KJV: But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men,
YLT: and Jesus himself was not trusting himself to them, because of his knowing all men,
Darby: But Jesus himself did not trust himself to them, because he knew all men,
ASV: But Jesus did not trust himself unto them, for that he knew all men,
| αὐτὸς | On His part |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Nominative Masculine 3rd Person Singular Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
| δὲ | however |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: δέ Sense: but, moreover, and, etc. |
|
| Ἰησοῦς | Jesus |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Ἰησοῦς Sense: Joshua was the famous captain of the Israelites, Moses’ successor. |
|
| ἐπίστευεν | did entrust |
|
Parse: Verb, Imperfect Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: πιστεύω Sense: to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in. |
|
| αὑτὸν | Himself |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Accusative Masculine 3rd Person Singular Root: αὐτόπτης Sense: of himself, themself, them. |
|
| αὐτοῖς | to them |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Dative Masculine 3rd Person Plural Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
| διὰ | because of |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: διά Sense: through. |
|
| τὸ | - |
|
Parse: Article, Accusative Neuter Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| αὐτὸν | His |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Accusative Masculine 3rd Person Singular Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
| γινώσκειν | knowing |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Infinitive Active Root: γινώσκω Sense: to learn to know, come to know, get a knowledge of perceive, feel. |
|
| πάντας | all [men] |
|
Parse: Adjective, Accusative Masculine Plural Root: πᾶς Sense: individually. |
|
Greek Commentary for John 2:24
“But Jesus himself kept on refusing (negative imperfect) to trust himself to them.” The double use of πιστευω pisteuō here is shown by Acts 8:13 where Simon Magus “believed” Causal use of δια dia and the accusative case of the articular infinitive το γινωσκειν to ginōskein (because of the knowing) with the object of the infinitive (παντας pantas all men) and the accusative of general reference (αυτον auton as to himself). [source]
The αὐτὸς , which does not appear in translation, has the force of on His part, marking the contrast with those just mentioned. [source]
Rev., trust. There is a kind of word-play between this and ἐπίστευσαν , believed, in the preceding verse. Wyc. reproduces it: “Jesus himself believed not himself to them.” He did not trust His person to them. Tynd., put not himself in their hands. “He had no faith in their faith” (Godet). [source]
Literally, on account of the fact of His knowing. John describes the Lord's knowledge by two words which it is important to distinguish. Γινώσκειν , as here, implies acquired knowledge; knowledge which is the result of discernment and which may be enlarged. This knowledge may be drawn from external facts (John 5:6; John 6:15) or from spiritual sympathy (John 10:14, John 10:27; John 17:25). Εἰδέναι (John 1:26) implies absolute knowledge: the knowledge of intuition and of satisfied conviction. Hence it is used of Christ's knowledge of divine things (John 3:11; John 5:32; John 7:29), Of the facts of His own being (John 6:6; John 8:14; John 13:1), and of external facts (John 6:61, John 6:64; John 13:11). In John 21:17the two words appear together. Peter says to Jesus, appealing to His absolute knowledge, “Thou knowest ( οἶδας ) all things:” appealing to his discernment, “Thou knowest or perceivest ( γινώσκεις ) that I love Thee.” [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for John 2:24
With a clear inward consciousness. See on John 2:24. [source]
See on John 2:24. [source]
Literally, and as Rev., we worship that which we know. On know, see on John 2:24. The neuter that which, is used of the true as of the unreal object of worship, perhaps for the sake of correspondence with the preceding clause, or because the object of worship is conceived abstractly and not personally. Compare John 14:9. [source]
Or perceived. See on John 2:24. [source]
Assured conviction based on Jesus' miracles (see on John 2:24). [source]
See on John 2:24. Nicodemus is not reproved for the want of previous knowledge, but for the want of perception or understanding when these truths are expounded to him. Rev., better, understandest not. [source]
This word is explained by what follows. He believed (at length) that Jesus was risen; for up to this time ( οὐδέπω ) he, with his fellow-disciple (plural, ᾔδεισαν ) knew not, etc. The singular number, he believed, as Meyer profoundly remarks, “only satisfies the never-to-be-forgotten personal experience of that moment, though it does not exclude the contemporaneous faith of Peter also.” On knew ( ᾔδεισαν ), see on John 2:24. [source]
For assigns the reason why Jesus went into Galilee. By His own country, Judaea seems to be meant, though almost the same phrase, His country, is used by the three Synoptists of Nazareth in Galilee. John's Gospel, however, deals with the Judaean rather than with the Galilean ministry of Jesus, and the phrase, His own country, is appropriate to Judaea as “the true home and fatherland of the prophets, the land which contained the city of Messiah's birth, the city associated with Him alike in ancient prophecy and in popular expectation.” Hence, at Jerusalem, the people said, “Hath not the Scriptures said that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was” (John 7:42)? In John 4:1-3it is stated that Jesus left Judaea because of a controversy excited by the Pharisees, whom John always marks as the leaders of the opposition to Jesus. Further, we are told that at Jerusalem, though many believed on His name, yet Jesus did not trust them (John 2:23, John 2:24). According to this explanation, γὰρ , for is used in its natural and most obvious sense as assigning the reason for Christ's departure into Galilee. The proverb is naturally suggested by the reference to Galilee, where Jesus had used it at Nazareth (see Matthew 13:57). The ὅτε οὖν whenthen (then indicating logical sequence and not time) of John 4:45follows naturally upon the citation of the proverb, signifying a correspondence between the character of His reception in Galilee and the motive of His going thither. Finally, if we understand by His own country, Nazareth, we are compelled to explain γὰρ , for, from John 4:46; Jesus went to Cana (north of Nazareth) without passing through His native place, for the reason mentioned. This seems forced and arbitrary. [source]
After the use of the singular number in John 3:3, John 3:5, John 3:7, John 3:12, the plural here is noteworthy. It is not merely rhetorical - “a plural of majesty” - but is explained by John 3:8, “every one that is born of the Spirit.” The new birth imparts a new vision. The man who is born of the Spirit hath eternal life (John 3:36); and life eternal is to know God and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent (John 17:3). “Ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye know ( οἴδατε ) all things” (1 John 2:20). He who is born of water and of the Spirit sees the kingdom of God. This we therefore includes, with Jesus, all who are truly born anew of the Spirit. Jesus meets the we know of Nicodemus (John 3:2), referring to the class to which he belonged, with another we know, referring to another class, of which He was the head and representative. We know ( οἴδαμεν ), absolutely. See on John 2:24. [source]
Better, Rev., perceived. See on John 2:24. [source]
Has no instinctive perception. See on John 2:24. [source]
The same verb as above. Some editors, however, read ᾔδειτε , the verb signifying absolute knowledge, the knowledge of intuition and satisfied conviction. If this is adopted, it marks a contrast with the progressive knowledge indicated by ἐγνώκειτε . See on John 2:24. [source]
See on John 14:2. Compare 1 John 2:24; 1 John 5:15. [source]
The A.V. ignores the distinction between the two words. “Thou knowest not” ( οὐκ οἶδας ), of absolute and complete knowledge. Thou shalt learn or perceive ( γνώσῃ ), of knowledge gained by experience. See on John 2:24. [source]
With evident allusion to the first word of Genesis. But John elevates the phrase from its reference to a point of time, the beginning of creation, to the time of absolute pre-existence before any creation, which is not mentioned until John 1:3. This beginning had no beginning (compare John 1:3; John 17:5; 1 John 1:1; Ephesians 1:4; Proverbs 8:23; Psalm 90:2). This heightening of the conception, however, appears not so much in ἀρχή , beginning, which simply leaves room for it, as in the use of ἦν , was, denoting absolute existence (compare εἰμί , I am, John 8:58) instead of ἐγένετο , came into being, or began to be, which is used in John 1:3, John 1:14, of the coming into being of creation and of the Word becoming flesh. Note also the contrast between ἀρχή , in the beginning, and the expression ἀπ ' ἀρχῆς , from the beginning, which is common in John's writings (John 8:44; 1 John 2:7, 1 John 2:24; 1 John 3:8) and which leaves no room for the idea of eternal pre-existence. “In Genesis 1:1, the sacred historian starts from the beginning and comes downward, thus keeping us in the course of time. Here he starts from the same point, but goes upward, thus taking us into the eternity preceding time” (Milligan and Moulton). See on Colossians 1:15. This notion of “beginning” is still further heightened by the subsequent statement of the relation of the Logos to the eternal God. The ἀρχή must refer to the creation - the primal beginning of things; but if, in this beginning, the Logos already was, then he belonged to the order of eternity. “The Logos was not merely existent, however, in the beginning, but was also the efficient principle, the beginning of the beginning. The ἀρχή (beginning ), in itself and in its operation dark, chaotic, was, in its idea and its principle, comprised in one single luminous word, which was the Logos. And when it is said the Logos was in this beginning, His eternal existence is already expressed, and His eternal position in the Godhead already indicated thereby” (Lange). “Eight times in the narrative of creation (in Genesis) there occur, like the refrain of a hymn, the words, And God said. John gathers up all those sayings of God into a single saying, living and endowed with activity and intelligence, from which all divine orders emanate: he finds as the basis of all spoken words, the speaking Word ” (Godet). [source]
Perfect active indicative followed by aorist active indicative, because, as Westcott shows, the first belongs to the very existence of the Son and the latter to his mission. There is no confusion of tenses here. No man There were crowds coming to Jesus, but they do not really accept him as Saviour and Lord (John 1:11; John 2:24). It is superficial as time will show. But “no one” is not to be pressed too far, for it is the rhetorical use. [source]
Perfect active indicative of γινωσκω ginōskō “I have come to know and still know,” the knowledge of personal experience (John 2:24.). The love o‘ God Objective genitive, “the love toward God.” See Luke 11:42 for this phrase in the same sense (only other instance in the Gospels, but common in 1John (1 John 2:5; 1 John 3:17; 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:9; 1 John 5:3) and in 2 Thessalonians 3:5; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Romans 5:5. The sense of God‘s love for man occurs in 1 John 3:1; 1 John 4:9, 1 John 4:10, 1 John 4:16; John 15:9. of Christ‘s love for man. These rabbis did not love God and hence did not love Christ. [source]
So often in John δε de is explanatory and transitional, not adversative. Nicodemus is an instance of Christ‘s knowledge of men (John 2:25) and of one to whom he did trust himself unlike those in John 2:24. As a Pharisee “he belonged to that party which with all its bigotry contained a salt of true patriotism and could rear such cultured and high-toned men as Gamaliel and Paul” (Marcus Dods). Named Nicodemus Same construction as in John 1:6, “Nicodemus name to him.” So Revelation 6:8. It is a Greek name and occurs in Josephus (Ant. XIV. iii. 2) as the name of an ambassador from Aristobulus to Pompey. Only in John in N.T. (here, John 7:50; John 19:39). He was a Pharisee, a member of the Sanhedrin, and wealthy. There is no evidence that he was the young ruler of Luke 18:18 because of αρχων archōn (ruler) here. [source]
Reference to John 3:22. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. Ουν Oun is very common in John‘s Gospel in such transitions. The Lord So the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has ο Ιησους ho Iēsous Mark usually has ο Ιησους ho Iēsous and Luke often ο Κυριος ho Kurios In the narrative portion of John we have usually ο Ιησους ho Iēsous but ο Κυριος ho Kurios in five passages (John 4:1; John 6:23; John 11:2; John 20:20; John 21:12). There is no reason why John should not apply ο Κυριος ho Kurios to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are “explanatory glosses,” not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be Κυριος Kurios (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. Knew Second aorist active indicative of γινωσκω ginōskō The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (John 2:24). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. How that Declarative οτι hoti (indirect assertion). Was making and baptizing more disciples than John Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John‘s early ministry (Mark 1:5; Matthew 3:5; Luke 3:7, Luke 3:15) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke 3:19.). Josephus (Ant. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would “raise a rebellion,” probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John 3:24), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate. [source]
The Greek ανηρ anēr means either “man” or “husband.” She had her “man,” but he was not a legal “husband.” Her language veils her deceit. Thou saidst well Jesus saw through the double sense of her language and read her heart as he only can do, a supernatural gift of which John often speaks (John 1:48; John 2:24.; John 5:20). For thou hast had five husbands “For thou didst have five men.” Second aorist (constative) active indicative of εχω echō Is not thy husband In the full and legal sense of ανηρ anēr not a mere “man.” This hast thou said truly “This a true thing thou hast said.” Note absence of article with αλητες alēthes (predicate accusative). Perfect active indicative ειρηκας eirēkas here, not aorist ειπες eipes (John 4:17). [source]
Failure to believe kills the life in the words of Jesus. Knew from the beginning In the N.T. we have εχ αρχης ex archēs only here and John 16:4, but απ αρχης ap' archēs in apparently the same sense as here in John 15:27; 1 John 2:7, 1 John 2:24; 1 John 3:11 and see Luke 1:2; 1 John 1:1. From the first Jesus distinguished between real trust in him and mere lip service (John 2:24; John 8:31), two senses of πιστευω pisteuō Were Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. And who it was that should betray him Same use of εστιν estin and note article and future active participle of παραδιδωμι paradidōmi to hand over, to betray. John does not say here that Jesus knew that Judas would betray him when he chose him as one of the twelve, least of all that he chose him for that purpose. What he does say is that Jesus was not taken by surprise and soon saw signs of treason in Judas. The same verb is used of John‘s arrest in Matthew 4:12. Once Judas is termed traitor (προδοτης prodotēs) in Luke 6:16. Judas had gifts and was given his opportunity. He did not have to betray Jesus. [source]
Rev., correctly, I did not know. See on John 2:24. The I refers to Paul himself. He speaks in the first person, declaring concerning himself what is meant to apply to every man placed under the Mosaic law, as respects his relation to that law, before and after the revolution in his inner life brought about through his connection with that law. His personal experience is not excluded, but represents the universal experience. [source]
The verb πιστεύω tobelieve is used in the New Testament as follows: 1. Transitively, with the accusative and dative: to entrust something to one, Luke 16:11; John 2:24. In the passive, to be entrusted with something, Romans 3:2; 1 Corinthians 9:17; Galatians 2:7. With the simple accusative, to believe a thing, John 11:26; 1 John 4:16. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. With the infinitive, Acts 15:11. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 3. With ὅτι that Matthew 9:28; Mark 11:24; James 2:19. Especially frequent in John: John 4:21; John 11:27, John 11:42; John 13:19; John 14:10, John 14:11; John 16:27, John 16:30, etc. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 4. With the simple dative, meaning to believe a person or thing, that they are true or speak the truth, John 2:22; John 4:21; John 5:46. See on John 1:12; see on John 2:22, John 2:23; see on John 8:31; see on John 10:37. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 5. With the preposition ἐν inNot frequent, and questioned in some of the passages cited for illustration. In John 3:15, ἐν αὐτῷ inHim, is probably to be construed with have eternal life. The formula occurs nowhere else in John. In Mark 1:15we find πιστεύετε ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ believein the gospel. The kindred noun πίστις faithoccurs in this combination. Thus Galatians 3:26, though some join in Christ Jesus with sons. See also Ephesians 1:15; Colossians 1:4; 1 Timothy 3:13; 2 Timothy 3:15; Romans 3:25. This preposition indicates the sphere in which faith moves, rather than the object to which it is directed, though instances occur in the Septuagint where it plainly indicates the direction of faith, Psalm 78:22; Jeremiah 12:6. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 6. With the preposition ἐπί uponon to, unto. a. With the accusative, Romans 4:5; Acts 9:42; Acts 11:17; Acts 16:31; Acts 22:19. The preposition carries the idea of mental direction with a view to resting upon, which latter idea is conveyed by the same preposition. b. With the dative, 1 Timothy 1:16; Luke 24:25; compare Romans 9:33; Romans 10:11; 1 Peter 2:6. The dative expresses absolute superposition. Christ as the object of faith, is the basis on which faith rests. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 7. With the preposition εἰς into Matthew 18:6; John 2:11; Acts 19:4; Romans 10:14; Galatians 2:16; Philemon 1:29, etc. The preposition conveys the idea of the absolute transference of trust from one's self to another. Literally the phrase means to believe into. See on John 1:12; see on John 2:23; see on John 9:35; see on John 12:44.Is counted for righteousness ( λογίζεται εἰς δικαιοσύνην )Rev., is reckoned. See on Romans 4:3. The preposition εἰς has the force of as, not the telic meaning with a view to, or in order that he may be (righteous); nor strictly, in the place of righteousness. Faith is not a substitute for righteousness, since righteousness is involved in faith. When a man is reckoned righteous through faith, it is not a legal fiction. He is not indeed a perfect man, but God does not reckon something which has no real existence. Faith is the germ of righteousness, of life in God. God recognizes no true life apart from holiness, and “he that believeth on the Son hath life.” He is not merely regarded in the law's eye as living. God accepts the germ, not in place of the fruit, but as containing the fruit. “Abraham believed God … . No soul comes into such a relation of trust without having God's investment upon it; and whatever there may be in God's righteousness - love, truth, sacrifice - will be rightfully imputed or counted to be in it, because, being united to Him, it will have them coming over derivatively from Him” (Bushnell). The idea of logical sequence is inherent in λογίζεται isreckoned - the sequence of character upon faith. Where there is faith there is, logically, righteousness, and the righteousness is from faith unto faith (Romans 1:17). Nevertheless, in the highest development of the righteousness of faith, it will remain true that the man is justified, not by the works of righteousness, which are the fruit of faith, but by the faith which, in making him a partaker of the life and righteousness of God, generates and inspires the works. Observe that the believer's own faith is reckoned as righteousness. “In no passage in Paul's writings or in other parts of the New Testament, where the phrase to reckon for or the verb to reckon alone is used, is there a declaration that anything belonging to one person is imputed, accounted, or reckoned to another, or a formal statement that Christ's righteousness is imputed to believers” (President Dwight, “Notes on Meyer”). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
Or, literally, has come to know. See on John 2:24; see on John 3:10; see on John 17:3. Showing in what sense knowledge was used in the previous clause: fancied knowledge; knowledge of divine things without love. [source]
The same, i.e., this same man who loves God. He does not say knows God, but implies this in the larger truth, is known by God. Compare Galatians 4:9; 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16; 2 Timothy 2:19. Γινώσκω in New-Testament Greek often denotes a personal relation between the knower and the known, so that the knowledge of an object implies the influence of that object upon the knower. So John 2:24, John 2:25; 1 Corinthians 2:8; 1 John 4:8. In John the relation itself is expressed by the verb. John 17:3, John 17:25; 1 John 5:20; 1 John 4:6; 1 John 2:3, 1 John 2:4, 1 John 2:5. [source]
Rather corrects the first statement, have known God, which might seem to attach too much to human agency in attaining the knowledge of God. The divine side of the process is thrown into the foreground by are known, etc. Known does not mean approved or acknowledged, but simply recognized. Saving knowledge is doubtless implied, but is not expressed in the word. The relation of knowledge between God and his sons proceeds from God. The Galatians had not arrived at the knowledge of God by intuition nor by any process of reasoning. “God knew them ere they knew him, and his knowing them was the cause of their knowing him” (Eadie). Comp. 1 Corinthians 13:12; 2 Timothy 2:19; Matthew 7:23. Dean Stanley remarks that “our knowledge of God is more his act than ours.” If God knows a man, that fact implies an activity of God which passes over to the man, so that he, as the subject of God's knowledge, comes into the knowledge of God. In N.T. γινώσκειν often implies a personal relation between the knower and the known, so that knowledge implies influence. See 1 Corinthians 2:8; John 1:10; John 2:24; John 17:3. For a parallel to this interchange between the active and the passive, see Philemon 3:12. [source]
To know God is to know him as the one, true God as distinguished from false gods; to know his will, his holiness, his hatred of sin, and his saving intent toward mankind. Two words are used of such knowledge, εἰδέναι and γινώσκειν . Both are applied to the heathen and to Christians, and both are used of the Jews' knowledge of God. Ἑιδέναι , of heathen, Galatians 4:8; 1 Thessalonians 4:5; 2 Thessalonians 1:8. Γινώσκειν of heathen, Romans 1:21; 1 Corinthians 1:21. Ἑιδέναι , of Christ and Christians, John 7:29, John 8:19, John 8:55; John 14:7. Γινώσκειν of Christ and Christians, Galatians 4:9; 1 John 2:13, 1 John 2:14; 1 John 4:6, 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:8; John 10:15; John 17:3. In John, γινώσκειν of Jews who do not know the Father, John 16:3; John 8:55: εἰδέναι , John 7:28; John 8:19; John 15:21. The two are combined, John 1:26; John 7:27; John 8:55; 2 Corinthians 5:16. A distinction is asserted between γινώσκειν as knowledge grounded in personal experience, apprehension of external impressions - and εἰδέμαι purely mental perception in contrast with conjecture or knowledge derived from others. There are doubtless passages which bear out this distinction (see on John 2:24), but it is impossible to carry it rigidly through the N.T. In the two classes, - those who know not God and those who obey not the gospel, - it is not probable that Paul has in mind a distinction between Jews and Gentiles. The Jews were not ignorant of God, yet they are described by John as not knowing him. The Gentiles are described by Paul as knowing God, but as refusing to glorify him as God (Romans 1:21). Paul rather describes here the subjects of God's judgment as one class, but under different aspects. [source]
Not perceive ( γινώσκειν ), but know with settled and absolute knowledge. See on John 2:24. [source]
Perceive. See on John 2:24. [source]
To abide in God is a more common expression with John than to be in God, and marks an advance in thought. The phrase is a favorite one with John. See John 15:4sqq.; John 6:56; 1 John 2:24, 1 John 2:27, 1 John 2:28; 1 John 3:6, 1 John 3:24; 1 John 4:12sq.; 1 John 4:15sq. Bengel notes the gradation in the three phrases “to know Him, to be in Him, to abide in Him; knowledge, fellowship, constancy.” [source]
If ye know absolutely that He is righteous, ye perceive that every one, etc. See on John 2:24. Ye perceive may be taken as imperative: perceive or know ye. [source]
Emphatic, as in 1 John 2:24. [source]
The phrase occurs twice in the Gospel (John 8:44; John 15:27); nine times in the First Epistle, and twice in the Second. It is used both absolutely (John 3:8; John 2:13, John 2:14), and relatively (John 15:27; 1 John 2:24). It is here contrasted with “in the beginning” (John 1:1). The difference is that by the words “in the beginning,” the writer places himself at the initial point of creation, and, looking back into eternity, describes that which was already in existence when creation began. “The Word was in the beginning.” In the words “from the beginning,” the writer looks back to the initial point of time, and describes what has been in existence from that point onward. Thus, “in the beginning” characterizes the absolute divine Word as He was before the foundation of the world and at the foundation of the world. “From the beginning” characterizes His development in time. Note the absence of the article both here and in John 1:1. Not the beginning as a definite, concrete fact, but as apprehended by man; that to which we look as “beginning.” [source]
Prolepsis again as in 1 John 2:24. [source]
Omit Christ. The human name, Jesus, shows that His blood is available for man. The divine name, His Son, shows that it is efficacious. I shall be rendering a service to students of John's Epistles by giving, in a condensed form, Canon Westcott's note, classifying the several names of our Lord and their uses in the Epistles. The name in John, as in the Bible elsewhere, has two distinct, but closely connected meanings. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 1. The Revelation of the Divine Being by a special title. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. The whole sum of the manifold revelations gathered up so as to form one supreme revelation. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The latter sense is illustrated in 3 John 1:7, where “the name” absolutely includes the essential elements of the Christian creed, the complete revelation of Christ's work in relation to God and man. Compare John 20:31; Acts 5:41. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In 1 John 2:12, the term is more limited, referring to Christ as He lived on earth and gave Himself for “the brethren.” In 1 John 3:23; 1 John 5:13, the exact sense is defined by what follows. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Actual Names Used. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (I.) His Son Jesus Christ. 1 John 1:3; 1 John 3:23; 1 John 5:20. The divine antecedent is differently described in each case, and the difference colors the phrase. In 1 John 1:2-3, the Father (compare 1John href="/desk/?q=1jo+3:23&sr=1">1 John 3:23, God. In 1 John 5:20, He that is true. Thus the sonship of Christ is regarded in relation to God as Father, as God, and as satisfying the divine ideal which man is able to form. The whole phrase, His Son Jesus Christ, includes the two elements of the confessions which John makes prominent. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 1. Jesus is the Son of God (John 4:15; John 5:5). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. Jesus is the Christ (John 2:22; John 5:1). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The constituents of the compressed phrase are all used separately by John. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (1.) Jesus. 1 John 2:22; 1 John 5:1; 1 John 4:3(where the correct reading omits Christ). The thought is that of the Lord in His perfect historic humanity. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (2.) Christ. 2 John 1:9. Pointing to the preparation made under the old covenant. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (3). Jesus Christ. 1 John 2:1; 1 John 5:6; 2 John 1:7. Combining the ideas of true humanity and messianic position. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In 1 John 4:15, the reading is doubtful: Jesus or Jesus Christ. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- On 1 John 4:2, see note. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (4.) The Son. 1 John 2:22, 1 John 2:23, 1 John 2:24; 1 John 4:14; 1 John 5:12. The absolute relation of Sonship to Fatherhood. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (5.) The Son of God. 1 John 3:8; 1 John 5:10, 1 John 5:12, 1 John 5:13, 1 John 5:20. Compare His Son (1 John 4:10; 1 John 5:9), where the immediate antecedent is ὁ Θεός Godand 1 John 5:18, He that was begotten of God. Combination of the ideas of Christ's divine dignity and divine sonship. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (6.) Jesus His (God's) Son. 1 John 1:7. Two truths. The blood of Christ is available and efficacious. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (7). His (God's) Son, His only Son. 1 John 4:9. The uniqueness of the gift is the manifestation of love. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The Son in various forms is eminently characteristic of the First and Second Epistles, in which it occurs more times than in all Paul's Epistles. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Κύριος Lordis not found in the Epistles (omit from 2 John 1:3), but occurs in the Gospel, and often in Revelation. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The expression, the blood of Jesus His Son, is chosen with a profound insight. Though Ignatius uses the phrase blood of God yet the word blood is inappropriate to the Son conceived in His divine nature. The word Jesus brings out His human nature, in which He assumed a real body of flesh and blood, which blood was shed for us.Cleanseth ( καθαρίζει )See on Mark 7:19. Not only forgives but removes. Compare Titus 2:14; Hebrews 9:13sq.; Hebrews 9:22sq.; Ephesians 5:26sq.; Matthew 5:8; 1 John 3:3. Compare also 1 John 1:9, where, forgive ( ἀφῇ ) and cleanse ( καθαρίσῃ ) occur, with an obvious difference of meaning. Note the present tense cleanseth. The cleansing is present and continuous. Alexander (Bishop of Derry) cites a striking passage from Victor Hugo (“Le Parricide”). The usurper Canute, who has had a share in his father's death, expiring after a virtuous and glorious reign, walks towards the light of heaven. But first he cuts with his sword a shroud of snow from the top of Mt. Savo. As he advances towards heaven, a cloud forms, and drop by drop his shroud is soaked with a rain of blood.All sin ( πάσης ἁμαρτίας )The principle of sin in all its forms and manifestations; not the separate manifestations. Compare all joy (James 1:2); all patience (2 Corinthians 7:12); all wisdom (Ephesians 1:8); all diligence (2 Peter 1:5). [source]
See on John 2:24. [source]
Lit., as many things as he saw. In the Gospel John uses the word εἶδεν sawonly twice of his own eye-witness (John 1:40; John 20:8). In Revelation it is constantly used of the seeing of visions. Compare Revelation 1:19. For the verb as denoting the immediate intuition of the seer, see on John 2:24. [source]