Week Nine: \u00a0Nov 6, 2011<\/p>\n
This week we focused on the false teachers that are the subject of the letter. \u00a0As a result we spend all of our time on verse 7.\u00a0 I will repeat the first part of this verse from last week.<\/p>\n
Study<\/p>\n
7* \u2013 For many deceivers have gone out into the world. They refuse to acknowledge Jesus the Messiah1<\/sup> is coming in flesh2<\/sup>. Any such person is a deceiver and an antichrist.<\/strong><\/p>\n For (\u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 -oti\u00a0)<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 While this verse marks a change in the letter from positive exhortation to warnings, it is connect to the previous verse.\u00a0 In context, John was glad that they were living in the truth because\u2026<\/p>\n many deceivers have gone out into the world.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Just as Christian missionaries that 3 John 5-6 says we should welcome have gone out refuse to acknowledge Jesus the Messiah is coming in flesh<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The word translated acknowledge (\u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 – omologountes) is a legal term for contracts in terms of\u00a0\u00a0 someone agrees and therefore promises to do something.\u00a0\u00a0 It is not referring to a mere intellectual acceptance of doctrine, but implies action as well.\u00a0\u00a0 In this light we can better understand John\u2019s stress on both Truth (intellectual acceptance) and Love (doing).\u00a0 Both are inseparably linked. To really believe is to do.<\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The phrase is coming is in the present tense, and is somewhat an unusual way of putting this. \u00a0\u00a0Normally we would expect has come as in a reference to the incarnation, or will come, as a reference to the second coming.\u00a0 But John puts this into the present tense.\u00a0\u00a0 We can see in this a clue concerning the identity of the false teachers.<\/p>\n It is unlikely that John would be warning them about the common place dangers of which they all were aware.\u00a0 As such these false teachers were probably not from any of the well known religious groups of the time.\u00a0 For example, if he were referring to the Jews, he could have simply said that they denied that Jesus was the Christ.<\/p>\n Therefore these false teachers were most likely people who claimed to be Christian, but who were not spreading the truth, but a lie.\u00a0 Thus John\u2019s use of the label \u201cdeceivers.\u201d\u00a0 Understood in this light, John\u2019s reference to \u201cJesus the Messiah is coming in flesh \u201c makes a lot more sense as it point to a particular group, the Gnostics, or probably more accurately proto-Gnostics.\u00a0 This is because full blown Gnosticism is a 2nd<\/sup> century movement.<\/p>\n Gnosticism may have had it start with Simon Magnus in Acts 8:9-24, a magician who claimed to be a Christian, but who really wanted to buy from the apostles the ability to give the Holy Spirit. \u00a0It was built around a number of concepts borrowed from many beliefs.\u00a0 But they did see Christ as an important figure, and thus could be mistake for more orthodox Christians.<\/p>\n Another belief important in this discussion is that Gnostics drew a sharp distinction between the spiritual world which was good, and the material world which was corrupt.\u00a0\u00a0 In fact they drew the divide so sharply that it resulted in a major problem.\u00a0 How could a spiritual god create a corrupt world?\u00a0 They attempted to solve this by postulating a very complex series of layers and intermediate actors in an attempt to separate the spiritual creator, from the corrupt creation.<\/p>\n This also caused a problem with Jesus and Christ for Gnostics made a division between the two. \u00a0\u00a0In Gnosticism, the body is material and therefore corrupt.\u00a0 But Christ is spiritual, and not corrupted. Gnosticism had several explanations for this, but they all centered on separating Jesus from the Christ.\u00a0\u00a0 Irenaeus described such a view in his discussion of the beliefs of person named Cerinthus .\u00a0 In his book Against Heresies (Book 1.26.1<\/a>)<\/p>\n Christ descended upon [Jesus] in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles. But at last Christ departed from Jesus, and that then Jesus suffered and rose again, while Christ remained impassible, inasmuch as he was a spiritual being.<\/em><\/p>\n Irenaeus also tells us that Cerinthus was a contemporary of John, in the following amusing antidote\u00a0 (Against Heresies,\u00a0 Book III.3.4<\/a>):<\/p>\n There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, \u201cLet us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n John apparently new Cerinthus and is referring to him, or someone with similar beliefs.\u00a0 Thus his phasing of the false teachers as denying that Jesus is coming in the flesh, i.e., Jesus and the Christ are the same, always have been, and always will be.<\/p>\n Any such person is a deceiver and an antichrist. <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 There is a translation issue here.\u00a0 It is not so much in the Greek text, or with what the author wrote, but rather with what the modern reader hears.\u00a0\u00a0 We hear of the antichrist, and immediately think of the end times. But that is not what John is saying here.\u00a0\u00a0 Rather John is stressing the magnitude of the error. They are not just wrong, but 180 degrees wrong.<\/p>\n –\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 So the false teachers were most likely a group of traveling messengers bringing a gospel of Christ, but it was not the true Gospel but a false one. This is why John felt it so important to warn this church so that they would not be taken in.<\/p>\n Questions and Discussion.<\/p>\n The questions and discussion this week centered on the false teachers and modern applications.\u00a0\u00a0 Did these teachers know they were spreading false doctrine, or did they really believe what they taught? My belief is that then, like now, one must draw a distinction between the founders of a religious movement, and the followers. Thus for example, it is very possible that Simon Magus was nothing more than a con-man.\u00a0 But con men deceive people, and as a result many were taken in by his teaching.\u00a0 By the time you get to the later part of the century when John is writing, it is very possible that the false teachers John was writing about were themselves deceived, and thought they were spreading the truth.<\/p>\n In terms of a modern application, there is a pretty general agreement that, whatever one thinks of Joseph Smith, \u00a0Mormons as a group are wonderful people.\u00a0 Yet there is little doubt that they have been deceived and are deceiving others. Many of their converts come from evangelical denominations<\/a>. \u00a0\u00a0For example, while Christians have historically taught, along with the Jews and Muslims, the belief in monotheism, that there is only one god,\u00a0 Mormon are henotheists, they believe that there are many gods, but they only worship one God.\u00a0 To justify this belief, one of the verses they cite is 1 Cor 8:5,\u00a0 which does say \u201cas there be gods many, and lords many\u201d (KJV).<\/p>\n Standing alone and out of context, this does seem to support the Mormon belief.\u00a0 But read in context it cannot.\u00a0 Paul here is addressing the issue of whether or not it was acceptable for Christians to eat meat sacrificed to idols.\u00a0\u00a0 He argues that it is ok to eat the meat because, \u201cWe know that no idol is real in this world and that there is only one God.\u201d\u00a0 (1 Cor 8:4) He acknowledges, what was in the first century city of Corinth very true, that there are many things that are called gods.\u00a0 Thus the ISV renders this as,<\/p>\n 4Now concerning eating food offered to idols: We know that no idol is real in this world and that there is only one God. 5For even if there are \u201cgods\u201d in heaven and on earth (as indeed there are many so-called \u201cgods\u201d and \u201clords\u201d), 6yet for us Not only does the passage in context not support the Mormon claim, it actually refutes it, for it starts with a strong statement of monotheism.\u00a0 In addition to this the Mormon claim is further rendered impossible for it would completely undercut Paul\u2019s argument.\u00a0 Paul argument is that \u201cno idol is real in this world.\u201d\u00a0 Since they do not exist, it is meaningless that the meat was sacrificed to them, so it is ok to eat.\u00a0 Yet the Mormon claim is that this passages is saying that other gods do in fact exist, which would destroy Paul\u2019s argument.\u00a0 Thus the twisting of God\u2019s word to teach doctrines antithetical to those historically accepted by Christians is not something that was only confined to John\u2019s day, but rather continues today.<\/p>\n So does this make Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses \u201cantichrists?\u201d\u00a0 The answer here depends very heavily on the translational issue addressed above.\u00a0 Again the word antichrist is for the modern mind strongly linked to the end-times, and in this sense I would say no, they are not.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 But John was not referring to the end times, but rather to the type of error. He was referring to people who claimed to be bringing the truth, when what they were bringing was the opposite of the truth.\u00a0 They were not bringing the truth of the real Christ, but of a false, or antichrist.\u00a0 In this latter sense, they are antichrist\u2019s, for the Jesus Christ preached by the Mormons, and by the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses, is one that is significantly different from the Jesus Christ that has historically been taught by Christians down through the ages, and I would argue significantly different that the Jesus Christ taught in the Bible.\u00a0 Yet given the modern understanding of the word \u201cantichrist\u201d the label does not apply.<\/p>\n Next week we will continue in 2 John 8<\/p>\n If you have question or comments about the class, feel free to send me an email at\u00a0elgin@hushbeck.com<\/a> and be sure to put \u201cEpistles of John\u201d in the header.<\/p>\n See here for references and more background on the class<\/a>.<\/p>\n
\nso had their counterparts. It is these counter parts that John is now going to warn them about.<\/p>\n
\nthere is only one God, the Father,
\nfrom whom everything came into being
\nand for whom we live.
\nAnd there is only one Lord, Jesus the Messiah,
\nthrough whom everything came into being
\nand through whom we live.\u00a0 (1 Cor 8:4-6)<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n