I John, 4:20-21

Alright. Well, we have two verses today. So let's get right into them. Look at verse 21. Yeah, let's read them together. We usually do that. Ready, set, go. If someone says, I love God and hates his brother, he is a liar. For the one who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. And this commandment we have from him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also."

Okay. So, if here, ha, Eton, it's a particle, and Eton indicates a third class conditional sentence. So I know it's early, and hey Brett, probably not fair to ask a, call it a technical question right off the bat. But, can anyone remember, besides Larry, what a third class conditional sentence is? I have to be selective because he answered this question three weeks ago. Third class, anybody? If not, we'll let Larry answer it.

Probability. Right. So the fulfillment of the statement is uncertain, but still likely. Probable is a very good way to describe it. Hasn't happened, but probably will. And then this is the chart I've shown up there before. It has the different class on there. Alright, this someone is the word tis, meaning someone or anyone. It's just an indefinite pronoun, so it just refers to anybody. John uses it only five times. Now our verb is lego, to say, to speak. It shows up eight times here. Its air is tense.

And it's in the subjunctive mood. And the subjunctive mood goes right along with this if in the third class conditional sentence. So the subjunctive mood has to do with probability as well. Summers defines it as the mood of moderate contingency where the action is objectively possible but not reality. And so you could translate it, if someone should say, or if someone would say, I love God.

That is a subordinating conjunction, Hati. And we've seen it before. Hati serves two purposes. That was bad. Two purposes in Koine Greek. We've looked at this before. One, it can mark the substance or contents of a statement. And then also, it can explain the reason that anything is said or done. And so we've seen both of these. And this morning, it's marking the substance or the contents of a statement.

This is what he's saying. He's saying that he loves God. And then the New American Standard doesn't even include it in their translation, but it's there in the Greek. I love, this is agapao, to have love for someone or something based on sincere appreciation and high regard. Remember, this is the only word for love that's used in 1 John. And it's the love that comes from God and is lived through us by the Holy Spirit. Question. Yeah. Can I go back one minute? Yeah. It says here, That is omitted from the numerical standard. Yeah, it's in the Greek, and just for the ease of translation, they just dropped it out.

So, in other words, if anyone says, I love God, that's how they translated it. But technically it says, if anyone says that, I love God. So, love is present tense right now, loving, active voice, he's doing it in his own decision, religion, indicative mood. Love is one of our key words used 28 times. You're going to see all of these today. God is theos, just the word for God, 62 times in 1 John.

I'd say just referring to the Trinity, God in general. So if anyone says, I love God and hates his brother, This AND is this little conjunction CHI. And I told you a little bit of information about CHI a couple of weeks ago. And here's the information again.

There are 33 different conjunctions in the New Testament, used over 14,000 times. So that's about two conjunctions for every single verse in the New Testament. And chi is used in over half of those instances. So chi is used over 7,000 times. So you'll see it a lot. And it can be used as a conjunction, which it is used right here. It just joins two phrases. But it can also be used as an adverb, which we'll see later this morning.

Hates. Maseo. To hate, to pursue with hatred, to detest. Of course, a real strong word. It's also present tense, active voice. It's a subjunctive mood because it's still going with the third class conditional sentence. If anyone should hate his brother. His, Altos, just a personal pronoun for his, we'll see it a lot this morning, and it's referring to the one who says that he loves God and yet hates his brother. Adelphos, brother. This is used 17 times. It's also one of the key words of 1 John. We've seen it, we've seen it a bit.

We've seen that it can refer to a believer and then just a natural brother, physical brother. So I've got a question that I want to ask and then we'll actually answer it later. Is this referring to a spiritual brother or a mere physical brother? And I guess the reason why I'm asking is because does this verse apply directly to Christians at all, or is it just talking about something that happens with unbelievers? So that's why we want to ask the question. But we'll answer it later. So there are several places in 1 John where a physical brother is clearly referred to.

Here's one example. not as Cain, who was of the evil one, and slew his physical brother. And for what reason did he slay him? Because his deeds were evil, and his brothers were righteous." Clearly talking about Abel's physical brother, Cain. And then also, everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. And we determine that in that context in chapter 3, that's talking about an unbeliever. Alright, so that's why this could refer to a believer or a natural brother. But we'll come back to that.

He is a liar. This is Amy, the verb to be, and it's an essence verb, so in this context it's describing the nature of anyone who is hating his brother, and then of course it's our chief word of 1 John. Present tense right now, so He is right now and continuing hating... I'm sorry, He is right now and continuing a liar. Now a liar, Pseudostas, this is the first time I've come across it in the verses that I've taught on. It's only used five times in 1 John, and only found ten times in the entire New Testament.

So, it doesn't show up very often. And it's anarthrus, no definite article. So he is a liar. And so now, can anyone, besides Brad and Roger, tell me the significance of an anarthrus noun? So it doesn't have a definite article. Woo-hoo! What's the point? Does anybody remember? When the definite article is not there, the character of the noun is being emphasized. So, it's not its specificness or specificity. So, he is like a liar. It's not saying he is the liar, but he's like a liar. He has the characteristics of a liar. All right.

So, if you know me very well, you would know that I hate waiting to give gifts or to postpone surprises." So, waiting 21 more words to answer the previous questions is really tough. Is brother referring to a spiritual brother in Christ or a mere physical brother? Okay, but I'm going to wait.

Let's keep going. Okay, Gar 4. Sorry. Gar, this is just a... She knows you do well. Yeah, it's kind of an inside thing, I guess. This is a particle that gives the reason for the preceding statement or opinion, okay? So, it's only used three times. So, why is the one who says that he loves God and at the same time hates his brother a liar? Why? Well, Gar will explain why. Okay, and the rest of this first 20 is easy, because I'm just going to throw the words up there, but we've already seen them. So John now just repeats himself the last half of this verse.

The one who does love, all those words are just two words in Greek. The article and the participle. And it's this agapao again. The one who does love. A participle, a verbal noun. And then the not just makes it a negative verb. His brother, this is Altas again. We've seen that already. Brother is Adelfas again. He was before partner. Whom? Now this is new. This is Haas. This is a relative pronoun.

It's translated whom, which, what, that. And it's referring to his brother, whom he has seen. This verb, he has seen, hara'o, is used six times in 1 John, twice in the verse this morning. Now it's perfect tense, and everybody by now probably knows that perfect tense means it's a completed past action with ongoing results in the present. So he saw him in the past and the effects of seeing him in the past are still in effect today. So he's seen him in the past and he still, perhaps in his mind's eye, knows his brother or thinks of his brother. I don't know. I'm not sure what the present results are of his having seen him, other than he knows him. Okay, so he's seen his brother, cannot love God.

This is dunamai, to be able, to have power. It's present tense, so right now he cannot love God. And then this is a deponent for the Greek geeks. It's in the passive or the middle form, but actually active in meaning. So he of himself, in other words, can't love God, is what it's saying. Dunamai is only used twice in 1 John. That's pretty unusual. And then the little nod is actually a separate word, and it just makes it a negative verb. OK, well, love again. This is agapalo again. God, that's a repeat. Whom, the relative pronoun again, the same as in the previous phrase. And he has seen, harado again. and then the particle makes it negative. Okay, so now let's summarize here and draw some applications and hopefully put it all together.

So, if someone says, I love God and hates his brother, he's a liar. For the one who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. So that's what John has said. And now we get to answer a question. So, someone is saying that he loves God. However, at the same time he is saying this, he is also hating his brother.

John then tells us that it is impossible to love God whom we have not seen when we are not loving our brother. So the first question we should probably ask is, does someone refer to believers or unbelievers? Because, again, if it refers to unbelievers, then John's just describing what goes on in the life of an unbeliever, and we don't have anything to really apply to our life. But if it refers to believers, then there's something directly for us there. Okay? So, based on our brief study so far this morning, what do you think? Is someone referring to Christians or... Christians and non-Christians? Both? Or... What do you think?

I think it's for the context. There's a lot of we's in there. Verse 19, we love because He first loved us. And then verse 21, because of the command we have from Him. Alright, anybody else before I go on? It seems like, I'm not sure if this is what you're going to say, but it seems like he's kind of, this is one of those contrasts again where he's saying, you know, you're not living out, Christ's life isn't half and half. You can't be doing one thing. You can't be living Christ's life out and loving God and hating your brother. It's an impossibility actually. So you're either walking in the flesh or you're walking in the limey air. That kind of message, he's done that. Yeah. Yes. Yes. Maybe you're going to get there. Well, that's the bottom line summary. The last bullet. No, I wasn't sure. No, you don't need to apologize. That's fine.

So it just so happens that this this indefinite pronoun test. It doesn't tell us anything in itself. It could refer to believers, unbelievers, or both just by that word. So we should look at the context, which Anne Marie did. Let's see here. Keep going. Because really context is the only way we can answer that question.

And what I did is I went back to verse 7 and tracked down to verse 20. And from about verse 10 down through 19, the context is believers. So, most likely, yeah, it's talking about believers here. The near context would indicate that someone is referring to a believer. Okay, so now what about brother, Adel Fass? That's the question we asked earlier. It can refer to a physical brother, we saw that. Okay, so the one here in our verse, 420, is the one who hates, sorry, the one who hates his brother is a liar.

Pius Dei, it's only used 10 times in the New Testament, and one of these times it's used is John 8, 44, and this is where Jesus talks about the devil. And he says, whenever Satan speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

So, at first glance, I would say, wow, it seems like anybody that's a liar is related to Satan. But then, we noted that liar is inarthorous. So, this one who's saying he loves God, but yet hates his brother, has the character of a liar. It's not saying he is a liar by nature, linked to Satan. It's saying he's exhibiting the characteristics of a liar. And like Roger said, lying Not these exact words, but lying is one of the fruits of the flesh. So if we're walking in the flesh, not walking in the spirit, we can certainly lie and exhibit this fruit of lying from our flesh.

So the one who is hating his brother has the character of a liar. And then what is he lying about? He's lying that he loves God. present tense. He says that he is loving, present tense, right now and continuing, God, but he's actually, present tense, hating his brother. Therefore, John concludes that he is, present tense, like a liar.

In the second half of verse 20, John gives us the reason this one is a liar. For the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. If you don't love your brother, then you can't love God. That's what John is saying. Present tense. And that goes, again, to Roger's point he made. You can't walk in the flesh and walk in the spirit at the same time. It's one or the other. And that's what's going on here.

Also, verse 21, which we'll look at in a minute, it goes on to admonish believers to love one another. just as 4.7 and 4.11 did. So, in conclusion, it seems that the brother in all of verse 20 best refer to a believer. Alright, one more observation. Verse 20 is similar to 1 John 1, 6. So that's the verse we just looked at.

If we say that we have fellowship with Him, with God, and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. Same message. I'm saying I'm in fellowship with the Lord, but yet I'm sinning. Well, then I'm lying. You can't. You can't do that.

In 1 John, our practical walk with God is repeatedly emphasized, similar to the book of James. The authors come at it from different perspectives, but they're emphasizing our practical walk with God. 1 John 2, 6, you may remember, the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked. So, similar thing going on in verse 20.

You're talking about condition, not position. In there, yeah. Yep, that's right. That's right, because what's happening is the believer in his condition is lying. He's saying that he loves God, but yet he hates. So he's conditionally out of fellowship.

A couple of quotes. This is an old quote from the first century on this verse. It is impossible that the invisible God can be piously worshipped by those people who behave with impiety toward those who are visible and near to them. Calvin said, it is a false boast when anyone says that he loves God but neglects his image, referring to his brother in Christ, which is before his eyes. and then Stott said something similar, every claim to love God is a delusion if it is not accompanied by unselfish and practical love for our brothers and sisters. I came across those and they're saying something similar to what John says here. What else do you guys see? Observations or applications in this verse?

What's that? I think you got it covered. Alright. Well, I'm sure I don't, but yeah. He just played it. Oh, love from brother. Okay, well... I heard you drinking there. Alright, well let's keep going here. Let's go to verse 21. Reload on the coffee here.

What is your conclusion? concluded that, yes, Adelphos is referring to a spiritual brother. So it is, in other words, what John's saying in verse 20, that's for us. That's for us to apply to our lives. So if I'm saying as a Christian that I love God, and yet, actually I'm hating my brother, then from this verse, God wants me to know that I'm lying.

Deceiving myself. What's that? What do you mean both? Sorry. Because that's one proof the guy is not a believer. We've got a whole world today of people who walk around saying they're not. Oh, yeah, right. All right. I'm just saying from an application standpoint, I think Paul, I agree Paul was most likely referring to Williams here because of the context of the script. Right. The concept But the sisters are all left out. Alright, well let's go to 21 here. This is a pretty neat verse.

And this commandment we have from him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also. And Kai, you know Kai very well now. a coordinating conjunction, it's used that way, it's just joining the two sentences together. This, this is new this morning, haute, it's a demonstrative pronoun, it's a pronoun you use in English, it's this or these, this cup, it's a near demonstrative pronoun, so it's something I use when I refer to something near me. A far demonstrative pronoun is something that's far from me, so that clock, that's the difference.

This is a feminine pronoun. It's used twice in 1 John. The masculine demonstrative pronoun is 15 times, and neuter is used four times. So now you can, knowing that, you can finally get some sleep tonight. Now, commandment is entele, he entele, the commandment. And we've seen this several times in 1 John, 14 times in total. It'll be used, and it's also one of the key words there.

Now, I did just a little bit of study and searching on this word and found that in the New Testament, I say scripture, but specifically the New Testament, you can make a note of that if that's not obvious, because the New Testament is written in Greek and this is a Greek word, but I should have put New Testament. In the New Testament, entele can refer to the Mosaic law.

It can also refer to church-age conduct. and it can refer to the Millennial Kingdom Law. So context is going to determine what type of commandment is being referred to. Are we talking about the Mosaic Law here? Are we talking about the Kingdom Law for the Millennial Kingdom? Or are we talking about Church Age conduct? And the context is the way you'll know.

You're going to have to study. And then I note that the word commandment is often given bad or legalistic connotations. It just is, by Christians. This need not be. The apostles of the church age lived in a far more legalistic period than we do today.

And they didn't shy away from teaching about commandments and conduct for believers under grace. The key is that they were balanced. And they were balanced because of this. They taught the Christians of God's enabling power, the Holy Spirit living in them, and they taught the Christians of their responsibility to walk by faith and thereby glorify God in their condition. So the apostles, the authors of the New Testament, were balanced in this area. And therefore, they didn't shy away from talking about commandments and our conduct. By the way, today is National Ten Commandments Day. No, it isn't. Yeah, you're right, you're right. Okay, anyway, and I'm not advocating the Ten Commandments. That's the mosaic cloth.

Okay, echo here is we have, to have or to possess, present tense, we are having, and this is also one of our key words here in 1 John 28 times. We have from Him. This is a preposition showing separation or origin. So we have... what we have is coming from Him in this context. It originates with Him. The commandment originated with Him. That's what it's saying. Now, Him is Altos. That's just the personal pronoun we've seen several times this morning in our first verse.

This is, okay, that is Hina, and we've seen this quite a few times. You probably remember from these hyena pictures. It's a subordinated conjunction, and normally, in most cases where we've noted it before, 1 John and 1 John, I'm sorry, Hina explains why. Normally, Hina explains why. But here, it refers back to the demonstrative pronoun, this commandment. So he's going to tell us what this commandment is, basically. Okay, now this is on the side.

Earlier in our study of 1 John, we noted that hena plus the subjunctive verb occurs many times in the New Testament, like over 600 times. And when it does, when hena occurs with the subjunctive verb, like it does this morning, several different ideas can be expressed in Koine Greek. The author can do different things. He can be expressing the purpose of something, the result of something, And then sometimes when the purpose and result are so tied together and you can't separate them, he's referring to both of those together. He can refer to something as the subject, the direct object. of the sentence or an apposition, basically where he repeats himself.

And that's what's going on this morning. I'll explain a little bit in a minute. You could also explain or clarify a noun or adjective. That's also going on sort of this morning. It can complete the meaning of a helping verb and it can be given as a command. It can give a command.

So, in our verse this morning, 1 John 4.21, it is used appositionally. Basically, that means that, in this case, the direct object is repeated. So, it could be translated this way. If it's confusing, look at it this way. This commandment is equal to, we should love one another. That's what's going on. Does that make sense? So, that's how Hina and the verb are used this morning. That's what it shows.

Alright, so the commandment that we've been given is that we... I'm sorry. The commandment that we've been given is the one who loves God should love his brother also. So, let's look at that. The one who loves... This is easy. This is Agapa'o. It's a participle.

We've seen that this morning like maybe four times already. the one who loves, present tense, active voice, the one who is loving, and who is he loving? He is loving God, and this is theos again, so the one who loves God should love his brother also, and should love is the same verb, agapao, And here it's the subjunctive mood. That subjunctive mood goes with the hena conjunction. Subjunctive also, remember, it means it's probable.

He should love his brother. It's not guaranteeing that he will, but it's something that should happen. And his is autos. Brother, adelphos. Now here is where, this is our little conjunction chi, but here it's used as an adverb. He should love also his brother. So it's modifying the verb. He should also love his brother. So now let's make some sense out of verse 21. In this commandment, we have from him, and here it is, he says, that the one who loves God should love his brother also.

So I've already elaborated a little bit that the word commandment is not a legalistic word when given to believers under grace. It is a legalistic word if it's talking about the Mosaic Law, and we're not under the law, we're under grace. But when it's talking about the conduct of believers under grace, it's okay. Christians do have responsibilities that they fulfill by trusting in God's grace. That's why it's okay. And then we noted that the commandment is this, namely, that the one who loves God should love his brother also. So here's the question for you.

Was this commandment already given in Scripture prior to John's first epistle? In the Gospel? In John? 1334? Yeah. Yeah, so this is referring, from what I can see, to Christ's command to love one another, which He said several times in John's Gospel. And then it's repeated again in 1 and 2 John. And Larry said John 1334. Here it is. A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another." So, clearly, this is what Christ desires. This is my commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you.

And then in 1 John, we've seen it repeated here. This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us. And the love one another, I'm sorry, just as He commanded us, is most likely referring to love one another. And we have the verse, John 13, 34. And then in 2 John, He brings it up again.

Now I ask you, lady, not as though I were writing to you a new commandment, but the one which we have had from the beginning, that we love one another. So yeah, John's just repeating what these Christians, and most likely the Asia Minor area, have known.

He's taught them this. The other apostles probably have taught them this. Remember, the apostle Paul had come through there, like, wow, 60 years before that. On his missionary journeys, he would have come through and spent time in Asia Minor, Ephesus, and he would have taught them. that believers need to love one another by God's grace. So, they would have known this.

Now, John is just reminding him of it. And then, as applications go, by faith and trust in the Lord, let's heed this commandment of Scripture and love one another today. That's what John is saying. If we say that we love God, we should love one another as well.

So that's all I had. What other what other observations or applications do you guys have on verse 21 or both verse 20 and 21? You've got 15 minutes. Yeah. So I think you've already talked about that. Yeah, that's right. That's what we had concluded as well.

I have none of your record for believers only. And I wanted to add that, because of my comment earlier, that we can apply a verse to non-believers, but whether I really think that verse applies to believers is just my guess. I thought after I got on the floor, maybe people thought I was trying to cast doubt. Oh, no, no, no. You're just saying that there's a truth there that can be general as well.

Right. No, that's fine. I kind of like the fact that we've been looking at Christ's name, my commandments, his commandments, this kind of says it in 21, kind of flips it around, this commandment we have from him, he still has the personal pronoun in there, at the bottom here, we have from him, you know it's interesting, my commandment, his commandment, in the Gospels and other parts of 1 John. Now he kind of flips it around and says, from him, he still links it with the Lord. It's just kind of, you know... Yeah, good point.

You know, really, whoa, it's not just saying, commandment... And we can't. We can't separate commandments from being in Christ. And that's the whole point. It's totally different in the mosaic system. They're out there. Obey those same commandments. That is impossible. It's a totally different picture we have here under grace. It's His commandments from Him. We have His life in us. That's what should be happening. That's a good point. That's a good point. And that's why I said earlier, I did some study several months ago on Paul's journeys and looked at the content of Paul's message to the early church, to the churches that he visited. And what I saw is that there were... Of course, you guys know the condition of the Galatian church, right? When Paul visited the Galatian church, he left. And immediately the legalistic Christians moved in. Or even the Jewish people who weren't Christians. They moved in and they started putting the Galatian church under the wall.

So Paul has to go visit them again. And then he writes the Galatian letter to try to clear up all that legalistic teaching. But when he does so, Paul doesn't shy away from continuing to remind them what God's will is. So here's this Galatian church with legalists that have moved in, and so it's a completely legalistic environment. because of the false teaching. And what we see is Paul doesn't shy away from giving them Christian conduct, even in that context. And you see the same thing in the other churches he visits.

But yeah, I like what Roger's saying. And so here's John writing at the end of the first century, like 60 years later, and yet he's careful to mention that this is his commandment. This is Christ's commandment. That's cool. That's helped me a lot in the whole study here. I remember when I first started looking at Christians, I said, commandments, oh no, law and grace. How am I going to explain this? But the Lord perfectly made it right there. I also think it's interesting that, you know, tied it, intimately tied into that. I think as Christians nowadays, we feel like that people will know us or recognize us as Christians because we're holy or we abstain from this or we don't do that or we don't do this. Right next to, was it, it was John 13, right?

Where he says, where Jesus says, along with love one another as I love you, he also says, by this people will know that you're my disciples. Not that you do all the right things, not that you're flawless, not that you never, you know, do these five sinful things, but you'll know by my love. And it's just really interesting that that's what he He's really harping on here. The commandment, love one another, love one another.

They'll know you're Christians not by how wonderfully judgmental you are with your co-workers, but by your love. I just think it's interesting. Challenging to me because I often find myself thinking, oh well what if I stumble or screw up or sin at work or get involved or get seen. Oh, won't that mar my witness? Won't that screw up my witness? And then nothing shouldn't be, I shouldn't be more conscious of that. But at the same time, it's the love that should be the characteristic of my like to non-believers who go to that side of the church.

Yeah, because that's completely foreign to them. Yeah. I mean, they'll see it and, what in the world are you doing loving that lady? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know if it's going to make any sense. I'm trying to make sense in my head. I'm sorry if it doesn't make sense.

But I'll just sign it into verse 19. Because this one says, 21, so the one who loves God should also love his brother. And 19 says, we love because he first loved us. So the reason we have that life is because he first loved us. And his act of love was to have a son, to die for us, and also live his life through us, and that's where our capability to love comes from. So, the reason we love in our brother also, if we're loving God, is because he gave us that capability in the first place.

I mean, it's him. I almost called Josiah back when I was looking up, and I almost moved 19 down with this verse, thinking it might fit better. But it's one of those things, you know, you go through and you start looking for breaks and it's tough with John's where I split. It's not going to be the right split.

But I think the 19 can easily have been put with 20. Sure. What really brought home that point. However, I think if you did love 1920, you definitely could have made a better case for applying unbelievers. I was kind of glad. Well, we'd love to get into 19. Yeah. Yeah. According to my Bible, this was written about 90 A.D. Six years approximately before Revelation.

Now at this point, where was John? Was he the captain of the isle of Ephesus? Or was he the elder or bishop that we seem to believe at the church of Ephesus? Well we don't know for sure, but it seems like he was at Ephesus. That would make a difference.

And he's writing that when he opens it up he doesn't address it to the church at Ephesus. So it's more of a general letter to the churches of that area. And he mentions those key cities or those key churches when he gets into Revelation a little later. And they're the seven cities of Asia Minor. So most likely this epistle along with 2 and 3 John would have been circulated around that area first and then spread on.

But it's just church tradition. It says he was in John, in Ephesus. And of course, the other reason he's talking about love in this epistle is because the Gnostics didn't have love, did they? The unbelieving Gnostics talked about knowing God mentally. They didn't love one another, practically. So also, that's why John's talking about this.