I John, 5:1-3

Alright. So, it's our custom here to really read the verses all at once, or all together as it were. So, we'll start at the top. As Roger pointed out, I usually use the New King James more out of habit than anything else. So, if you want to read it in the NIV or the NASB, out of your own Bible, you can. It'll just kind of Clash a little bit. It's all good though. That's really not a problem. Okay, ready? One, two, three, go.

Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves Him who is begotten of Him. By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments, and His commandments are not burdensome.

This first verse was just a doozy. I mean, it's like, whoever wrote it out obviously didn't speak English. That's exactly right. It's just amazing. Who believes in Jesus Christ? Okay, that's good. Everyone who loves Him who begot also loves Him who is begotten of Him. It sounds like something out of what the Cheshire Cat would say.

It's just amazing. So anyway, we're going to cut that open and hopefully it will make more sense. I think after looking at it for a couple of hours, it kind of cleared up. Oh, your translation? Do you want to spit it out? and whoever loves the father loves the child born of him. Oh, that's great. I like that. Which one is that? That's lovely. That's way better. We'll move to it. Yeah, so this was really the only translation I looked at, and I thought, I just was dizzy. But anyway, we'll get through it.

So it starts with whoever, which is pas, it's a word we've seen before, meaning each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, or everything. And it's well translated, whoever here, just because of the meaning. Because it's not, of course, referring to the universal sense of all.

It's referring to those who meet the requirements in the following clause or verses. These requirements, once again, will tie our position to our condition so closely that we can clearly see that John's intent here is that there should be no clear line between what we believe and how we live in our day-to-day lives. So, that's kind of, we're going to see more of that tenure as we go through today.

Usual biblical verb for belief or faith. It can also mean to be fully persuaded of the truth of a claim, an argument or a fact. This is a word that we see more than 220 verses in the New Testament. That's just the verb form. There's a handful more of the noun form. It's a derivative of the word pistis, which there it is, it came out in Greek, meaning the noun form of the verb that we see here. It's also important to notice that it's in the present tense in the active voice, so it could be translated, all who are actively believing right now that Jesus Christ is born of God. Okay. Is. Is esti? Obviously another one we've seen time and time again here. It's the third person conjugation of the key word to me. It is the usual word for to be in Greek. Here we see it is in the present tense in the indicative mood.

This is really important because John has made the case John has made the case that, against the Gnostics, that Jesus was an actual physical being. You know, in the beginning he's talking about we touched him, we felt him, we heard him, and all that business.

So he's a real being, not an illusion. However, we're not saved by our belief that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God. But rather, we're saved by our belief that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. I just thought that there's a lot of people who will honor Jesus in the past and say, oh, he was a great teacher, he was a good man, he was this, he was that, and that has no power to save.

That's what I would put forth, that it's the present tense that is of any importance. So now moving on, the Christ. This is the Greek word that is used to translate the word translated Messiah in the Septuagint, or in the Old Testament, in the Hebrew. It's not a name, but a title.

Due to a misunderstanding, many people, I don't know if you've ever met anyone who thinks that Christ is actually just Jesus' last name. I've met a handful. Then you hear people when they're cursing, they'll put an H in the middle there, and everyone asks, what's Jesus' middle name if it's H? So anyway, just in fear of actually, you know, letting something silly like that slide on. Yeah, so this is a title, this is something else.

In the Old Testament, the Hebrew context, this title is meant the Anointed of God. is something which the Old Testament gave us a clear picture, as the priests of the Old Testament, as well as the prophets, were sometimes called the anointed of God. And this is an artist's rendition of Samuel anointing David, actually. So, in the Old Testament, we find people being anointed. The appointment is king, as well as priestly appointment, and in a very interesting point in scripture, the Gentile king Cyrus is also called the anointed of God, because he's going to do God's will. not obviously in the same manner that Christ is called the Anointed of God, but even still.

So, I don't remember who's being anointed here. And you can really buy this on the internet, but I wouldn't recommend it. Is that what the elders are supposed to do when somebody's sick? Call the elders? Anoint them? Is that what you get on the internet? Yeah, I think so. I don't know. I just use vegetable oil. It's cheaper. Exactly. But anyway, there it is. If you ever want to get it, I don't remember the website.

So Jesus' role as Christ is partially a recognition of his priestly ministry as we see displayed in the book of Hebrews. Does someone want to read Hebrews 9, 11 through 12 real quick for us? I don't know if flip to it or read it off the screen. But when Christ appeared as a high priest to the good things to come, he entered into a more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not this creation, and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, he entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

Notice I've taken on some special, interesting spelling. It's phonetic. Entered. And there it is. So anyway, just recognizing Jesus as the Christ is, recognizing Jesus in his priestly ministry as standing between us and God, or standing as the gate, as he said. is born, is genao. We're going to see this word three times today, of all things.

This word can mean physical birth, as happens each and every day. It can also mean spiritual birth, as occurs through Christ in the life of the believer at the moment of belief. However, this is kind of the special meaning. This is something that we have to take in context of all Scripture to say, well, it's not exactly the typical meaning that we're used to. Since we know that Jesus is not a created being, And we know that He is without any beginning and is eternal, along with the other two members of the Trinity, as found in these verses. This phrase, born of God, has to be interpreted to imply the special and unique relationship between God the Father and Jesus Christ. Not in terms of before the world was created, God got pregnant and had Jesus, but it's something more having to do with their relationship together.

So, just wondering if it's really that important that we recognize these things in the church and as Christians. I mean, these are just a couple, just a few examples people, and movements, and books, and they're trying to say that Jesus was just human, or Jesus wasn't God, or Jesus wasn't this. Jesus was a good man.

I mean, I'm doing a study on the Da Vinci Code right now for a Bible study due on Wednesday nights, and it's just amazing, the allegations that he makes in that book. I mean, it's just, it's beyond fantasy. So, and then, where is it? The Gnostic Gospels is kind of the center of it. It's a crack-up.

Here are these Gospels that are not terribly reliable documents, discovered years and years after the biblical documents that we have, and yet people are willing. And scholarly, well, I don't know if I'd call them too scholarly, but fairly scholarly people are willing to take that as an authority over our biblical texts. they're willing to take a later document as an authority over the earlier documents.

It's just absolutely wild and if we don't know about it, I think there's a number of... Well, there's a number of bad thoughts going on out there, so just other stuff. And of course Islam leads the belief that Jesus is not obviously God and God is not noble. Actually, I've even heard that they believe that Jesus will come back and then Muhammad will come back after Jesus and really take over. So, I mean, there's errant views about who Christ is and all that all over the place. So our world and culture is trying to foster beliefs in us that Jesus was nothing more than a man, a powerful prophet, or a good teacher. Some even go so far as to say that Jesus never claimed himself to be deity. And this is the one that just blew my mind when someone said, well, Jesus never thought he was God. Yeah, he did. No, he didn't. People just, since they've never opened the Bible, they'll just assume anything that they hear is true. So, if someone says that, then all of a sudden it becomes a viable opinion. So, here's 1 John 1, 1 through 3.

It says, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him, nothing came into being that has come into being. And then this is from the Ryrie Study Bible.

This is the IIM, and we've probably all heard from Verne, but in the Greek language, Jesus would have said, ego eimi, which is the equivalent of saying, because in Greek you can leave off the subject, When you read in the Old Testament and God says to Moses, I am sent you, it's egoe me.

I, I am, I who am in the eternal present. So all these statements made by Jesus throughout the book of John were made in this way and that's why very often after they're made you read, oh and then the Pharisees picked up stones to stone him because he was claiming to be God. So here's, I am the bread of life. I am the light of the world, I am the gate, I am the good shepherd, I am the resurrection and the life, I am the way, the truth and the life, and I am the true vine.

I mean, I think we can make a very strong case that these were just specific, outright claims to deity. Furthermore... I think on John 1, 1-3, what you need to do is put verse 14 with it, but that explains what the word is. Oh, yeah, that's a good point. Word, word, word. What's the word? Job 114 says what the word is. It's Christ. Yeah, that's where the equation is made. You're right.

I'll add that, actually. Can I borrow your pen? Thank you, dear. I'll make a note to myself or else I'll forget. Plus verse 14. Cool. Thanks, Doug. You're amazing. Oh yeah, it's the key to understanding the whole passage, because you could consider it to mean anything after that. No, it's great. I appreciate you saying so.

Here's Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well. The woman says, I know that the Messiah is coming. He who is called Christ, the one who comes, he will declare all things to us. And Jesus says, I who speak to you am he. Is this not? blatant claim to divinity.

I mean, here is Peter and the Lord Jesus in Matthew 16, 13-16. Now, when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he's asking his disciples, who do people say that the Son of Man is? They said, some say John the Baptist, and others Elijah, but still others Jeremiah, one of the prophets. And he said to them, but who do you say that I am?

Simon Peter answered, you are the Christ, the Son of the living God. And then Jesus denies it and said, no, no, no, no, you've got it all wrong. No. He said, blessed are you, Simon Peter, for this has not been revealed to you of flesh, but of spirit.

Sorry, that was the B.I.V., Bradley International Version. I don't remember exactly the word for word. But anyway, he accepts that claim. He accepts others claiming him as divinity. He accepts his own claims of divinity. We'll move on. I said we'd see this word again.

Here's born, him who begot, and begotten of him. I'm sorry, the begotten there, or the who is begotten, but the of him is actually a different word in Greek. Huh, typo, my apologies. Anyway, these three are the same root word in Greek, and it's that, um, genau, am I pronouncing that right, genau? Cool. This word can mean physical birth, remember when we read this before? Not going to do it again.

So this verse could be rendered, whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ, born of God, And all who love the birther also love those born of him. And I think this is why, like, the Nazby, I guess, Nazby, you said, that you wrote out of? We'll try to clarify it by saying, since it's quite obviously in reference to the father there, they'll just say, whoever loves the father also loves. And it actually does make for an easier reading English translation. Because obviously birther, at least Spellcheck would tell me, is not a real word. So there you go. It's really a shame, because it works out kind of well there. So it goes. Brian, I hate to interrupt you. Go ahead.

You just say back there now, in the form of God, we look at a born mother and a child have a very close relationship. In the form of God, a very intimate relationship. Right? Absolutely. It's a celebration there. We're about to find out. I absolutely believe you though. I think that's a fantastic application. to the intimacy of us. Oh, absolutely. Thanks, Doug. All right, so now we're going to move into one of the specific incidences here.

I'm not even going to take a whack at that Greek word, but this word, this is the word that we saw before, and it's just in a different conjugation because of its placement in the sentence. It's part in grammar. The pronoun him here is actually not in the text, but they insert it for English readability. Like I said, the word birther, not really a word, and the word father is, I wouldn't say it's a far cry, but it's a jump. You can't find a Greek word that matches up with father, and that kind of throws you off a bit. The word father, if you look at the NISV, they have father. It was a call and somebody decided, well, I'm not surprised actually they did that. NISV usually tries to be more accurate to the Greek and they went the other direction here. The NIV, the message, one of those that's trying to smooth things out, maybe you'd see it.

Does that basically make sense though, that that's something that can happen in Greek, that we really don't have, we don't have begatter, birther, or we don't have a one-word equivalent for that. So, like I say, and we'll learn, given the context, the previous phrase, it would make sense that the begetter here is God the Father of whom the Son of God is begotten. Actually, I didn't even open the NASB on this verse, so I'd say it's just a pretty sound, logical, given the verse before it, a pretty logical conclusion that God the Father is the the begetter, or the birther, or the one who is doing the action here. And then also here is Kai. And just like we saw last week, when Josiah told us, usually Kai is and, but sometimes it can very well be also. So, in this case, it's also. He who loves, let's see, anyone who loves the begetter also loves him who is begotten.

So, we'll move on. Him. This is the usual third person pronoun that is well translated, but the question is, who is him near? I'm just going to tell you in advance. I'm not 100% heart set on this one, so if you want to disagree with me, this is free game. It's always free game, but it's even more so here.

I think, as Roger pointed out to me earlier, I think Jesus is probably, in the context, the most natural choice, because of all the characters, all the people involved in the past few verses, Jesus is in there, so begotten of Jesus, begotten of Christ. I just wanted to throw some other verses up there from John 1, 12 and 13.

But as many as received Him, He gave them the right to become children of God. So there's this idea of being children of God. Even those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, God. And then John 3, 5-16, Jesus answered, Truly, truly, I say unto you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

That which is born of flesh is flesh, that which is born, that which is sea-born, that which is born of Spirit is Spirit. So, I would make the argument that it might be something in reference to the Godhead, or to the Trinity as a whole, since we are born of the Spirit, we are called children of God, However, in the context, if you want to take this to mean exclusively Jesus Christ, I think you can find as much reason for that, too.

Does anyone have anything to add about that, or any thoughts on that? I don't know, but I'm actually kind of rethinking this a little bit. Actually, I noticed that the New American Standard puts a child in there. It's not in the original, but I'm trying to help you out.

I almost wonder, if you go back to the first part, in that clause, So that whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ, that really the whole thing is a participle, participle phrasably, and is is a verb, so that's talking about a believer right? So when you come back to the bottom part, I'm actually thinking that I've probably jumped, you know, it's another thing, but I think it's that whoever loves loves. The begotter, whoever loves the begotter. The question is that begotten of him is that, obviously every believer, we're also begotten of him. I know, my head's spinning. I don't know, I could be a believer. There is a third person in this though, whoever loves him who is begotten of.

So, this is about love for the children of God, or love for Christians, love for saints. Regardless, that hymn either refers to someone in the deity, but this hymn up here, surely, and then the further back over that, this is exactly what I was fighting over. So, just to be absolutely unclear, everyone who loves Him, who begot the Father, Also loves him who is begotten the saint or the children of God child of God Began of him.

Do you want Jesus? Do you want the Trinity you want the spirit take what you will? Believe me tossing and turning I was The bold hymn, I concluded, if I just had to put my penny in the bucket, I'd say it was the Trinity. It was a reference to the Godhead. However, like I said, I think you can make a perfectly good contextual reference and say it's Christ. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God.

Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or just God. Or God, either way. Either way, it's Him. Does anyone have any other questions or curiosities about that?

Because I've got to say, that was my big struggle this week. That was the huge pain. So, yeah, we're good. Feel comfortable with that? No? Took me a while to get there. Okay, so in this verse, sorry, verse 1, we see that John is connecting. Oh, sorry, this will be a part of my interpretation. I believe that the entire Trinity was implied in this statement. And if you don't see the spirit in there, then you can just X this off your outline. Bye. So in this verse, I see John connecting the entire Trinity and giving us a logical argument about how our eternal position in Christ plays out in our daily condition.

We know that by our belief in Jesus as the Christ and as the Son of God, we become born of God. Furthermore, inasmuch as we love the Father, we must surely love Jesus. And as much as we love Christ, we must surely love those who are born of Him, that is, the saints.

I mean, I feel like what John's doing here is just making a logical argument. It's kind of like this, you know, if A equals B and B equals C, then A equals C. If you love God, the Father, then you must love Christ. Like Jesus says, if you would have known me, or if you would have known my Father, you would have accepted me. If you love God, you love Christ. If you love Christ, you love the saints, those who are born of Him. Yeah, so therefore, in some way, in some way of kind of logical connection, to love the saints is to love God.

I think that's kind of the argument that he's getting involved in here. But I hope as we go back and learn the other parts of it, the connection between God's love through us is loving, we're to love one another, that's over and over and over again, so it's another way of looking at that truth. Absolutely. So, alright, just to read the whole verse.

By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. More literally translated in this, we've seen it a handful of times already, in this, but by this is more of a common English phrase. In what though? By what do we know that we love the children of God?

Now, this is what I did since I was kind of looking through it piece by piece and I didn't take a step back until I had it all wrong. I was looking at by this to refer to the last verse. And actually, as I read through this translation and some other translations, I said, oh, well, it's the beginning of a new clause. So it's not by this referring back, it's by this referring to the end of this thing. So, here we go, down at the bottom. So it's really, understanding is pointing to the last half of verse 2 and all of verse 3.

So, when we love God and keep His commandments, by this we know. By what? When we love God and keep His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments, and His commandments are not burdensome. So, that's how we know. That's by what we know.

Know here is Gnosko. Now, you've got a handout in the back, and I just kind of, I don't know if I'd say I got sidetracked, but you should have a handout in the back, do you? You do, yes. I see what I've done. This is nothing terribly, terribly profound, but it just looked so enjambed like this.

And when I looked through it, like there are some no's that I left off here, like things that say they do not know the lie, or they do not know Jesus, or they don't know Him, or they say they know Him, I left those off. And this is just... on a cursory glance, what we can know, what John wants us to know, what John wants the Christian to know, the first God. And some of these are conditional, I think. So I wouldn't suggest that you just take this as an out-and-out devotional resource, but just to point us towards the verses if it pleases you to go through and look them up and see how they relate. So anyway, in verse 2-3, Yeah. Oh, I'll just start up here, actually.

This is the word for know, that is the word that we've seen again and again in the book of 1 John. It's one of the primary purposes in writing the book, and the Holy Spirit, through the instrument of John, wants believers to know what's going on. He wants them to know, and that's where we go into this handout here. He wants to know that we know Him, in verse 2-3.

That we are in Him, in verse 2.5. That this is the last hour, in 2.18. That we know the truth, 2.21. He is righteous, 2.29. When He is revealed, we will be like Him, 3.2. He was manifested to take our sins, 3.5. We have passed from death to life, 3.14.

He wants us to know love, that we would know love, 3.16. Know that He abides in us, 324, the Spirit of God in 4.2, and the Spirit of error in 4.6, that we would know God in 4.8. Tell us that we know God in 4.8. We abide in Him, 4.13, to know that we love the saints, 5.2. That's our verse today.

To know that we have eternal life, one of the major purpose statements, I think, of the book. To know that He hears us, and to know that Jesus gives us understanding. Jesus has given us understanding. Not massively profound, but I just... We've been talking about this, this knowing is a key theme in the book.

And so I just wanted to pull out some of, I'm sure I didn't get them all, but some of the things that John says that we would know. Each one of these verses is Skanosko. That we would know, that we would know, that we would know. Which, when you look at it like this, and then I left out a bunch of them, so it's pretty wild to think how much of a focus this is of John's.

So anyway, we'll move on forward. Okay, children of God, ta tekne tu theo. Okay, so the word tekne here is translated children. It is a word that means child, but is also used in terms of close association as between a disciple and his master. I think it implies all the intimacy that Doug was talking about. All this intimacy of being a child of God, or what it is to be a child of God. The intimacy that we share with God, with Christ, with the Spirit, the intimacy that we share. Well, I won't draw that conclusion just yet. And there's an interesting... I was reading through Matthew Henry, because it's free on the internet, and he actually really had, I thought, a pretty profound statement here.

He says, and he's talking about our love being, you know, our, you, me, love to them being the other believers, the children of God. Our love to them appears to be sound and genuine when we love them not merely upon any secular account as because they are rich or learned or kind to us. or of our denomination among religious parties, but because they are God's children, His regenerating grace appears in them, His image and superscription are upon them, and so in them God Himself is loved." Thus we see what Thus we see what that love to the brethren is that is so pressed in this epistle. It is love to them as the children of God and the adopted brethren of the Lord Jesus. So I just thought this was a really profound commentary on our love of the children of God.

We are not to love each other at Holly Hills Bible Church because we're nice to each other. We're not to love each other because we take care of each other, because we have great sermons or great teaching necessarily. We're to love each other because we're the beloved of God. So, that's how he's going to go on to say later, it's not burdensome.

I mean, because we're loving the Eternal in each other, and it's completely, just as God's love for us is completely based on our actions and our behaviors towards Him, So, our love for each other is completely not based on our actions. It's the unconditional love of God. And actually, that word also, as we've seen it time and time again, is agape. So, it's agape love. It's Father's love. And we're loving the children of God not because of what they do, or who they are, or anything like that. We're loving the children of God because they are the children of God.

Yeah, if I'm like in the workplace and I work in sales in the past, I guess I've done it for six years or something outside sales. So I get to drive around, meet people. And and so. You get to know people and you start to wonder if they are Christian or not. Some people you know right away. You don't know right away. You find out later. But it's pretty cool once you find out that somebody else is a Christian.

There's a bond. It doesn't matter what position they are in. Like this is signing or what level they are at in the company. They're your brother. It's pretty cool. You have an instant bond with them. Because that's our most important bond, really. Not work or whatever. Absolutely. It supersedes family and it supersedes... It was just incredibly profound for me, because it never occurred to me. Why do we love our brothers?

Well, because we're told to, or because we should, or because there's something in me, because I'm supposed to love, or something. And really, we'll talk about later, that really it's Christ loving. God's doing everything at some level. But at another level, I've realized I don't love Christians because we believe the same thing, necessarily. We are brothers because we believe the same thing. But it's not simply because we see eye to eye on all the social issues, or see eye to eye on the ways of life, or even see eye to eye on all of our theology. But we love each other because that's a child of God.

We love each other because of what God has done in them, not because of... what they have done, or because what I have done, or because what a great Christian I am, that I can love all the other believers. No, that's not it at all. It was just incredibly profound to completely redefine the basis and the nature of that love as being who they are in Christ.

So, glare's mud? Ready to move on? Okay. Commandments. Entole, this issue of commandment was covered so succinctly and precisely by Josiah, I'm just going to repeat it. It's all in quotes. Best commentary I could find on the whole issue. In Scripture, Entole can refer to the Mosaic Law, Matthew 19, 17, the Church Age Conduct, John 13, 34, and to the Millennial Kingdom Law, Matthew 5, 1.

Context will determine which type of commandment is being referred to. The word commandment is often given bad or legalistic connotations, but 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, for they taught the Christians of God's enabling power and their responsibility to walk by faith and thereby glorify God in their condition.

Hey Greg, I was thinking about that. I'm glad you threw that back up there. I have on the first paragraph there, the apostles of the church age lived in a far more legalistic period than what we do today. And the reason I said that, we do live in a legalistic period today, but I probably should have reworded it. My purpose was that they actually had Jews coming into their churches, putting them under the Mosaic Law, and we don't have that today in that exact way. We have Christians who are confused, and they're putting themselves under the Mosaic Law, but they're not Jews, and they're not Christians. It's a little different and that's why I worded it that way. I didn't mean that we don't live in a legalistic period today.

We do, unfortunately. It's just because they are closer to the mosaic hall and they were everywhere. Things are absolute. We don't have the same... It's like Thessalonians and Galatians. Right. And again, the legalizers. Yeah. Because they were coming in and they were like, hey, that's fine. Do this. But you have to do this too. You have to do this. You have to do that. So I thought about that over the week.

Good, good, good. Fantastic. Alright, so we'll move on to the verse 2 summary. 1 John 5, 2 clearly displays to us how we know that we love the children of God. It is interesting that it is not because of the nice things that they have done or the good upstanding people they are in their condition, nor is it that they love us back, but it is because of what God has made them to be. Furthermore, it is interesting that we are not loving them out of our own personal supply of love, nor out of our own power in any way. It is something that is done purely by Christ in us. We see that the whole thing is, once again, God's doing. We can either choose to walk by faith and rely on Him, or mess it up trying to, or not to do it ourselves. So you notice we catch ourselves not loving the saints.

It's going to be either because we're... I mean, this is just my slight commentary. It's going to be because we're trying to do it out of our own supply or trying not to do it. And I think I'm even more ashamed of the times that I try not to, but I do.

I spend all my time trying to come up with reasons why I shouldn't have to love that person, or reasons why I shouldn't have to da-da-da-da-da-da. And it's actually me getting in the way of God's love, me getting in the way. I'm not resting in Him. And I'm actually trying not to love someone out of my flesh, out of my condition. And that's the only way it works.

If we just rest in Him and walk by the Spirit, if you like, then that should be what's coming out naturally from us. But it's one of those odd tensions of the faith that we have to rest in the Spirit, but it takes work to rest in the Spirit. It takes focus and concentration and we have to be looking at the Word and all that. So, anyway, anything else to say about verse 2 before we move on to verse 3? Wait, there's more.

There is also an important equation made between our conduct, our life, our love for God, and our love for the saints. John makes it clear here, as he does in countless other verses, that our conduct is important and something that we need to be considering in our day-to-day walk. We are not under law, nor are we to run around fearing that we are going to jeopardize our salvation, for that would be impossible. But we are to prayerfully consider our conduct as we evaluate whether we are now walking in the flesh or walking in the Spirit. Does anyone have anything to add to that, verse 2? Applications? Observations? I know I didn't get everything. No? Fire ahead.

I think verse 2, your interpretation of verse 2 is good and it also clears up the questions we had at the end of verse 1. But you didn't have it because you knew the context. You got him referred to it by talking about the children of God. I was cheating. I knew it. And that really was what cleared it up, for me, is just going on to verse 2 and being like, oh, it's great to look at the word by word and it's completely necessary, but if I lose sight of the whole, oh, it's gone, all falls to pieces. And it certainly did.

Okay, taken from Thayer's, this is the word for keep, it's tereo. I just took the list of possible definitions. To attend carefully, to take care of, to guard, Metaphorically, to keep one in the state which he is in, to observe, or to reserve, to undergo something. Anybody? I chose to observe. Yeah? Okay.

So we observe, that we observe his commandments. Because, yeah, so there it is. R, actually we're going to end a little early, hopefully. R, this is the third person plural of to be, and is well translated R, is a really amazing thing that is also in the present tense in the indicative mood, and this really does have great significance. So, what is the significance of this?

John is not telling that God's commandments shouldn't be burdensome. This is really important, because we will read that and say, oh, if I was really a good Christian, God's commands shouldn't be burdensome, but since I'm not, they are burdensome. He's not saying that. He's saying they are not burdensome. Not that they shouldn't be burdensome, not that they wouldn't be burdensome if we were better, but that they are not burdensome to us right now. Nor is it telling us that God's commandments will not be burdensome in the future. That is, when we go to glory, or when we're raptured, or whatever point in time that we reach that point in maturity, then they won't be burdensome. No, they're not burdensome right now.

And I think it's intense, because every time I've read this before, at least, just for me, I've always said, oh, I've taken it as this, like, oh, when you're a really great Christian, when you're a really mature Christian, then God's commandments won't be burdensome to you. But right now, I'm walking around with lists of things, and da-da-da-da-da, and now, right now it's burdensome. But once I'm perfect and I've got all 150 commandments all checked off, then they're not burdensome.

And no, that's not what he's saying at all. And I think it's a part of the beautiful balance of John, that he'll say in one verse, you know, that we obey God's commandments, and in the next one, but his commandments are not burdensome. So... What are the commandments then that are there? I think, kind of akin to what Josiah was saying, I'm not putting these words in Josiah's mouth, because you can disagree with me if you want.

I think there's of course the greatest commandment that's given to Christ, that we should love one another. A new commandment I give you, that we should love one another. Love one another as I love you. So I'd say that's the, I think that's the primary commandment that we've been looking at.

But when it goes into the plural of these commandments, I think you can Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm treading on thin ice and I know it. I think those commandments are everything you can read in the letters of Paul, everything that you can read in the letters of John, everything in Peter. I think those commandments are what can be found throughout the New Testament. Not to be lived out as law, as we'll actually re-emphasize again later, but I think it's everything. I mean, you're going to talk about the fruit of the Spirit, you're going to talk about how we should... I mean, from Romans to Revelation, I think you can find the commandments.

Plural in there. So, as Simon was saying earlier, about the commandments and so forth, the Judaizers coming in and so on, Some people think that means it's the law. Ten Commandments. Absolutely. I have a covenant. I think it's the two Commandments. Love the Lord your God with all your heart. Love your neighbor as yourself.

Well, I think here again, John is really consistent. He always puts, he links it back to Christ. He knows every time it's his commandments, his commandments. And even in Josiah's verse, he covered it was commandments of him. So, I'm just really impressed that he focuses back on Christ. And you can't separate Christ from his commandments. who He is. As we abide in Him and walk by faith, walk by the Spirit, we will do His commandments because it's not us, not I, but Christ. It all hangs together. That's the way the Christian life is. You see commandments and you kind of get nervous a little bit. You think, somehow the wall is in here and it shouldn't be here. But I think when it's His commandments, you can relax. The very life of Christ.

And he reiterates the points. It's love one another, over and over again. So he's explicit. A new commandment, new equality, different than Matthew and Moses. So it's distinguishing. Yeah, and I think, Doug, I think you're right. In the strictest, in the stricter contextual sense, you're right. He probably referred just to the two commandments, the major, the two that Jesus gave. I think you're absolutely interpretationally sound in there, in that.

And I guess what I question is that I think you can, or I would interpret this as saying in a larger sense, the commandments such as when Paul says to the Ephesians, stop stealing. that that would be considered, because this is the word of God, regardless of whose pen it came out of, that you can kind of say, look, these are all the commandments. We get a pretty rounded picture of conduct in the New Testament. Real quick, Brad.

1 Corinthians 14.37, Paul's writing to Corinthians and he says, if any man finds himself to be a prophet or spiritual, Let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

And he uses that word until later. So, yeah, specifically, I think you're right. I'm talking about John, but yeah, it can refer to the church-age conduct as well, so. Because they're all looked at the same way. Except the one commandment or two that we're talking about here. Yeah, by his life.

Well, then, I'm satisfied. That doesn't take as much for me. Okay, it's burdensome. This is a word that can mean weighty, heavy, burdensome, or troublesome. The King James translates this word as grievous, meaning that the commandments are not oppressive to us. So there it is, not oppressive. Alright, so here's a verse 3 summary.

So we've seen in these verses that John intimately ties our condition with our position. It is of the utmost importance in our walk to be conscious of the commandments that scripture has for us in the church age. However, it is also very important to notice that John writes to us that his commandments are not burdensome. How could his commandments not be burdensome? Because they're not a law, and we're not under law. Because it's Christ living out His life in us, day by day in our walk. And that is how the commandments are not burdensome to us. They're natural. They're the natural outflow of His life in us.

That's about my whole summary on that. Does anyone have anything to add? We're looking at the whole verses now, if you want to take a second to read over them. Like I said, I know I didn't get everything, everything. I'm just trying to come to some esoteric understanding of the entire thing.