Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XLVII) 12/20/22

^5:6 And Jesus the Messiah was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

Earlier, John described the Spirit as “the Spirit of truth,”[1] and in the upper room discourse in John’s Gospel, Jesus similarly defines the Spirit three times.[2] Both here in verse six and in John’s Gospel,[3] the role of the Spirit is to bear witness to the truth about Jesus. In the Fourth Gospel, the Spirit’s testifying role mainly bears witness to Jesus against the world. Here in John’s Epistle, the Spirit’s testifying role primarily bears witness to believers concerning the truth of the message about Jesus that they heard from the beginning.[4] John invokes the Spirit as a witness to the reality of the fact that Jesus came by “water and blood” because he says, “the Spirit is truth.” At a minimum, this constitutes a guarantee of the truthfulness of the Spirit as a witness about Jesus. Still, it may also imply that as truth is personified in God elsewhere,[5] it is embodied in the Spirit in this verse.^[6]

Believing that Christians can fall away from the faith, Ben Witherington III (1951) notes that some Bible scholars conclude that the Apostle John must be rebutting those who forsook the congregation for the world, who maintained that Jesus only came by water. But were there actual opponents who argued that Jesus came by birth or baptism (water) but not by His death or the Lord’s Supper (blood)? Have not these same commentators argued that the opponents were likely Docetics or even Gnostics, in which case they would deny that Jesus came by physical birth or material sacrament? This whole line of argument commits two mistakes: (1) not realizing that the text is out-of-date considering later docetic or even gnostic controversies; (2) it reads far too much into John’s emphatic rhetoric. John is not refuting anyone here; instead, he is affirming his community’s basic views and values: Jesus came by both water and blood – the meaning of which we need to unravel further at this juncture.^[7]

With her crafted spiritual insight, Judith Lieu (1951) comments that the third person term of these confessions, “the one who,” reflects John’s concern to use them as benchmarks for identifying those who truly belong. Already in chapter four, these two patterns were indirectly brought together, at least to the extent of setting “our” specific experience of God’s love in the (Father’s) sending of the Son alongside the affirmation of “the one who acknowledges” Jesus as the Son of God.[8] Despite the apparent demand that Jesus be identified as such, there is only a limited sense of what further ideas or stories, either “Jesus” or “Jesus the Anointed One,” would evoke for John or his readers. Such references as “that one” have shown that they knew something of His life and death[9] but that it was His exemplary or present significance that was of greater impact.[10] This impact, however, would only be effective because Jesus the Anointed One, “having come in the flesh,” is one who unmistakably belongs to the sphere of human experience.[11] ^[12]

Contextual interpretation specialist Gary M. Burge (1952) calls verse six one of the most perplexing verses in all of John’s letters. Without explanation, John uses a somewhat incomprehensible phrase (“water and blood”), which was indeed known among his followers. Three views attempt to explain the passage. (1) Some believe “water and blood” refer to the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist. The chief problem with this view is singular: John’s interest is not in church ritual but in a historical incarnation. The Johannine schism centers on Christology expressed in history, not on worship. (2) A second viewpoint to while Jesus was on the cross, a spear thrust into His side brought forth “blood and water.”[13] In this sense, John may say that the cross is a significant saving event in Jesus’ life.

This might be important if the secessionists claimed that they were without sin and had no need for ritual cleansing.[14] But one difficulty with this view is the closing phrase of verse six, “not … by water only, but by water and blood.” John is making a counterpoint to some claims involving only (or primarily) water. (3) A third view, held by most interpreters, sees water and blood as summing up the totality of Jesus’ incarnational ministry on earth. Jesus’ baptism (water) and crucifixion (blood) frame His ministry: He was declared the Son of God in the Jordan.[15] He obtained even more power and authority through His glorification at Golgotha. Marshall, for instance, understands that John is refuting a Docetic (or pre-Gnostic) tendency that downplayed a complete incarnation. Some were teaching that the heavenly Anointed One descended on the man Jesus at baptism but departed before He was crucified. Hence, John says, Jesus came not only by baptismal water but also through the blood of the cross.^[16]

Emphasizing the Apostle John’s call to Christian fellowship, Bruce B. Barton (1954) explains that the one who came by water and blood in this context can be interpreted in one of two ways: (1) The phrase “water and blood” refers to Jesus’ death on the cross, when he was pierced, and blood and water flowed out.[17] John witnessed this piercing and asserted the importance of this occurrence. Cerinthus, a false teacher, and the Docetists denied Jesus’ true and lasting humanity. But John saw Jesus shed his blood and die. (2) The phrase “water and blood” could refer to Jesus’ baptism (water) and crucifixion (blood). The word order corresponds to Jesus’ baptism and death.

These were times in Jesus’ life when His authority was most clearly delineated. Cerinthus also said that Jesus was “the Anointed One” only between his baptism and his death—that is, He was merely human until He was baptized. At that time, “the Anointed One” descended upon him but left him before his death on the cross. But if Jesus died only as a man, he could not have taken upon himself the world’s sins, and Christianity would be an empty religion. Only an act of God could take away the punishment that sin deserves. The Holy Spirit testifies to the truth of Christ’s life and works[18] because the Spirit is truth. The Spirit’s primary role is to reveal the Anointed One to the believers and affirm Christ’s message.^[19]

With a classical thinking approach to understanding the scriptures, Bruce G. Schuchard (1958) says verse six is the third formalized instance of an equative clause beginning with an attention-grabbing “this is”[20] and marks the beginning of “the one who came by water and blood, Jesus the Anointed One.” There can be little doubt that John used phraseology that was already familiar to his hearers, as represented in his Gospel, where “blood and water”[21] flow from the pierced side of Jesus. Today, however, some two millennia later, John’s terminology is not so readily comprehended. “This” again points forward both to the One whose coming, whose person and work, was itself marked at its apex by “water” and “blood,” and to the nominative of apposition,[22] “Jesus the Anointed One.” In verse six, the demonstrative “this” referent is personal. The first of three references to “water” and “blood” describes the means and the manner of the coming of the man Jesus, the Anointed Son of God, so that we might live through him.[23] Therefore, the sentence offers a historical reference designed to link the interchangeable designations “the Son of God”[24] and “the Anointed One” to “Jesus”[25] in specific circumstances of His earthly ministry as “the coming one.”[26] ^[27]

Great expositional teacher David Guzik (1961) sees the Apostle John returning to a theme he started at the beginning of the letter: the natural, historical foundation for our trust in Jesus the Anointed One.[28] The emphasis was on what was seen, heard, looked upon, and handled – the real stuff, real people, tangible things. As water and blood are natural, so was the coming of the Son of God, Jesus the Anointed One. 1) Some believe that water speaks of our baptism, and blood speaks of receiving communion, and John writes of how Jesus comes to us in the two Christian sacraments of baptism and communion (Luther and Calvin had this idea). Yet, if this is the case, it doesn’t add up with the historical perspective John had when he wrote: “came by water and blood.” He seems to write of something that happened in the past, not ongoing. 2) Others (such as Augustine) believe the water and blood describe the blood and water which flowed from Jesus’ side when He was stabbed with a spear on the cross. [But this is untenable since the blood (crucifixion) came first and then water (baptism). Why would anyone baptize a dead body?][29] 

Nonetheless, it was an important event to the Apostle John because immediately after this description of water and blood, he added: And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe.[30] ^[31]

An expert in highlighting the crucial part of a biblical message, Marianne Meye Thompson (1964) says that to understand the point being made using “by water and blood,” it will be helpful to examine the use of “water” and “blood” in the Gospel and the epistles of John. While water is mentioned in the epistles only here, several significant references are found in John’s Gospel. John the Baptizer baptizes with water,[32] as does Jesus,[33] and the water symbolizes cleansing. Jesus changes water set aside for the Jewish rites of purification to wine.[34] He speaks of the necessity to be born of “water and the Spirit,”[35] where “water and Spirit” probably connotes one idea: cleansing and sanctification by the Holy Spirit.[36] Thus water also symbolizes the gift of the Spirit given by the risen Jesus.[37] Together these references stress the concept of purifying, particularly the purifying effect of God’s Spirit.^[38]

---

[1] 1 John 4:6

[2] John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13

[3] Ibid. 15:26

[4] Cf. 1 John 2:24-27

[5] See Ibid. 5:20; see John 14:6

[6] Kruse, Colin G., The Letters of John (The Pillar New Testament Commentary), op. cit., loc. cit., Kindle Edition

[7] Witherington, Ben III, Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on Titus, 1-2 Timothy and 1-3 John, op. cit., loc. cit., Kindle Edition

[8] 1 John 4:10, 14-15

[9] Ibid. 2:6; 3:16

[10] Ibid. 3:3, 5; cf. 2:11

[11] Ibid. 4:2

[12] Lieu, Judith: A New Testament Library, I, II, & III, op. cit., p. 208

[13] John 19:34

[14] 1 John 1:7

[15] John 1:34

[16] Burge, Gary M., The Letters of John (The NIV Application Commentary), op. cit., pp. 201-202

[17] John 19:34-35

[18] Ibid. 15:26; 16:13-15

[19] Burton, Bruce B., 1, 2, & 3 John (Life Application Bible Commentary), op. cit., p. 109

[20] See 1 John 5:3, 4b, 5:6 NIV

[21] John 19:34

[22] Apposition is a relationship between two or more words or phrases in which the two units are grammatically parallel and refer to each other.

[23] 1 John 4:9

[24] Ibid. 5:5, 9b, 10-12

[25] Ibid. 5:1a

[26] Ibid. 4:2; see 4:9-10

[27] Schuchard, Bruce G., Concordia Commentary, 1-3 John, op. cit., pp. 529-530

[28] 1 John 1:1-3

[29] John 19:34

[30] Ibid. 19:35

[31] Guzik, David: Enduring Word, 1,2 & 3 John & Jude, op. cit., pp. 90-92

[32] John 1:26, 31,33

[33] Ibid. 3:22; 4:1-2

[34] Ibid. 2:1-12

[35] Ibid. 3:5, 8

[36] Ezekiel 36:25-27

[37] John 4:13-14; 7:37-39

[38] Thompson, Marianne M., The IVP New Testament Commentary Series, 1-3 John, op. cit., pp. 133-134

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XLVI) 12/19/22

^5:6 And Jesus Christ was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

Could the Spirit be the Father’s vehicle in talking to His Son? If so, it could then be argued that the Spirit did confirm the significance of the baptism of Jesus. Not only so, but the Spirit must undoubtedly be regarded as inspiring the First Covenant writers who prophesied the coming of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God. In some or all these ways, it may be claimed that the Spirit already bore witness to Jesus during and even before his earthly life. Hence John may be thinking here of the activity of the Spirit who witnessed in the past Jesus as the Son of God and who still bears his testimony, confirming to the believer what he has already said.^[1]

With a Jewish convert’s enthusiasm for the Christian Messiah, Messianic writer David H. Stern (1935) said, Yeshua is the one who came through water and blood, Yeshua the Messiah. Contrary to Gnostic teachings, Jesus did not “receive the heavenly Anointed One” upon emerging from the Jordan; instead, Yeshua, already the Messiah’s immersion in water, symbolized His death and resurrection.[2] Likewise, He did not imitate being human but died an actual death on the execution stake; otherwise, He would not have atoned for our sin – the blood, which is shorthand for Yeshua’s death,[3] witnesses that He is God’s Son.[4] ^[5]

As a seasoned essayist on the Apostle John’s writings, John Painter (1935) says “who is He” refers to Jesus in verse five. The fact that the opponents denied this seems obvious. Here Jesus is identified as “Jesus the Anointed One.” The double name implies that Jesus is the Son of God, “the one who came through water and blood.” Reference to “the one who came” draws attention to a specific event. The authentic confession “Jesus the Anointed One has come in the flesh” is called to mind here. The use of the double name affirms the identity of the human Jesus, and the divine Anointed One is one person. In all the confessions of faith concerning the identity of Jesus, the name Jesus is used alone: Jesus is the Anointed One,[6] and Jesus is the Son of God.[7] But He is referred to as “Jesus the Anointed righteous One,” and God’s command is to believe in the name of His Son Jesus the Anointed One.[8] Further, the name “Jesus the Anointed One” is used when His coming is spoken of by those who confess “Jesus the Anointed One has come in the flesh,”[9] and “Jesus the Anointed One came by water and blood.”[10] ^[11]

A man who is not hesitant to aim for the heart of the subject, Muncia R. Walls (1937), Ministry and Missions Overseer of Medora, Indiana Pentecostal Church, acknowledges that there are a lot of different opinions as to just what John has in mind here in this verse when referring to water and blood. Some feel that water refers to the baptism of Jesus, and blood denotes His death on the cross. Still, others think that it has reference to the Communion service. The Cerinthian heresy taught that the Anointed One came upon Jesus at the time of His baptism and departed when He hung on Calvary. They argued that His humanity never limited the Anointed One. Therefore, the Anointed One was never a young child, nor did the Anointed One die on the cross. But John argues that Jesus the Anointed One came by water and blood. With this, he connects Jesus and the Anointed One as one individual who experienced birth, life, and death: as one person. John states, “And it is the Spirit that bears witness because the Spirit is truth.” Only those born of the Spirit can truly understand this wonderful truth concerning Jesus the Anointed One. Those who have not been born again keep arguing about His deity, about the role, He played in human affairs. Like the Corinthians, people choose to explain away the divinity of Jesus the Anointed One or relegate Him to sharing a second-person status with two other members in their so-called Trinity Godhead. ^[12]

In verse six, expositor and systematic theologist Michael Eaton (1942-2017) emphasizes that Jesus comes to us in three ways. First, the word “came” apparently means not just “came into this world,” but “came into the position of being a Savior, came to us through certain historical events which enable Him to give us eternal life.” There were circumstances and events “through” which Jesus “came” to reach us as a Redeemer. He came through water. He was the Son of God before His baptism. But His ministry to us involved “coming” to us through water. At His baptism, the Holy Spirit empowered Him for ministry. He came through blood. That is to say, He had to die, and His death was confirmed. John has already said that it is the blood of Jesus that turned away the Father’s anger against sin.[13] It is the blood of Jesus that cleanses the conscience of the Christian who “walks in the Light.”[14] The historical fact that Jesus, the Son of God, died upon the cross for us is indispensable to His “coming” to us. ^[15]

After scrutinizing the Apostle John’s subject theme, William Loader (1944) says that the Apostle John doubtless made the dispute about Jesus quite clear to the readers. Without their first-hand knowledge, we must reconstruct what John might have meant. Clearly, in John’s mind, the opponents taught that Jesus the Anointed One came with or by (the) water only, and not with or by (the) blood. What is the difference? Water and blood might refer to aspects of the human body. Those saying he came only by water would be suggesting that His body was not a natural human body. This would amount to saying the same thing another way: He did not come embodied in the flesh. This would assume the opponents had a belief that understood Jesus’ body as substantially consisting of water and not of water and blood. The chief difficulty with this view is that we cannot be sure that any such notion of a water body ever existed at the time.

The Spirit bears witness to this because the Spirit is truth. In a previous segment, the connection between correct belief and the role of the Spirit strongly appears.[16] It structurally matches the present passage. It has been a consistent feature of John’s reasoning to appeal to the witness of the Spirit. The image of the anointing in First John 2:20-27 enables the readers, struggling with the antichrists, to distinguish truth from error. It assures the believer of mutual indwelling with God.[17] Here, as in 1 John 4:2, the Spirit ensures the correct understanding of Jesus in the Spirit is truth because it bears witness to the facts.^[18]

Great Commission practitioner David Jackman (1945) notes that the preposition “by” (Greek dia) is literally “by means of” or “through.” It is probably best to keep in mind that water and blood symbolize “how” Jesus came into the world to accomplish his mission of salvation. From Augustine onwards, a long line of commentators has interpreted this to mean the water and blood which flowed from the side of the Anointed One when pierced by the soldier’s spear as He hung on the cross.[19] In that context, John emphatically underlines his eyewitness testimony to this actual death of a genuine man. The testimony in these verses and the combination of blood and water have been used to support this as primary witnesses. It seems very unlikely that John would build such a significant argument on a comparatively small historical detail, even if he were an eyewitness. Others have drawn attention to the water of baptism and the blood (wine) of the eucharist and have seen here a symbolic foreshadowing of the two great sacraments of the church. These things may well be accurate, but they do not sufficiently account for John’s meaning in its context. ^[20]

After studying the context surrounding this verse, John W. (Jack) Carter (1947) states that one of the primary purposes of this letter is to counter arguments by the Docetics who hold that Jesus was not human. John often refers to Jesus as the “Word,” equates the Word with the Messiah, the Anointed One, and states that the “Word became flesh and lived among us.”  The Messiah, YAHWEH, LORD, became human and walked among us.  He came to us by water, a physical property, not a mystical one. Some may argue that John is referring to the process of childbirth since the phrase is idiomatic of the birth process.  Some hold that the water refers to the baptism of Jesus, the point when Jesus’ ministry on earth began. The Messiah returned to Glory through the event on the Cross, where He shed His blood. These points still hold to the truth that Jesus was fully human, yet fully YAHWEH. It is easy for this world to reject the true identity and purpose of Jesus the Anointed One, and the vast majority of the people of this world do so. 

These do not bear any witness to the truth, says Carter, and have no interest in doing so.  However, the Holy Spirit of God, who is the power behind all of God’s work and will continue to do, bears witness to the truth of Jesus’ identity and purpose. The Holy Spirit always represents truth. The Holy Spirit never performs any work that serves to deceive or present any form of falsehood. Therefore, when one relies on the witness of the Holy Spirit concerning the nature and purpose of Jesus Christ, one can only come away with the truth.  Jesus is who He says He is.  Jesus is who the Holy Spirit says he is.  Jesus is who the Father says He is.  Jesus is YAHWEH, LORD, the agent of creation, and through the work of the Cross of Calvary, the judge of all people.^[21]

A man who loves sharing God’s Word, Robert W. Yarbrough (1948) says that references to Jesus’ arrival imply His heavenly origin. He was the Light “coming into the world.”[22] He has been “with God” uniquely “in the beginning.”[23] He was the one whom John the Baptizer promised was “coming” next,[24] of whom he was not worthy. Jesus was the one “coming” from above, from heaven.[25] In other words, in John’s understanding, Jesus is God incarnate, and he finds the incarnation instead in John’s reference to water. Complete redemptive faith in Jesus the Anointed One recognizes that He, and no other, is the one who came from heaven to be God’s saving agent in the earthly domain.^[26]

Skilled in Dead Sea Scroll interpretation, Colin G. Kruse (1950) tells us that following the Apostle John’s description in verse four of those who overcome the world as those who believe that Jesus is God’s Son. Here in verse six, John describes the Jesus he believes in. He is the One who came by water and blood – Jesus, the Anointed One. His belief is different from the secessionists, and John indicates the difference between his view and theirs: He did not come by water only but by water and blood. This text suggests that Jesus came “by water” and was not in dispute. What was being argued was whether He came by “water and blood.” Having made the point that those who truly believe that Jesus is God’s Son also think that He is the One who came by “water and blood.” John indicates that the Spirit testifies to all this truthfully because the Spirit is Truth.

---

[1] Marshall, Ian Howard: The Epistles of John (The New International Commentary on the New Testament), op. cit., p. 235

[2] Romans 6:3-6

[3] Ibid. 3:25

[4] 1 John 5:5, 9-12

[5] Stern, David H., Jewish New Testament Commentary. op. cit., loc. cit., Kindle Edition

[6] 1 John 2:22; 5:1

[7] Ibid. 4:15; 5:5

[8] Ibid. 3:23

[9] Ibid. 4:2

[10] Ibid. 5:6

[11] Painter, John. Sacra Pagina: 1, 2, and 3 John: Volume 18, op. cit., loc. cit., Kindle Edition

[12] Walls, Muncia: Epistles of John and Jude, op. cit., pp. 84-85

[13] 1 John 2:2; 4:10

[14] Ibid. 1:7

[15] Eaton, Michael: Focus on the Bible, 1,2,3 John, op. cit., pp. 178-179

[16] 1 John 4:1-3

[17] Ibid. 3:24; 4:13

[18] Loader, William: Epworth Commentary, The First Epistle of John, op. cit., pp. 62-63, 68

[19] See John 19:34-35

[20] Jackman, David: The Message of John’s Letters, op. cit., pp. 147-148

[21] Carter, Dr. John W. (Jack). 1,2,3, John & Jude: (The Disciple’s Bible Commentary Book 48), op. cit., pp. 121-122

[22] 1 John 1:9

[23] John 1:1; cf. 1:18

[24] Ibid. 1:15, 27

[25] Ibid. 3:31

[26] Yarbrough, Robert W. 1-3 John (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), op. cit., pp. 281-282

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XLV) 12/16/22

^5:6 And Jesus Christ was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

The soldier was not entirely sure that the Anointed one was dead. So, to make sure, he thrust his spear into the Savior’s side. The stream of blood and water that followed proved the reality of His death. Thus, a rude soldier’s violent act confirmed our Lord’s death. And this, we are confident, was the reason why the incident was recorded. In the text, there is an expression, which is fatal to the fanciful interpretation. The critical statement is, “this is He that came by water and blood.”

How did the Anointed One come in that manner? It is the question to be determined by the interpreter. The history of our Lord furnishes the answer. He came by water when John the Baptist baptized Him and blood when the soldier stabbed Him. And this view is confirmed by the additional circumstance in the text – “it is the Spirit that bears witness.” For it shows that the subject in John’s mind is the testimony given about the Anointed One, and this, he states, is threefold, His baptism, His death, and the Holy Spirit.^[1]

In reviewing what the Apostle John says in this verse, Archibald T. Robertson (1863-1934) states that the Apostle John refers to the Incarnation as an actual historical event. First, the preexistent Son of God was sent from heaven to do God’s will. The use of the Greek genitive preposition dia (“by”)[2] water (at His baptism) and blood (as on the Cross) John signifies in the statement that the Anointed One has come. These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because, at Jesus’ baptism, He was formally set apart for His Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon Him and by the Father’s audible witness. Then at the Cross, His ministry reached its culmination when He said, “It is finished!”[3]

Other theories, notes Robertson, do not agree with the language and the facts. It is true that at the Cross, both water and blood came out of Jesus’ side when pierced by the soldier’s spear.[4]  Thus, 1 John 5 is a complete refutation of the Docetic denial of an actual human body for Jesus and of the Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and the Anointed One. There is thus a threefold witness to the fact of the Incarnation, but John repeats the twofold witness before giving the third. The repetition of Greek prepositions dia and en[5] (“by”) in verse six argues for two separate events, emphasizing the blood which the Gnostics made light of or even denied. It is the Spirit that bears witness. Thus, the Holy Spirit is the third and chief witness at Jesus’ baptism and all through His ministry. Jesus spoke of “the Spirit of truth”[6] (whose characteristic is truth). Here John identifies the Spirit with truth as Jesus said of Himself[7] without denying the Holy Spirit’s personality.^[8]

Characteristically, Alan England Brooke (1863-1939) says that out of the many suggested interpretations of this passage, only three deserve serious consideration: (1) First, a reference to the two Christian Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist naturally suggested itself to many interpreters of the Epistle, especially in view of the fourth and sixth chapters of John’s Gospel. But it is open to more than one fatal objection. If “water” can be satisfactorily explained by Baptism, “blood” is missing in the Final Covenant as a designation for Communion. And secondly, the form of the sentence, “is come by water and blood,” almost necessitates a reference to definite historical facts in the life of the Anointed One on earth, which we could regard as peculiarly characteristic of the Mission which He “came” to fulfill. If the Apostle John intended to refer to the Christian Sacraments, he must have said, “is come.” It is hardly necessary then to point out that one interpretation referring to a rite instituted by the Anointed One, and the other to something which happened to Him (such as the Christian rite of baptism and the atoning death on the Cross), is even less satisfactory.

(2) The reference to the spearing incident recorded by John was also natural,[9] considering the stress laid upon it by John in his Gospel and the exact language in which he records the result of the piercing of the Lord’s side. This incident gives a definite fact that would justify the use of the aorist “is come.” And the difference in the order of “water” and blood” or “blood and “water” offers no real difficulty. It is easily explained as a consequence of John’s desire to throw special emphasis on the “blood,” which he develops further in the next clause, “not come by water only, but by water and blood,” which made an impression on him. It had suggested to him the significance of “blood” and “water,” symbolizing two distinctive aspects of the Lord’s work, cleansing and life-giving. But the incident itself could hardly be thought of as the means whereby He accomplished His work. Therefore, as an explanation of the actual words used, it fails to satisfy the requirements of the case.

(3) Thus, we go back to the explanation of Tertullian, Theophylact, and many modern commentators, who see these as references to Jesus’ baptism by John the Baptizer when He was consecrated to His Messianic ministry and received the gift of the Spirit descending upon Him. And then, His death on the Cross by which His work was consummated. The terms used definitely refer to the historical manifestation of the Son of God and compel us to look for significant characteristic events in that history which means it could be said that His mission was accomplished, His “coming” achieved. The two significant events at the ministry’s beginning and end satisfactorily fulfill these conditions. At the Baptism, He was specially consecrated for His public work and endowed with the Spirit, which enabled Him to carry it out. And His work was not finished before Calvary. The Death on the Cross was its consummation, not a mere incident in the life of an ordinary man after the Higher Power had left Him, which had temporarily united itself with His human personality for His mission of teaching.^[10]

With an eye for detail, David Smith (1866-1932) hears the Apostle John tell his readers, “This Jesus is God’s Son, the Messiah whom the prophets foretold and who ‘came’ in the fulness of the time.” His Advent is no longer an unfulfilled hope but a historical event. He not only “came through” but continued “in water and blood,” for example, His ministry included both the baptism of the Spirit and the Sacrifice for sin. Perhaps, however, the Greek prepositions “dia” and “en” (“by”) are interchangeable.[11] Jesus identified Himself as “the Truth,”[12] and the Spirit came in His place, His alter ego.[13] The Threefold Testimony to the Incarnation: This is He that came through water and blood, Jesus the Anointed One; not in the water only, but water and blood. And it is the Spirit that testifies because the Spirit is the Truth. Because these three testify the Spirit and the water and the blood, and the three are of one accord.^[14]

A spiritual mentor, Ronald A. Ward (1920-1986) admits that verse six by the Apostle John has caused much perplexity among Bible scholars, not so much through lack of understanding of its general meaning as through uncertainty as to the explanation of the grammar and vocabulary. First, we should notice the literal translation. “This one is He who did come through water and blood – Jesus the Christ, not in the water only, but in the water and the blood; and the Spirit it is that is testifying because the Spirit is the truth,”[15] We must remember that John is dealing with a local situation (probably Ephesus)[16] and that his language may be that of local controversy. However, most scholars accept “water” as a reference to water baptism and “blood” as His shed blood on the cross. John has been giving his testimony, but the Spirit is the pre-eminent Witness because He is the truth part of Jesus’ Gospel.[17] Truth must witness, and this is the function of the Spirit.[18] Jesus witnesses to the Father and the Spirit, who testifies to Jesus.[19] [20]

With academic precision, Stephen S. Smalley (1931-2018) mentions that in verse five, the Apostle John described the content of orthodox Christian belief as faith in Jesus as the Son of God. In verse six, he proceeds to present the witnesses to the truth of that confession and begins by revealing their character.[21] Thus, verse six needs to be joined with verse eight, since, in both contexts, there is a cryptic allusion to “water and blood,” which presumably needs to be interpreted in the same way, “He is the one who came by water and blood, even Jesus the Anointed One.” The demonstrative “He” or “this” links verse six firmly to the second part of verse five and directs our attention to the end of the present sentence. This Jesus came, and He is “the Anointed One.”[22] ^[23]

A dynamic speaker, H. P. Mansfield (1933-1987) notes that here in verse six, we have another statement in which the Apostle John says, “the Spirit is truth.” So, if we walk according to truth, we are walking in agreement with the Spirit. And those words of the Spirit will give us life eternal. Let’s listen to the Apostle Peter, who said, “You have been born again. This new life did not come from something that dies. It came from something that cannot die. You were born again through God’s life-giving message that lasts forever.”[24]So there is that which will give us incorruptibility. Not something that we got at birth, but something which must develop. Do you remember what the Lord Jesus the Anointed One said: “You must be born again?”[25] And do you remember that He said we must be born of water and the spirit, or we won’t enter the kingdom of God?[26] So being spiritually reborn is not something that we inherit at birth; it’s a new birth. And I submit to you, says Mansfield, that if you carefully read what Peter goes on to say, you will find nothing there that will set before you that proposition.[27] ^[28]

As a capable scripture analyst, Ian Howard Marshall (1934-2015) says we may wonder whether what the Apostle John said here in verse six is what John meant. It is tempting to think of the activity of the Spirit in the life of Jesus. At His baptism, the Spirit came upon Him, and it was this fact that convinced John the Baptizer that Jesus was the Son of God.[29] In the other Gospels, the baptism of Jesus was accompanied by a heavenly voice that declared that He was God’s Son.[30] The Gospel writers certainly did not believe that this meant that God adopted Jesus as His Son at this point, and there is no evidence that their predecessors held this view. Instead, it was a sign that the One being baptized was already God’s Son.

---

[1] Morgan, James B., An Exposition of the First Epistle of John, op. cit., Lecture XLII, pp. 415-416

[2] Cf. Galatians 5:13

[3] John 19:30

[4] Ibid. 19:34

[5] “dia” in Strong’s Concordance is G1223, and “en” is G1722

[6] John 15:26

[7] Ibid. 14:6

[8] Robertson, Archibald T., Word Pictures in the New Testament, op. cit., pp. 1967-1968

[9] John 19:34

[10] Brooke, Alan E., Critical and Exegetical Commentary of the Johannine Epistles, op. cit., pp. 132-137

[11] Cf. 2 Corinthians 6:4-8; Hebrews 9:12, 25

[12] John 14:6; 18:37

[13] Ibid. 5:16-18

[14] Smith, David: Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1 John, op. cit., pp. 194-195

[15] The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Covenants, Literally and Idiomatically Translated out of the Original Languages by Robert Young, Published by A. Fullarton & Company, Edinburgh, 1863, 1 John 5:1

[16] Cf. 1 John 2:18ff

[17] John 14:6

[18] Ibid. 15:26

[19] Ibid. 8:18; 16:14

[20] Ward, Ronald A., The Epistles on John and Jude, op. cit., pp. 54-55

[21] See 1 John 5:7-9

[22] Cf. Ibid. 2:22; 2 John 1:7

[23] Smalley, Stephen S., Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 51, 1,2,3 John, op. cit., p. 277

[24] 1 Peter 1:23

[25] John 3:3

[26] Ibid. 3:5

[27] 1 Peter 3:20-22

[28] Mansfield, H. P., The Truth Vindicated, First Debate February 12, 1962, pp. 19-20

[29] John 1:32-34

[30] Mark 1:11

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XLIV) 12/15/22

^5:6 And Jesus Christ was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

In the First Covenant, water and blood were everywhere connected with the service of the sanctuary. The Anointed One existed before the act of baptism, and He lives now since He died. However, He did not exist in person before His baptism, and He is not visible before the world now. This Epistle of John is entirely about the embodiment and revelation of the Anointed One. John speaks of that which was seen, heard, gazed upon, and handled. He, therefore, treats only that part of our Lord’s life exposed to the senses of the world. The water and the blood point to two distinct historical events in the earthly life of our Lord. One is the point a quo (from which), and the other is the point ad quem (to which).

Baptism in water was the beginning of His human form as the Messiah, and His death on the cross was the conclusion. Hence, He came by water and blood. The Lord Jesus did not show Himself to the world as the Son of God before His baptism, nor did the world get a view of Him after the cross. He came in by water and passed out by blood. One was the entrance, the other the exit. He came to fulfill all righteousness in His baptism and accomplished that upon the cross, crying, “It is finished.” John the Baptist came baptizing in water so that Jesus might be shown to Israel. The only contact that Jesus had with John the Baptizer was at His baptism and during the subsequent testimony given by John a few days afterward. It will thus be seen that Jesus entered His personified form on the earth, among men, at the time of His baptism. He terminated that physical existence at the time of His death by pouring out His blood on the cross. As He disappeared from the world’s view in blood, He also passed before God’s face through His blood. It was the blood of the brazen altar before the mercy seat combined. It was the body without the camp and the blood within the veil. Mankind saw one, and the other was visible to God alone.^[1]

With his Spirit-directed calculating mind, Alfred Plummer (1841-1926) sees the Apostle John appealing to the daily experience of every victorious Christian that Jesus is God’s Son. The faith that conquers is no vague belief in the existence of God but a definite demand in the Incarnation.[2] This verse shows that John’s “liar”[3] does not mean “supreme liar.” Therefore, here in verse six, “He that overcomes” cannot mean “the supreme conqueror.” The sole Victor is the Anointed One in the highest and most unique sense.[4] Belief in the Anointed One is confidence in God and man at once. It lays a foundation for love and trust toward our fellow believers. Thus, the instinctive distrust and selfishness, that reign supreme in the world, are overcome.

Closely connected with what precedes, is that this Son of God is He that came. The identity of the historical person, Jesus with the eternal Son of God, is once more insisted upon as the central and indispensable truth of the Christian faith. Faith in this truth is the only faith that can overcome the world and give eternal life. And it is a truth attested by witnesses of the highest and most extraordinary kind, water, and blood. It is the most perplexing passage in the Epistle and one of the most mysterious in the Final Covenant. A significant number of interpretations of water and blood have been suggested. But a few of the principal explanations, and the reasons for adopting the one preferred, may be stated with an advantage. The water and the blood have been interpreted to mean: (1) The Baptism by means of water in the Jordan River and the Death by means of blood upon the Cross. (2) The water and blood which flowed from the Anointed One’s pierced side. (3) Purification and Redemption. (4) The Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist.

These are representative interpretations; the first two making the water and blood refer to facts in the earthly career of the Messiah; the last two making them symbolical of mysteries. It will be observed that these explanations are not all exclusive: either of the last two may be combined with either of the first. The problematic passage in John 19:34 and the difficult passage before us do not explain one another. That these two passages alone, of all Scripture, are blood and water placed together would, if true, amount to nothing more than a presumption that one may relate to the other. The change of order would at once weaken such a presumption: instead of the “blood and water” of John’s Gospel, we have here “water and blood” in this Epistle. But the statement in John’s Gospel has nothing to do with crucifixion and baptism.[5] It would be ridiculous that John would speak of outpourings of the blood from the dead body of Jesus as the Son of God “before water?”

Moreover, on this interpretation, what can be the point of the emphatic addition, “not in the water only, but in the water and the blood?” At the piercing of Jesus’ side, the blood (representing the crucifixion), not the water (indicative of baptism) came first. So that, to make the reference clear, the whole sentence ought to run somewhat in this manner: “This is He that came by water and blood, even Jesus the Anointed One; not by water only, but by water and blood.”^[6]

Prolific writer on the Epistles, George G. Findlay (1849-1919) comments that by the time of the Apostle John, “Jesus the Anointed One” and “Jesus the Son of God” had become terms synonymous in Christian speech. John insists upon the oneness of Jesus the Anointed One and makes it the test of genuine Christianity.[7] The name thus appended to verse six is no idle repetition; it is a solemn reassertion and summation of the Christian creed in two words – Jesus the Anointed One. And He is Jesus the Anointed One since He “came through water and blood – not in the water only.” This passage brings to a point the verbal attack aimed towards which the whole Epistle, in one way or other, has been directed: “I am writing these things,”[8] John explained, “to warn you about those who want to lead you astray,”[9] namely, the “antichrists” and “false prophets.”[10]

The heretics whom the Apostle opposes allowed, and maintained in their way, that Jesus the Anointed One “came by water” when He received His Messianic anointing at John’s baptism and the man Jesus thus became the Anointed One, but the “coming through blood” they despised. They regarded the death on the cross, happening to the human Jesus, as a punishment of shame inflicted on the flesh, in which the Divine Anointed One could have no part. Upon this Cerinthian view, the Anointed One who came “through water” went away rather than came “through blood.” In the death upon the cross, the Docetists saw nothing that witnessed to the Godhead in Jesus the Anointed One, nothing that spoke of Divine forgiveness and cleansing,[11] but an eclipse and abandonment by God, a surrender of the earthly Jesus to the powers of darkness.

This error revived in a new form what the Apostle Paul had called “the scandal of the cross.”[12] As the crucifixion seemed to him, in his Jewish unbelief, a disproof of Jesus’ Messiahship, so to these later misbelievers, it was evident that Jesus, who had been one with the Anointed One, was a helpless, forsaken man. But John found in the shedding of the Anointed One’s blood grander evidence of His Sonship to God, the demonstration of His perfect harmony with and understanding of the Divine will and love to humankind.[13] ^[14]

With his stately speaking style, William Macdonald Sinclair (1850-1917) says that “water” and “blood” are referred to as two of the three great witnesses, or sets of evidence, for the Anointed One. They are symbols and look back to two of His personal history’s most characteristic and significant acts. The one is His baptism, the other His cross. Why His baptism? The baptism of John was the seal of the Law. It served as the outward sign by which those who repented at the Baptizer’s preaching showed their determination to keep the Law no longer in the letter only but also in the spirit.

Jesus, too, showed this same determination. Baptism in water was His outward seal to the First Covenant: He did not come to destroy but to fulfill the Law; not to supersede the prophecies, but to claim them. It was to show that in Him, the righteousness and purification which the Law intended was to be a reality, and through Him to be the law of His kingdom. Thus, it pointed to all the evidence that the First Covenant could afford Him, and, through the First Covenant, it pointed to the dispensation of the Father. Thus, when this most symbolic act was complete, the Almighty Giver of the old Law or covenant was heard saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”[15] ^[16]

Undoubtedly, says Charles Gore (1853-1932) the dependence of The Apostle John’s First Epistle on the Gospel is nowhere more evident than in this passage. The meaning of “water” is to be found by reference to John the Baptizer’s testimony as given in John’s Gospel to the significance of the baptism of Jesus.[17] The witness of the blood is to be interpreted in the light of where “flesh” expresses our Lord’s human nature, given for the life of the world. Also, when the word “flesh” causes scandal,[18] “blood” is added to it to emphasize the reality of sacrificed manhood – of which the “blood is the life.” The combination of water and blood that flowed from our Lord’s pierced side is emphasized without explanation in John’s Gospel,[19] and here interpreted as the union in Jesus of the divine and human elements. The term “witness of the Spirit” must be thought of in the light of (1) When Jesus said, “living water,” He was speaking of the Spirit, who would be given to everyone believing in Him.[20] (2) Of the last discourses about the Spirit,[21] were, to a degree not commonly recognized, the Spirit is spoken of as “the Spirit of truth.” Again, the idea of a divine witness to the Anointed one overshadowing the human witness, which is to be appropriated as divine by the individual, requires interpreting by John[22] and other passages.^[23]

Esteemed ministry veteran James B. Morgan (1859-1942) says we see that the Apostle John, the author of this epistle, records a circumstance that occurred during the crucifixion of our Lord – “One of the soldiers, with a spear, pierced His side, and out came blood and water.”[24] Some suppose there is a reference to this incident here in verse six and that John suggests in it an illustration of the design of the Anointed One’s mission. Thus, the water and the blood are theoretically suggestive of the two great blessings of redemption, purity, and pardon, more technically expressed sanctification and justification. The blood represents justification and water is illustrative of sanctification. Such expositions are to be handled with care. There is a much more natural meaning in the facts recorded by the evangelist.

---

[1] Cameron, Robert: The First Epistle of John, or, God Revealed in Light, Life, and Love, op. cit., p. 221

[2] Cf. 5:1; 2:22; 3:23; 4:2, 3

[3] 1 John 2:22

[4] 1 Corinthians 15:57

[5] Leviticus14:52; Hebrews 9:19

[6] Plummer, Alfred: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, N. T., Vol. IV, pp. 157-160

[7] 1 John 5:1; cf. 2:22; 3:23; 4:2, 3 15

[8] Ibid. 5:13

[9] Ibid. 2:26

[10] See ibid. 2:18, 26; 4:1-6

[11] See ibid. 1:7, 9

[12] 1 Corinthians 1:17-2:5

[13] 1 John 4:9, 10

[14] Findlay, George G: Fellowship in the Life Eternal: An Exposition of the Epistles of St. John, op. cit., p. 381

[15] Matthew 3:17; 17:5

[16] Sinclair, William M., New Testament Commentary for the English Reader, Charles J. Ellicott (Ed.), op. cit., Vol. 3, p. 491

[17] John 1:32-34

[18] Ibid. 6:52-55

[19] John 19:35

[20] Ibid. 7:38-39

[21] Ibid. 14:25-26; 15:26-27; 16:7-15

[22] John 3:31-34; 5:31-47

[23] Gore, Charles: The Epistles of St. John, op. cit., p. 196

[24] John 19:34

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XLIII) 12/14/22

^5:6 And Jesus Christ was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

As a Messianic scholar,[1] Alfred Edersheim (1825-1889) speaks about the symbolic meaning of the Water and Blood flowing from His pierced side, on which the Apostle John focuses here in verse six. But, to its external expression in the symbolism of the two Sacraments (baptism and communion), we can only point the devout Christian. The two Sacraments mean that the Anointed One had come and that Death and Corruption had no power over Him who was crucified for us and loved us unto death with His broken heart and lives for us with the pardoning and cleansing power of His offered Sacrifice.^[2]

Like a spiritual farmer planting the seed of God’s Word, Henry A. Sawtelle (1832-1913) admits there have been endless disputes about what the Apostle John meant by the water and the blood. Yet, both are closely connected with our Lord’s earthly history as witnesses that He was the Messiah, the guiding Light, spiritual and eternal Life. Some scholars understood water to be the water that came from the Savior’s pierced side; some, the baptism commanded for believers in the Great Commission;[3] some, the Word of God;[4] some, Jesus’ baptism in the Jordan River. A careful weighing of the entire section and its purpose leaves hardly a doubt that “water” refers to our Lord’s baptism, a most important event of His earthly manifestation, and pointing, as John shows,[5] to Jesus as the Possessor and Giver of life, and hence the Anointed One. John calls it water because it is an element rather than an act, considered a witness.

Furthermore, says Sawtelle, the water of His baptism symbolized the spiritual Life He had without measure or the Spirit of eternal Life belonging to Him, and hence was a witness that He was the Son of God. Are these not the points John aims to establish on various testimonies that the Anointed One is the Fountain of Life?[6] And if Fountain of spiritual and eternal Life, He is God’s Son. Then, blood is another witness. The blood does not refer to the wine at the Last Supper but to the death of the Anointed One. And John uses the term blood because it is not the death John had in mind, but the spiritual and eternal Life poured out,[7] of which blood is the symbol.[8] The Anointed One’s blood of sacrifice pointed to the spiritual and eternal Life He gave for mankind and hence bore witness to Him as the Possessor and Giver of eternal life. So, our life is in the blood. And the Author of spiritual and eternal Life is the Anointed One. Not by water only, but by water and blood.

And it is the Spirit who also bears witness. The Spirit, given in connection with the Anointed One’s coming, both at Pentecost and as a permanent blessing in the Church, is the most direct witness[9] to the same fact that the Anointed One is the Source and Giver of spiritual and eternal Life, therefore, the Son of God because the Spirit is the truth. Not as a symbol, like water and blood, but the truth itself, directly uttering God’s nature. For that reason, a witness must be at once acknowledged and speak directly about what the others utter indirectly.^[10]

With the ability of a linguist’s concentration, Marvin R. Vincent (1834-1921) notes that the true principle of interpretation appears to be laid down in the two canons of Dordrecht.[11] (1) Water and blood must point both to some purely historical facts in the life of our Lord on earth, and some still present witnesses for the Anointed One. (2) They must not be interpreted symbolically but understood as something so real and powerful, as God’s testimony given to believers, and eternal life assured to them. Thus, the sacramental reference, though secondary, need not be excluded. The first proof of the Messiahship of Jesus lay in His complete historical fulfillment of Messiah’s work once and for all, in bringing purification and salvation; that proof continues in the experience of the Church in its two separate parts. Therefore, we are led to the ideas underlying the two sacraments of water and blood.^[12]

Noting the Apostle John’s doctrinal implications, John James Lias (1834-1923) comments that the language of the Apostle John certainly implies that the work of Jesus the Anointed One was a double work. Those who only regard one part of that work receive a defective impression of the nature of the Gospel. The first work is the taking away from us what we have – namely, a sinful nature; the second is the giving us what we don’t have – that is, fellowship with the Divine nature. We may also take Water as a type of cleansing from sin. Finally, blood is a phrase used to denote the impartation of the Anointed One’s righteousness. Let us regard each of these:

            (a) The first step is a sense of reconciliation with God. To express this, we have a variety of words in the English Bible. Reconciliation and atonement (both renderings of the Greek noun katallagḗ,) justification, adoption, grace, and the like, are used to convey it. All these imply the removal of the alienation between God and man, which is the necessary consequence of sin, and the substitution in its place of the confidence to speak boldly, the access, the assurance of fatherly love on God’s part which Jesus the Anointed One revealed.

            (b) The next step is stirring us up to fight against sin. God’s object is not merely the removal of the spiritual death sentence but the cause of the sentence. The renewed life is entirely irreconcilable with sin and must be in dead defying hostility with it.[13] And the object of the renewed energy is the expulsion of evil. The cleansing, or washing, involves the gradual detachment of the soul from all sinful habits.

            (c) We are sustained in this conflict by the assurance of victory.[14]  From this point of view, water is regarded as refreshing as well as cleansing aspects. It implies the confidence with which the Christian warrior advances to the battle, armed with the shield of faith; the sustained energy they display in the conflict; the renewed vigor they demonstrate when downcast or wearied when they return to the Fountain and is invigorated by fresh breezes of the water of life.

            (d) But it is the life of the Anointed One which does all. As we have already seen, the water, after all, only represents one particular effect of the blood gift. It is the blood that cleanses us from sin.[15] It is to the blood that we owe our justification, adoption, peace,[16] and all the refreshment and strength that a Christian can receive through faith. But these ideas are not immediately connected in our minds with blood. Hence this aspect of the Divine life is represented to us under the figure of water.

            (e) Exhortation to confidence in the Christian walk.[17] ^[18]

With his systematic mindset, Augustus Hopkins Strong (1836-1921) also points to water as an implication of Jesus’ baptism. Therefore, our Lord could say, “It should be done, for we must carry out all that God requires.”[19] Because only through the final baptism of suffering and death, which this baptism in water foreshadowed, could He “put an end of sin” and “bring in everlasting righteousness”[20] to the condemned and ruined world. He could not be “the Lord our Righteousness,”[21] except by first suffering death due to the nature He had assumed, thereby delivering it from its guilt and perfecting it forever.

All this was indicated when He was first “made manifest to Israel.”[22] In His baptism in Jordan, He was buried in the likeness of His coming death and raised in the likeness of His following resurrection.[23] His baptism in water was the beginning of His ministry, and His shedding of blood was the closing of that ministry. As Jesus’ baptism pointed forward to His death, our baptism points backward to that death as the center and substance of His redeeming work, the one factor by which we live. We who are “baptized into the Anointed One” are “baptized into His death.”[24] That is, into spiritual communion and participation in that death which He experienced for our salvation. In short, we declare symbolically that His death became ours in baptism.^[25]

A tried and tested biblical scholar who believes in the up-building of the Christian life, Robert Cameron (1839-1904) points out that in the first part of this chapter, the Apostle John told how our faith overcomes the world, which for a few days tolerated the Anointed One, but in the end, shook Him from its lap, condemned Him to death, and put Him upon a cross. We, however, take that same Jesus crucified by the combined hatred of Jews and Romans and make Him our Lord and our God. We acknowledge that we owe everything to Him, and without Him are nothing and have nothing. Very naturally, then, John asks the question: On what authority do we devote our interests for time and eternity to this Anointed One? What extraordinary facts lead us to accept Him despite such universal condemnation?

John then proceeds to say, notes Cameron, that Jesus came by water and blood; also, that He has three witnesses testifying to His character – the Spirit, the water, and the blood. There has been very much dispute about what is meant by Jesus’ coming by water and blood and how the Spirit, the water, and the blood bear witness to His character. Concerning this, we may say, first, that these words point to some purely historic facts apparent in the life of our Lord on earth. Secondly, it is assumed that these facts are so actual and evident that they serve as the introduction and boundary of God’s testimony to those who put their trust in Him. It will be readily seen and admitted that the two great facts which correspond to these conclusions are the baptism and the death of our Lord. The exact expression here is both by and in, water and blood. The one implies the means through which, and the other the element in which He came.

Hence John says, “He … came by water and blood,” as if to impress his readers with the fact that the Son of God was fulfilling everything that these types caused them to expect. He manifested Himself utilizing water and blood. He came and symbolically fulfilled all the promises made to the apostolic fathers concerning the Messiah in the act of baptism. Thus, the fulfillment was made a reality at His death. Therefore, “He that came” is equivalent to “He has fulfilled the promises to the apostolic fathers, as the Savior sent from God.”

---

[1] Messianic refers to a Jewish convert to Christianity

[2] Edersheim, Alfred: The Life & Times of Jesus the Messiah, Vol. 2, Ch., 15, Crucified, Dead, and Buried,” p. 485

[3] Matthew 28:19

[4] John 3:5

[5] Ibid. 1:31, 33

[6] Ibid. 4:14

[7] Cf. Deuteronomy 12:23

[8] Leviticus 17:11

[9] John 15:26

[10] Sawtelle, Henry A., Commentary on the Epistles of John, op. cit., pp. 56-57

[11] The Decision of the Synod of Dort on the Five Main Points of Doctrine in Dispute in the Netherlands is popularly known as the Canons of Dort (or the Five Articles Against the Remonstrates [members of the Arminian party in the Dutch Reformed Church]). It consists of statements of doctrine adopted by the great Synod of Dort which met in the city of Dordrecht in 1618–1619. Although this was a national Synod of the Reformed Churches of the Netherlands, it had an international character, since it was composed not only of sixty-two Dutch delegates but also of twenty-seven foreign delegates representing eight countries.

[12] Vincent, Marvin R: Word Studies in the New Testament: op. cit., p. 365

[13] See 1 John 1:6, 9; 2:5, 15; 3:3, 9, 10; cf. Romans 6; 8:2, 4. 7

[14] See John16:33; 1 Corinthians 15:57; 1 Thessalonians 1:5

[15] 1 John 1:7; cf. Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 12:24; Revelation 1:5; 7:14

[16] Romans 3:24-26

[17] 1 John 5:13, 18, 20; Romans 5;1

[18] Lias, John James: The First Epistle of St. John with Homiletical Treatment, op. cit., pp. 363-369

[19] Matthew 3:15

[20] Daniel 9:24

[21] Jeremiah 23:6

[22] John 1:31

[23] 1 John 5:6

[24] Romans 6:3

[25] Strong, Augustus H., Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, op. cit. p. 304

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XLII) 12/13/22

^5:6 And Jesus the Anointed One was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

With expertise in holiness doctrine, Daniel Steele (1824-1914) points out that the identity of the Rabbi of Nazareth with the eternal Son of God is again emphasized as the central truth of Christian theology. This reception is necessary to attain victory over the world and transferred out of the moral ignorance of darkness and into the marvelous spiritual enlightenment of truth. Then follow the witnesses to this truth: which are “the water and the blood.” Many are the explanations for these words. The ritualists understand them to signify baptism’s sacraments and the Lord’s Supper. Others see only symbols of purification and redemption.

But it seems that John uses these words as a summary of the Anointed One’s earthly life and mission, baptism in the water of Jordan, and His sacrificial death by the shedding of His blood for the world’s redemption. The cardinal truths of His gospel are here briefly stated; for at His baptism with water with the Holy Spirit attending the Divine announcement of His Sonship to God implied that He is God’s Son in a sense unique and peculiar. It was a sufficient opening and explanation of His whole ministry. His public and tragic death is at once the close and the description of His life of self-sacrifice.

Now, the Gnostic teachers, against whom John is writing, admitted that the Anointed One came “through” and “in” water; at His baptism, they said, that the Divine Word united Himself with the human Jesus. However, they denied that the Divine Anointing had any share in what was achieved “through” and “in” blood. According to them, the Word departed from Jesus at Gethsemane. John emphatically assures us that there was no such separation. It was God’s Son who was baptized; it was the Son of God who was crucified; and it is faith in this vital truth that produces brotherly love, that overcomes the world, and is eternal life. Besides, the Spirit’s testimony to the Divinity of the Anointed One and the absolute truth of His Gospel.[1] There are six other witnesses cited in John’s Gospel: The First Covenant Scriptures,[2] John the Baptizer,[3] the Disciples,[4] the Anointed One’s works,[5] His words,[6] and the Father.[7]

In this Epistle, John adds two more witnesses, the water and the blood, thus making eight witnesses in all. That John is not a favorite with the so-called liberal religious teachers is not extraordinary. “The Spirit is truth.” Hence His testimony is infallible in glorifying the Anointed One[8] identifying Him as Jesus. “Just as the Anointed One is Truth,[9] the Spirit sent in His name is Truth.”

With a studious monk’s spiritual insight, Bede the Venerable (672-735 AD), notes that the Latin Vulgate Version reads thus: “The Spirit is He who testifies that Christ is the Truth” with a very vigorous style, to denounce those who deny the reality of our Savior’s human body. To this, he responds: “Since, therefore, the Spirit testifies that the Anointed One is the Truth and since He surnames Himself the Truth, and John the Baptizer proclaims Him to be the Truth, and the Son of thunder in his evangel heralds Him as the Truth, let the blasphemers who dogmatically declare that He is a phantom hold their tongues; let their memory perish from the earth who deny either that He is God or that He is a real man.” The whole truth revealed by the Anointed must be believed no matter how much one may disagree. It is morally impossible to be a picky believer, receiving only the pleasant parts of Christianity. It is putting corrupt taste above the infallible Teacher, to whom the human intellect and the human will must bow when we exercise saving faith. Here, John’s speech concerning the Anointed One is also said of His representative, the Holy Spirit.^[10]

After sufficient examination of the Greek text, Brooke F. Westcott (1825-1901) notes that the two parts of the historical witness to the Anointed One are distinguished by the different forms of outward symbols used in corresponding clauses. He came “by water and blood,” and again “not in water only, but in water and in blood!” The pronoun “He” (KJV) in verse six goes back to the subject of the last sentence of verse five, “That Jesus is the Son of God.” The compound title at the end of the clause, “Jesus the Anointed One,” emphasizes the truth established by the manner of the “coming of” Jesus. He came, whose Divine Office is expressed by the full name He bears, Jesus the Anointed One.

Now, the verb “came” is used with an apparent reference to the technical sense of “He that comes.”[11] Thus “He that came”’ is equivalent to “He that fulfilled the promises to the patriarchs, as the Savior sent from God.”[12]  The sense of “He that came” distinctly points to a historical fact and determines that these terms must have historical meaning and refer to actual events characteristic of how the Lord fulfilled His office upon the earth. He was proven to be the Anointed One – by water and blood. “Water” and “blood” contributed in some way to reveal His work’s nature and fulfillment. There can be no doubt that Death on the Cross satisfies the conception of “coming by blood.”’ By so dying, the Lord made known His work as Redeemer; and opened the fountain of His life to humanity.^[13]

After observing the Apostle John’s attention to detailJohn Stock (1817-1884) states that the Apostles delighted to dwell upon the Lord Jesus, His salvation, and His name to those who love the Lord like ointment poured out on His name.[14] John here asserts that our Lord came by water and blood, both of which, in what they signify, are indispensably requisite for salvation. Not only by water or blood alone, both of which issued from His pierced side[15] denoting His death. All who believe are sanctified and perfected by His blood allowing His Spirit access to work in them to will and do everything according to God’s good pleasure.[16] One sanctification protects us from sin and its deserved death; the other remold us into the lost image of God. Our Lord saves His people from their sins, guilt, and power, saying, “Sin shall not have dominion over you.”[17] Had the Lord only come by blood, salvation from death would not have qualified us for heaven. By bringing deliverance to the pit where there was no water,[18] He came by water, and His Spirit makes us eligible to be partakers of the saints’ inheritance in the Light.[19] ^[20]

---

[1] John 15:26

[2] Ibid. 5:39-47

[3] Ibid. 1:7

[4] Ibid. 15:27; 16:30

[5] Ibid. 5:36; 10:23, 38

[6] Ibid. 8:14, 18; 18:37

[7] Ibid. 5:37; 8:18

[8] Ibid. 16:14

[9] Ibid. 14:16

[10] Bede, The Venerable: Ancient Christian Commentary, Bray, Gerald, ed., op. cit., Vol. XI, p. 223

[11] Matthew 9:3; Luke 7:19ff; cf. John 1:15, 27; 6:14; 11:27; 12:13; see also John 1:30; 10:8

[12] John 2:18

[13] Westcott, Brooke F., The Epistles of St. John: Greek Text with Notes op. cit., p. 181

[14] Song of Solomon 1:3

[15] John 19:34

[16] Luke 12:32

[17] Romans 6:14

[18] Zechariah 9:11

[19] Colossians 1:12

[20] Stock, John: An Exposition of the First Epistle General of St. John, op. cit., pp. 315-316, 323-324

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XLI) 12/12/22

^5:6 And Jesus the Anointed One was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

As a faithful and zealous Bible aficionado, William Graham (1810-1883) infers that the Witness of the Spirit concludes verse sixth – “And it is the Spirit that bears witness, for the Spirit is truth.” How does the Spirit bear witness to Christ? (1) The Holy Spirit gave witness to the Son of God in the person of the Redeemer, for the power of the Holy Spirit generated Him.^[1]Furthermore, the Holy Spirit descended upon Him like a dove at His baptism.^[2]The Spirit then guided Him into the wilderness and the rest of His ministry in humility and self-denial.^[3]He also performed His miracles in the power of the Holy Spirit.^[4] Finally, the Holy Spirit raised Him from the grave. And after His resurrection, our Lord was filled with the immeasurable power of the Holy Spirit, whereby He became the head of the new dispensation of grace, from whom all the needy creatures of God are to receive the divine mercy and goodness forever.

(2) The Holy Spirit also testified about the Redeemer. Especially to His death and resurrection and His gifts^[5]of a miraculous spiritual endowment to the Church. From the Day of Pentecost to the present, it enabled the Church to testify of the resurrection and glory of the Lord Jesus the Anointed One. There is no testimony so noble, so convincing, none so overpowering to the convictions of sinners, or so unassailable to the infidel, as a Church filled with the fruit of righteousness walking in the ways of the Lord. Such a Church is the work of the Holy Spirit. He built the house, inhabiting it; He formed the temple and worshiped in it.

(3) The Holy Spirit bears witness to the Savior by the prophecies which are fulfilled and fulfilling in Him, and hence it is written, “The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”[6]The Holy Spirit is the divine inspirer, and all holy Scripture is inspired by God,^[7] for “holy men of God spake as the Holy Spirit moved them.”^[8] So, then, the Holy Spirit bears testimony to the Lord Jesus in His person and work, the persons and results of the redeemed Church, and the great system of providence and prophecy. Therefore, the Apostle John might well say, “And it is the Spirit that bears witness because the Spirit is truth.”^[9]

With the spiritual zeal of a sacred text examiner, William E. Jelf (1811-1875) comments that the Apostle John forcibly states the object and grounds of this faith. Faith is such an essential element, or rather, so indispensable a foundation of the Christian character, that John repeatedly refers to, “this is God’s Son.” Others state that it is an acknowledged fact that Jesus was baptized and crucified. The point to be insisted on against Jews, Gentiles, and certain heretics was that Jesus the Anointed One, or the Messiah was and is the Son of God who came.[10]There are many interpretations of this most challenging passage: (1) The water and the blood which flowed from our Lord’s pierced side as evidence of His actual death, or as types of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. (2) The sacraments. (3) The water signifies our Lord’s baptism; the blood, His death. (4) The water signifying the sacrament of baptism; the blood, the Anointed One’s death; and others which it is not worthwhile mentioning.

We may observe that the “water” and “blood” are not yet spoken of as witnesses but as circumstances accompanying our Lord’s mission on earth. “Is come” expresses properties or qualities, or additions to the action defined by “has come,” and, therefore, it is in our Lord’s mission on earth that we must find the meaning of “water” and “blood.”  We need not look in anything that He instituted or in anything merely viewed as evidence; they must express His characteristics on earth. In our Lord’s life as the Messiah, there are two circumstances where the notions of water and blood find a place. One in His baptism, which was, as it were, His inauguration into the Messianic office, the first step in carrying out God’s will as the Anointed One, a fulfilling of all righteousness. Another was His death on the cross as the Redeemer’s last of His mission on earth.

We might agree that “by water” is more challenging to assign a particular meaning. Everybody probably would at once connect “by blood” with Jesus’ death. But, whatever sense we give to this, we must provide an equivalent one to “by water” so that we may not suppose the former to mean a circumstance belonging to the Anointed One and the latter a rite instituted by Him. The best interpretation is that His water baptism and crucifixion blood characterized His Messianic mission. The Apostle John may have mentioned the water and blood because of what he relates in his Gospel.[11] He may also have had the water and blood of the two sacraments in his mind. But this notion is a needless refinement to the passage, which adds nothing to its force, and confuses its meaning.

If Jesus’ mission had been marked only by His baptism, He might have been merely a Prophet, coming from God indeed, to save mankind by a moral system. His shed blood on the cross gives the Christian structure its characteristic of redemption, and therefore it is thus definitely stated by John. The article “by” marks the identity of each with the water and blood mentioned above. There are also a variety of interpretations given to the word “Spirit,” which commonly refers to the Holy Spirit. He bore witness to the Anointed One’s mission, either in His miracles on the Day of Pentecost, or perhaps both. The force of the witness borne by the Spirit lies in that He is Truth itself and cannot deceive or be deceived.^[12]

With an inquiring spiritual mind, Johannes H. A. Ebrard (1819-1893) asks what power “the Anointed One has come” has that causes Him to work in us, activating true belief. We see this unfold in verse six. It is self-evident that the verse serves as the confirmation of the central proposition of verse five, “Who is he that overcomes,” and not to the support of the lesser clause, “that Jesus is the Son of God.” It is not necessary now that the Apostle John should establish the general proposition that Jesus is the Son of God, for he has already amply and comprehensively revealed the consistency and harmony of this proposition in chapter four with the principles of all knowledge of God. The fact that verse six does not establish the suggestion that Jesus is the Son of God will be shown by carefully examining the meaning of  “Jesus the Anointed One is the one who came. He came with water and with blood. He did not come by water only. No, Jesus came by both water and blood.” On the whole, these easily understandable words have been explained in various strange ways by different expositors.

To begin with, it is plain that “witnessing” cannot stand without knowing its object. Therefore, it will not suffice to supply “that Jesus is the Anointed One” from verse five. “Witnessing,” in verse six, must have its object; and even more, because in verse seven, it stands without one, which would be acceptable by specifying the item in verse six. Therefore, “the Spirit tells us that this is true because the Spirit is the truth” as an impartial proposal. The Spirit of God, who is effectual in us as the Spirit of faith and love, lays down His testimony before the world to this: That this spirit of Christian faith and of Christian love is the truth. The Spirit demonstrates by His power and operation what is true.

That begs the question, to what is the Spirit bearing witness? Is it meant to be assumed, from the fact that the Spirit of God is truth, that He cannot possibly keep silent but must offer His testimony? The emphasis, however, does not rest here upon the assumed idea but upon the affirmed fact that the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony. Therefore, because the Spirit is truth, His testimony is steadfast and sure. But has it been revealed what the Spirit is testifying? Yes! “Jesus the Anointed One is the one who came by water and blood.”[13]

After inspecting John’s train of thought, William Kelly (1822-1888) comments that here we are led from the person of the Anointed One, which had just been before us, to the work of the Anointed One characterizing His person. For His ministry is that which furnishes the witnesses. God deigns to give us more than sufficient testimony. The Law required two witnesses in the things between humans; three were better still.[14] Here God provides fully. He presents three witnesses of the most significant conceivable weight for leading to the truth. “This is He that came,” neither by human birth, might, or wisdom, nor yet by divine power or glory.

It was not through His incarnation nor His unequaled ministry. “This is He that came through water and blood, Jesus the Anointed One.” He who was the true God and life eternal came to die as any human, yet as no other could die, He came from God to save sinners and wash them, not only purified inwardly but in God’s sight whiter than snow through His blood.[15] Yes, His death alone could blot out sin and glorify God.[16] The allusion is unquestionable to our Lord on the cross, dead already, pierced by the soldier to make sure of His death, out of whose side flowed blood and water. In history, the blood caught the eye first, of course, and so there was first named. Had anyone heard that blood and water should issue out of the side of a dead man? Yet so they did here.[17]

Familiar with the Apostle John’s writing style, William B. Pope (1822-1903) states that this is a problematic passage. First, it is governed by human and Divine testimony that “Jesus is the Anointed One” and “the Son of God.”  Secondly, the terms used in verse six imply a symbolical meaning underlying the literal, for we cannot understand “water” and “blood” as merely pointing to historical facts. Thirdly, the Apostle John has in view the misinterpretations of his time concerning the manifestation of Jesus in the flesh. “This Person Jesus the Anointed One” who “came” not into the world, but His Messianic office as the Anointed One, “by water and blood.”

There are two leading interpretations of those words. One of them understands by “water” the instituted baptism of John the Baptizer, which inaugurated Jesus into His Messianic office, and by “blood” His passion and death. The other explanation regards John fixing his thought upon the mysterious “sign” that he watched after the Savior’s death. It occurred when the piercing of His side was followed by the double stream of blood and water – the blood of atonement and water of life – flowing together as the symbol of one eternal life from His sacrifice. The latter we hold to as the true meaning. But let us do justice to the former.^[18]

With precise spiritual discernment, William Alexander (1824-1911) extensively exposes verse six. He focuses on the fact that “He did not come by water only.” It may have been that the Apostle John had the followers of Cerinthus in mind. They separated Jesus from the divine Spirit placed upon Him at His baptism, then left before His death on the cross. These misled people could not bring themselves to believe that a person could be both human and divine in one body without some infusion of power from above. But John utterly denies such thinking. There is only one authentic Lord Jesus, the Anointed One – declared to be One in His baptism and by the passion of His blood on Calvary. The Jews already incorporated this by pouring water and wine on the sacrifices at the Altar. As the Lamb of God, we read that when Jesus died on the Cross, one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and blood and water flowed out.^{[19] [20]}

---

[1] Luke 1:35

[2] Matthew 3:16

[3] Matthew 4:1; Luke 4:1

[4] Matthew 12:28

[5] Romans 1:11; 12:6; 1 Corinthians 7:7; 12:4, 9,28,30-31; 2 Corinthians 1:11; 1 Peter 4:10

[6] Revelation 19:10

[7] 2 Timothy 3:16

[8] 2 Peter 1:21

[9] Graham, William: The Spirit of Love, op. cit., p. 322-323

[10] Cf. Matthew 16:16

[11] John 19:34

[12] Jelf, William E., Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John, op. cit., pp. 70-72

[13] Ebrard, Johannes H. A., Biblical Commentary on the Epistles of St. John, op. cit., p. 315

[14] Matthew 18:16

[15] Isaiah 1:18

[16] John 13:31-32

[17] Kelly, William: An Exposition of the Epistles of John the Apostle, op. cit., p. 362

[18] Pope, William B., The International Illustrated Commentary on the N. T., Vol. IV, p. 37

[19] John 19:34

[20] Alexander, William: The Holy Bible with an Explanatory and Critical Commentary, op. cit., Vol. IV, pp. 341-342

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XL) 12/09/22

^5:6 And Jesus Christ was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XL) 12/09/22

^5:6 And Jesus Christ was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

• The context requires “water” and “blood” as referring, not so much to anything characteristic in the person, as to some matter of fact in the Apostles of Jesus the Anointed One. If anything of this kind were meant, “water” and “blood” would not have been represented as something independent and distinct from the Anointed One, bearing witness in favor of His dignity. But the facts here alluded to must clearly be of such a nature, that, in conformity with the prophecies of the First Covenant, and with the expectations respecting the “coming One” at the time of the Anointed One, the principal and most essential credentials for the Messiahship of Jesus are contained in them, and, indeed, a particular reference to the Anointed One’s work of atonement or purifying world-overcoming power.

• By the emphatic addition: “did not come by water only, but by water and blood,” John hinted that he meant such facts in the life of Jesus as were somehow distinct, as facts, each of which contained a Messianic credential, but which, in their import being essentially one, and mutually serving each other as a compliment, only united together and in conjunction with the Spirit could first afford the perfect Spirit of God concerning the Messianic dignity of Jesus the Anointed One.

• By “water” and “blood,” only such facts can be meant as, in the Christian consciousness of the readers were, by their recollection, both the history of Jesus and the whole tenor by John’s symbolism, easily recognized.^[1]

With plain talk, Albert Barnes (1798-1870) notes that the object of the Apostle John in verse six, in connection with verse eight, is to state the nature of the evidence that Jesus is the Son of God. He refers to three well-known things he probably had insisted on in his preaching – the water, the blood, and the Spirit. He says this furnished evidence on the very point he was illustrating by showing that Jesus on whom they believed was God’s Son. “This,” says John, “is the same one, the very Person, to whom the well-known and important testimony bears witness, and to Him alone. The fact these undisputed things relate only to Him, and not to any other who might claim to be the Messiah; and they all agree on the same one point,”[2] that He came by water and blood. But, of course, this does not mean that He was accompanied by water and blood when Mary delivered Him into the world. Still, the idea is that the water and the blood were manifest during His continued appearance, or that they were remarkable testimonials in some way to His character and ministry.

The idea is that the water and the blood were manifest during His appearing on earth, or that they were remarkable testimonials in some way to His character and work. An ambassador might be said to come with credentials; a warrior might return with the spoils of victory; a prince might arrive with the insignia of royalty; a prophet comes with signs and wonders, and the Lord Jesus came with power to raise the dead, and to heal disease, and to cast out devils. But John here fixes the attention on a fact so impressive and remarkable in his view as worthy of special remark that He came by water and blood.^[3]

With impressive theological and spiritual vision, Richard Rothe (1799-1867) talks about this faith in Jesus as the Anointed One, which the Apostle John just presented as the only world-conquering power.^[4] John now shows that it rests upon the secure witness of God to Jesus as His Son.^[5] He also warns about the fearful danger associated with the refusal of the faith in Jesus that is required. To reject this faith, John says, is to make God a liar and renounce eternal life. The witness of God to Jesus is essentially a witness to the fact that God has given us eternal life, namely, in Jesus His Son, in whom alone it is possessed.^[6] In verses six and seven, John states the basis on which the assurance is grounded is that Jesus is the Anointed One, the (Messiah).^[7]

Consistent with the Apostle John’s way of thinking, Heinrich A. W. Meyer (1800-1873) notes the discussion about the genuineness of the disputed words in verses seven and eight has reached a point where substantially all competent and candid scholars agreed that external and internal evidence is powerful against leaving these words in the text. The introduction of three who bear witness in heaven is unconnected with developing thoughts of the context and the chapter. This thinking, so far as a matter of fact or truth is concerned, is this: Jesus is God’s Son; so far as evidence is concerned, the design of the passage presents the evidence which is brought to mind by the water and blood (for example, by the remarkable facts at the beginning and end of the ministry of Jesus), and by the Holy Spirit working in the soul and bearing testimony to it. The passage speaks to a truth to be seized by everyone in their earthly life and of evidence presented here on earth.

The fact that the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit are three bearing witness in heaven, notes Meyer, and that they are one, does not suggest evidence of the same sort; but, so far as it indicates proof at all, it suggests what is of a different kind. This fact comes to the mind in another way and is understood in its force only after the truth, that Jesus is God’s Son has been accepted and believed. The fact that the first three speak of bearing witness in heaven takes the words out of the passage’s context. In other words, it depends upon the testimony given on earth. Moreover, verse nine strongly diminishes any genuineness of these added words, either because these disputed words, if admitted, make it unintelligible what the Spirit of God’s witness means in this verse. If we regard the witness of God as involving the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the contrast must be with the testimony of the Spirit, the water, and the blood to mankind. In contrast, this latter is not a human but a divine testimony.

The non-Johannian character of the Father and the Word expression is worthy of consideration. In connection with the external evidence, the extreme improbability that such a formal statement involving the doctrine of the Trinity, if initially contained in the Epistle’s text, could have disappeared from all Greek manuscripts from the fourth to the fifteenth century.^[8]

According to Robert Jamieson (1802-1880), Andrew Fausset (1821-1910, and David Brown (1803-1897) we should note that “He” at the beginning of verse six refers to Jesus God’s Son at the end of verse five. The Apostle John wants to validate the claim He is God’s Son by pointing out that He came with water and with blood. He did not come by water only. No, Jesus came by both water and blood. And the Spirit of Truth tells us that this is true. Thus, they tell us that – “by water,” refers to His ministry being inaugurated by baptism in the Jordan, and He received the Father’s testimony to His Messiahship and divine Sonship.[9]

He also came by “bleeding on the cross.“[10] It was His shed blood that first gave water baptism its spiritual significance. John adds the Holy Spirit as an additional witness.[11] The Spirit attested these truths at Jesus’ baptism by descending on Him and throughout His ministry by enabling Him to speak and do what no one ever said or did before. The Spirit continues to serve as a witness that the Anointed One is now permanently in the Church: both in the inspired Scriptures, and in the hearts of believers, by spiritual reception of baptism, and the Lord’s Supper. His essential truth gives the Spirit’s witness such infallible authority.[12]

With noticeable spiritual comprehension Henry Cowles (1802-1881) believes that “water” is related to the spiritual life is universally the symbol of moral cleansing; “blood” of the propitiation^[13] wrought by the Anointed One’s atoning death. Most fundamental scholars believe no other interpretation is acceptable. The usage of the Scriptures – First Covenant and the Final alike – goes solid in support of this simple construction and application of these words. The Spirit of Truth bears witness to these great facts as to the work of the Anointed One. His mission is to teach these truths and impress them on human hearts. His witnessing agency came after the Anointed One’s ascension, in and after the scenes of the great Day of Pentecost.^[14]

With a spiritually activated inquiring mind, Daniel D. Whedon (1808-1885) states that this Jesus is the great “He that came.” He was God’s predicted messenger, and His coming was Advent. And the fact that He came is attested by two tokens divinely appointed, namely, water and blood. There are many fanciful interpretations of “water” and “blood.” Still, the best commentators now agree that the water was the Anointed One’s baptism and the blood the redeeming blood of His crucifixion. These two elements symbolize the commencement and the end of our Lord’s ministry. “He came” refers not to His birth but to His office and earthly life, which are one extended coming. Yet John uses the past tense “is come” to denote that definite historical fact, not any continuous spiritual coming through the ages. The preposition “by” should be “through,” meaning that He was manifested to prove He was God’s Son and Messiah by these two attesting tokens.

We note that John the Baptizer came by water only, not blood. His water would have been of no avail but for the Redeemer’s blood. It was the blood with the Sufferer’s divine self-sacrifice and reconciling power that gave value to the water. So, the Greek prepositions here before water and blood are neither by nor through but are expressively changed to in the water and in the blood. Thus, John beholds the mystical coming, as the coming of His person, enveloped in these elements.

Then concerning the Spirit as a witness, Whedon points to Jesus’ baptism where the descending Spirit, in the form of a dove, identified Him as the Son in whom God was “well pleased.” The same Spirit was secured by His death to be the witnessing heritage of the Church, commencing his work on the memorable day of Pentecost. The same goes for the Spirit as the Truth. The Spirit is authentic and truth itself, even as God is Love. The Spirit’s testimony gives force to the tokens, “water” and “blood,” which elevates and transforms them into witnesses, which means the witnesses are three.^[15]

In line with Apostle John’s theological conclusions, Henry Alford (1810-1871) points out that the word “This” at the beginning of verse six is the same person spoken of in verse five, Jesus. “This,” which most commentators maintain, asserts the identity of the Son of God with the historical Jesus, not the converse. It is validated on two grounds: 1) the fact that Jesus came by water and blood needed no proof even to Heretics: 2) that on the ordinary interpretation, the following words, “of Jesus the Anointed One,” are altogether unneeded.  But to these, it is quickly replied, a) that although the fact might be confessed, it was not acknowledged which fact provided testimony, namely, that Jesus who came in the flesh was the Son of God. b) that the appositional clause “of Jesus the Anointed One” is by no means redundant, being only a solemn reassertion of our Lord’s Person and Office as testified by these signs.^[16]

---

[1] Lücke, Gottfried C. F., A Commentary on the Epistles of St. John, op. cit., p. 253

[2] 1 John 5:8

[3] Barnes, Albert: New Testament Notes, op. cit., 1 John 5, pp. 4875-4876

[4] See 1 John 4:1ff

[5] Cf. 1 John 5:6-10

[6] Ibid. 5:11-21

[7] Rothe, Richard: Exposition of the First Epistle of St. John, op. cit., The Expository Times, April 1895, p. 326

[8] Meyer, Heinrich A. W., Critical Exegetical Handbook New Testament, op. cit., Vol. 10, p. 814

[9] Cf. 1 John 5:5 with John 1:33-34

[10] See Hebrews 9:12

[11] Cf. 1 John 5:7

[12] Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, New Testament Volume, op. cit., p. 729

[13] Propitiation means, “A payment that satisfies,” From a sermon I heard by Dr. Bruce Frank, Lead Pastor of the Biltmore Church in Asheville, N. C, preached on Sunday, July 18, 2021, at Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California.

[14] Cowles, Henry: The Gospel and Epistles of John: with Notes, op. cit., p. 355

[15] Whedon, Daniel D., Commentary on the New Testament, op. cit., pp. 277-278

[16] Alford, Henry: The Greek Testament, op. cit., Vol. IV, p. 499

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XXXIX) 12/08/22

^5:6 And Jesus Christ was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

Consequently, notes Macknight, it was with great modesty that Jesus began His ministry immediately after receiving this miraculous confirmation. Jesus’ coming was proven by blood; He was authenticated to be the Anointed Son of God through His death, as follows: 1) In His sufferings and death, all the ancient prophecies concerning the sufferings of the Anointed One were fulfilled. 2) During His trial, Jesus expressly called Himself the Anointed Son of the blessed God before the Jewish council and Pontius Pilate. Such renaming calls his witnessing a good confession:[1] He was put to death as a blasphemer for that confession. 3) During His sufferings and death, God bears witness to Him as His Son by the three hours of darkness, the earthquake, the rending of the rocks, and the splitting of the Temple’s veil. 4) Jesus being put to death for calling Himself the Anointed Son of God, His resurrection from the dead was an infallible proof of His being God’s Son. Suppose He had falsely claimed that high title, God would never have raised Him from the dead. On all these accounts, therefore, John had good reason to affirm that Jesus came as the authentic Son of God by blood and water.

It is the Spirit who joined as a witness by the water and the blood. So, the Spirit bears witness to Jesus utilizing water, for the heavens opened after Jesus came out of the water in which He was baptized. The Holy Spirit was seen descending in the bodily shape of a dove and landing upon Him while He prayed. By this miracle, the Spirit pointed Him out to all present as the person of whom the voice from heaven spoke. Accordingly, John the Baptizer told the Jews that Jesus was pointed out to him as the Anointed One by that witness of the Spirit. So likewise, the Spirit witnessed that Jesus is God’s Son through blood. For it was the Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead and thereby gave Him that great endorsement as the Son of God. Therefore, the Apostle Peter also testified.[2] The apostle’s meaning is that the Spirit was employed to bear witness to Jesus as God’s Son, by means or on the occasion of the water and the blood, because He is a witness who can neither deceive nor be deceived.^[3]

After skillfully scrutinizing the Apostle John’s theme John Brown of Haddington (1722-1787) says that Jesus’s being God’s Anointed Son was well attested at His baptism and in His bloody death. But, after His resurrection, the powerful influences of the Holy Spirit, in applying His saving grace to multitudes and in the miraculous gifts bestowed and cures put into effect for the confirmation of the Gospel, make it an even more potent truth.^[4]

For example, a man with a heartfelt friendship with hymn writer^[5]John Newton (1726-1807), Thomas Scott (1947-1821) comments that after the Apostle John mentioned Jesus as “God’s Son,” he observed that this was the anointed Savior who “came by water and blood.” Then, as He entered His ministry on earth after being baptized by John the Baptizer, He closed it by shedding His blood on the cross. “Water and blood” flowed from His pierced side immediately upon His death. It became symbolic of the removal of our guilt by His atoning sacrifice and the purifying of our souls by His grace. We are to follow His example according to His commandments.[6] For He came to save sinners, not only by water nor by teaching the way of holiness but enabling the obeying of His commandments not burdensome. It opened the way to sanctification and doing works of faith in love as God’s children.

It came both in the miracles wrought by those who taught this doctrine and lived holy lives. They were patient in suffering and the blessed assurances that came with it.[7] Thus, the Spirit gave testimony to the principle of His atonement, as God’s Son, come in the flesh, to save sinners by His blood, which could not be objected to or rejected. The Spirit is the Truth, even the essential Truth itself, which cannot possibly deceive or be deceived. The two ordinances of baptism with water, the outward sign of regeneration and purifying from the pollution of sin by the Holy Spirit. It appears that the Lord’s Supper, as the outward sign of His body and the shedding of His blood and receiving Him by faith for pardon and justification, also seems to be intended by John.[8] ^[9]

At age fifteen, a potential young theologian who preached and conducted cottage and prayer meetings, Joseph Benson (1749-1821), speaks about the Anointed One’s offices, exhibited emblematically by water and blood, and of the witnesses in heaven and earth who testify of Him and His salvation.[10]  Here, the Apostle John evidently alludes to his testimony in his Gospel that when the soldier pierced the Anointed One’s side, out came blood and water.[11] This fact John represents as of great importance; adding, (“This report is from an eyewitness giving an accurate account. He speaks the truth so that you also may continue to believe.”)[12]

John then offers full proof, in opposition to the doctrine of the Docetæ, that the Anointed One came in the flesh and died. But, because the offices were emblematical, our Lord sustained salvation; He procured for His people. The water symbolized the purity of His doctrine, instructing people in the purest morals and His pure and holy example. What is of still greater importance is the purifying grace of which He is the fountain, sanctifying and cleansing, those that believe in Him, from all filthiness of unwilling flesh and rebellious spirit.

Additionally, the blood issued from Him was an emblem of His and His followers’ sufferings that awaited them. They, too, were expected to seal the truth with their blood, for which He made atonement for the world’s sins. Therefore, He procured for His followers a free and full justification. Thus, He manifested Himself to be the Son of God, the promised Messiah, by fulfilling those types and ceremonies of the law performed by water and blood. The former of which, denoting purification from sin, He fulfilled by cleansing us by His Spirit[13] (signified by water, from the corruption of nature, and the power and pollution of sin) and restoring God’s image in us.[14] This restoration prefigured the compensation of our sins, fulfilled by shedding His blood to atone for our sins and procure for us deliverance from their guilt and punishment.[15]

It restored us again to God’s favor. Not only was His doctrine pure and His life holy, and may purifying grace be derived from Him, but He came by blood, shed for the punishment of our guilt, for these things must go together. It will not avail us to avoid sin and live in a holy manner until the sins of the time past are paid for. The Spirit bears witness to these things in the writings of the ancient prophets, who spoke mainly concerning both, and in the discourses and reports of the apostles, who have a more precise and fuller testimony. So, also, in the hearts of the faithful, who, convinced of their need for pardon and holiness, receive both through the merits and Spirit of the Anointed One.[16]

A straightforward full Gospel preacher Charles Simeon (1759-1876) says we should be alert that we never attempt to separate what God has joined together. Unfortunately, some self-righteous individuals look to sanctification only as the means of recommending them to God. In contrast, others of good works and merit think little of justification through the Redeemer’s blood. But both are involved in the most grievous of errors, and if they do not obtain a clearer view of the Gospel’s truth, they will forever be separated from God by the lake of fire.

On the one hand, notes Simeon, there is no other fountain opened for sin and uncleanness than that which flows from Mount Calvary; nor, can anyone that is unsanctified behold the face of God in peace: for “without holiness, no one will see the Lord.”[17] On the other hand, if any take refuge in the doctrines of predestination and election, let them know that God ordained the means as well as the end; and that “God planned long ago to choose you and to make you His holy people, which is the Spirit’s work. God wanted you to obey Him and to be made clean by the blood sacrifice of Jesus the Anointed One.”[18] Whichever of these truths any person may consider as exclusive importance, we would say to them, as our Lord said to the self-deceiving Pharisees, “What sorrow awaits you, teachers of religious law. You hypocrites! For you are careful to tithe even the tiniest income from your herb gardens, but you ignore the more important aspects of the law – justice, mercy, and faith. It would be best if you tithe, yes, but do not neglect the more important things.”[19] ^[20]

Considering everything the Apostle John has said so far, Adam Clarke (1774-1749) makes note that Jesus was attested to be the Son of God and promised Messiah by water, namely, His baptism, when the Spirit of God came down upon Him, and the voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Jesus the Anointed One also came by blood. He shed His blood for the world’s sins, and this was in accordance with all that the Jewish prophets wrote concerning Him. Here the Apostle John says that the Spirit witnesses that Jesus came not by water only – being baptized and baptizing in His name that they might be His followers and disciples. But He also came by blood – by His sacrificial death, without which the world would remain unsaved, and He could have no disciples.

Perhaps John makes a mental comparison between the Anointed One and Moses who came by water – all Israelites were baptized with him in the cloud and the sea, becoming his flock and disciples.[21] (Some scholars think this refers to Moses’ rescue from the Nile River). Aaron came by blood – he entered the holy of holies with the victim’s blood to make atonement for sin. Moses initiated the people into the covenant of God by bringing them under the cloud and through the water. Aaron confirmed that covenant by shedding the blood, sprinkling part of it upon them, and the rest before the Lord in the holy of holies. Moses came only by water, Aaron only by blood, and both came as types.^[22]

After spiritually analyzing John’s conclusions, Gottfried C. F. Lücke (1791-1855) says that all agree in this, that the symbolical expressions “water” and “blood” are to be explained from the emblem of the First and Final Covenants in general and more particularly from the symbol of the Apostle John. But what meaning they convey in this verse is very much contested, particularly among modern interpreters.

• From the total impression and the context of the whole, let us endeavor to gain such exposition as may securely guide our judgment of the several disagreeing interpretations.

• Since this passage contains no contentious points of view, the entire reasoning, as is quite evident from the context of the preceding passage,[23] as well as the subsequent verse thirteen, has no other object to justify the belief of Christians in God’s Son, and to counter the world’s unbelief. Therefore, it naturally follows that any explanation of the complex expressions in this epistle in any particular or controversial way must be false.

---

[1] 1 Timothy 6:13

[2] 1 Peter 3:18

[3] Macknight, James: Apostolic Epistles with Commentary, Vol. VI, pp. 105-107

[4] Brown of Haddington, John: Self-Interpreting Bible, New Testament, Vol. IV, p. 506

[5] Newton, John: Composer of “Amazing Grace,”

[6] Note John 19:31, 37; 1 Corinthians 6:9, 11

[7] John 15:26, 27; Acts of the Apostles 5:32; Hebrews 2:14

[8] 1 John 4:18; John 14:4-6; 15-17; 16:12-13

[9] Scott, Thomas: Commentary on the Holy Bible, pp. 406-407

[10] 1 John 5:6-9

[11] John 19:34

[12] Ibid. 19:35

[13] John 7:38-39

[14] Ezekiel 36:25, 27; Ephesians 5:25-26; Titus 2:14; 3:5

[15] Romans 5:9; Galatians 3:13; Ephesians 1:7

[16] Benson, Joseph: Commentary on the Old and New Testament, op. cit, p. 342

[17] Hebrews 12:14

[18] 1 Peter 1:2

[19] Matthew 23:23

[20] Simeon, Charles: Horæ Homileticae, op. cit., Vol. XX, Discourse 2464, pp. 525-531

[21] 1 Corinthians 10:1-2

[22] Clarke, Adam: Wesleyan Heritage Commentary, op. cit., Hebrews-Revelation, pp. 394-396

[23] 1 John 5:1-5

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R. Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XXXVIII) 12/07/22

^5:6 And Jesus the Anointed One was revealed as God’s Son by His baptism in water and shedding His blood on the cross – not by water only, but by water and blood. And the Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with His testimony.

Now, this removal of guilt cannot make us completely happy. What is it less than hell on earth to be under the dominion and pollution of every immoral lust? Therefore, to complete the happiness of the redeemed, the Anointed One is made for them not only wisdom and righteousness, the curing of our ignorance, our guilt, and our sanctification, to relieve us from the dominion and pollution of worldly corruption.[1] Jesus came not only by water but by blood, for purifying and pardoning. How complete and perfect a cure is the Anointed One.

Indeed, our sanctification cannot defend us before God, but it can verify our justification before the world. Is there no necessity or use for a holy life because it does not reward us with a right to stand innocent before God? Is the soul’s preparation for heaven, by altering its frame and temperament, nothing? Is the glorifying of our Redeemer, by a life of faith in the world, nothing? Does the work of the Anointed One render the work of the Spirit needless? God forbid! He came not only by blood but also by water.

We must realize that sin pollutes all nations of the world by nature and practice, which they will see and bitterly lament when the Light of the Gospel shines among them. This same Light will also determine that the only remedy for evil lies in the Holy Spirit of the Anointed One. It is the only fountain opened to all nations for sanctification and cleansing, making the Lord Jesus incomparably desirable in their eyes. O, how welcome the Messiah who comes to them, not by blood only, but also by water.^[2]

Influenced by his Arminian view of salvation, Daniel Whitby (1638-1726) has much to say about verse six. His comments focus on the role of the Holy Spirit in verifying that Jesus was the true Messiah and Son of the Living God. Whitby writes that the witness, in this verse, is only styled as the Spirit, which enabled the Anointed One to heal diseases, cast out devils, raise the dead, and work all sorts of miracles, for confirmation of His mission. But in verse seven, the Holy Spirit distinctly signifies the inward gifts by which the understanding is amplified. The believer is enabled to perform things they could not do without the immediate workings of the Spirit, such as the gifts of wisdom, knowledge, faith, prophecy, discerning of spirits, the gift of tongues, and the interpretation of them.[3] The basis for this distinction appears in the following considerations:

1. Our Savior, while He was on earth, gave His apostles and the seventy disciples power to heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, and cast out demons.[4] Yet the Apostle John informs us that the Holy Spirit was not in them as a comforter and guide because Jesus had not yet been glorified.[5] Our Savior also tells His disciples that the Holy Spirit would not come until He departed.[6] So also, the Apostle Peter says that with our Lord exalted to the right hand of God, the Father fulfilled our Lord’s promise of the Holy Spirit.[7] Therefore, the Holy Spirit must signify something distinct from the power of working miracles.

2. The Apostle Peter’s mention of Joel’s prophecy as the promise on which the giving of the Holy Spirit has founded promises, visions, dreams, and predictions, but not miracles.[8] Furthermore, the gifts of the Spirit mentioned by the prophet Isaiah are only those of wisdom, knowledge, understanding, counsel, courage, holiness, and reverence for the Lord; no mention consists of signs and wonders.[9]

3. Throughout the book of Acts, where Luke mentions the miracles that the apostles and primitive believers performed, he always uses these words, signs, and wonders.[10] But Luke always indicates the Holy Spirit coming on them when people prophesied or spoke in tongues.[11] And lastly, where the Scripture mentions these things together, it puts a manifest distinction between signs and wonders and the gifts and distributions of the Holy Spirit. Thus God, said the apostles, bear witness to the doctrine they preached, by signs and wonders, many miracles, and distributions of the Holy Spirit.[12]

Therefore, the Spirit of God bears witness to the Anointed One on earth by enabling Him to do many mighty works to confirm His mission, to heal all manner of diseases, sicknesses, and disorders. Jesus commanded the wind and the seas to obey Him, cast our devils, and raise the dead. The Spirit also assisted Jesus’ Apostles and disciples in doing these same things in His name. And not only for His disciples but even our Lord himself, cast out devils by the Spirit of God, He expressly testifies.[13] Because Jesus fulfilled the words of Isaiah,[14] the Apostle Peter speaks like this to Cornelius and his friends. So you know how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, who went about doing good and healed all that the devil oppressed.[15] And to these works wrought by the assistance of the Spirit of God, our Lord frequently appealed, as to a sure testimony that God had sent Him: “For, the works that I do in my Father’s name, bear witness of Me.”[16] It showed that the Father was in Jesus and He was in the Father.[17] ^[18]

With meticulous Greek text examination and confirmation, Johann Bengel (1687-1752), author of the “Gnomon of the New Testament,”[19] sees the Apostle John giving reasons why he attributes victory over the world to those who genuinely believe that faith in Jesus as the Son of God has invincible strength. Not only from the testimony of human witnesses but much more from the testimony of God, which has overcoming power. He does not say, coming, in the present, but “is come,” in the aorist tense, having the force of expressing a past action or state “was continuously manifested.”[20] Jesus is the One expected on account of the promises respecting Him; and who is genuinely come: whom the Spirit, water, and blood confirm with their testimony. 

The water, says Bengel, signifies baptism; hence John is called the Baptizer so Jesus might be manifested as the Son of God.[21] Moreover, baptism was monitored by Jesus’ disciples.[22] The blood is indeed the blood of One, and Jesus the Anointed One, which was shed at His passion, is drunk in the Lord’s Supper. Jesus, the Anointed One who came by water and blood, is, by this very fact, pointed out as the Messiah, not in water only. In verse six, “by” seems to refer more particularly to the water and the blood. John, who baptized with water, preceded the coming of Jesus, and Jesus came by (through) water: but Jesus, finished the work which the Father gave Him to do by shedding His blood; therefore, earlier He came by water, and now blood.

Jesus only undertook the task of fulfilling all righteousness when He came to baptism,[23] but He also completed it by pouring out His blood. When this was done, blood and water came forth from the side of Jesus the Anointed One, being dead on the cross. The apostle then declares what he means by the word Spirit, namely, the truth. But what does John mean by the word truth? There is no doubt that, in this professed list, he embraces in some way all things which connect to the testimony concerning Jesus the Anointed One, except the Divine testimony itself. The Scriptures testify of Jesus the Anointed One: Moses and the prophets,[24] John the Baptizer, testified.[25]

Afterward, the apostles testified,[26]  Now when the apostle collects the testimonies concerning Jesus Christ, as concerning Him who is come, be by no means overlooked the Gospel. He never calls it the Gospel; he generally calls it the testimony. But in this passage, it would be inconvenient to say there are three that bear witness, the testimony, the water, and the blood; therefore, instead of testimony, he tells the truth, namely, not only concerning knowledge but also with respect to its publication: and he distinguishes the truth by the name of the Spirit; with which subject the predicate, to bear witness, elegantly agrees. Therefore, let the name of Spirit be highly considered.

In this Spirit the prophetic testimony of the First Covenant, together with its fulfillment and demonstration. Again, John says, “Jesus the Anointed One came both by water and blood:” he does not here say, “and the water and blood are they which bear witness.” Once more, John says, with great emphasis, “it is the Spirit which bears witness.” He does not say Jesus the Anointed One came “by the Spirit” or “in the Spirit.” The Spirit was bearing witness, even before the coming of the Anointed One, but the water and the blood were intimately connected with His very appearance. And the testimony is more appropriately ascribed to the Spirit than to the water and the blood: inasmuch as the Spirit has the power of bearing witness, and the water and blood obtain and exercise the same passion when the Spirit is added to them.^[27]

After scholarly meditation and reflection on the text, James Macknight (1721-1800) offers the following points for us to consider: (1) He came by water and blood, even Jesus the Anointed One. Here, speaking of Jesus, the Messiah is His coming into public life, attested, or proved to be the Anointed Son of God. Jesus came certified, first, through His baptism in water; secondly, by means of His blood or death, and thirdly, His resurrection. The proof by water is mentioned before the evidence by blood because His baptism was before His death.

Concerning the Anointed One’s baptism, let it be remarked that it was not the baptism of repentance, for Jesus had no sin to be repented of.[28] But it was the baptism of righteousness,[29] that is, a baptism by which Jesus called Himself God’s Son, was manifested to the surrounding multitude. That’s what John the Baptizer declared.[30] Therefore, he should be made manifest to Israel; therefore, I am baptizing Him. John was sent to baptize people in water, that gathered they might hear and see Jesus proved to be the Son of God. Accordingly, when Jesus was baptized, coming up out of the water, “Behold a voice from heaven said, this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”[31] This miraculous confirmation, Jesus called a greater witness of His being God’s Son than the witness which John the Baptizer provided Him. And this witness after His baptism, John had good reason to say, this is He who came attested as the Son of God by means of water.

---

[1] 1 Corinthians 1:30

[2] Flavel, John: The Method of Grace: How the Spirit Works, Ch. 1, pp. 14, 23; Ch. 13, p. 231

[3] 1 Corinthians 12:1-11

[4] Matthew 10:8; Luke 10:9

[5] John 7:39

[6] Ibid. 16:7

[7] Acts of the Apostles 2:33

[8] Ibid. 2:17; Joel 2:28

[9] Isaiah 11:1-3a

[10] Acts of the Apostles 2:43; 5:12

[11] Ibid. 10:44; 11:15

[12] Hebrews 2:4; See Romans 15:19; Galatians 3:5

[13] Matthew 12:28

[14] Luke 4:18-29

[15] Acts of the Apostles 10:38

[16] John 5:36; 10:24

[17] Ibid. 10:37-38; 14:10-11

[18] Whitby, Daniel: Critical Commentary and Paraphrase, op. cit., pp. 439-470

[19] Gnomon has various meanings from sundial pillar to carpenter’s square ruler, but Bengel’s used it as an “interpreter”

[20] See 1 John 1:2; see also 4:2; 5:20 “is come”

[21] John 1:33-34

[22] Ibid. 4:1-2; Acts of the Apostles 2:38

[23] Matthew 3:15

[24] Ibid. 5:46; 1:46; Acts of the Apostles 10:43

[25] John 1:7

[26] Ibid. 15:27; 19:35; 1 John 1:2; 4:14; Acts of the Apostles 1:89; 2:32

[27] Bengel, Johann: Gnomon of the New Testament, op. cit., Vol. 4, pp. 143-144

[28] 1 Peter 2:22

[29] Matthew 3:14-15

[30] John 1:31

[31] Matthew 3:17