Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson CXLI) 08/17/22

^4:20If anyone says, “I love God” but keeps hating their brother or sister, they are lying; for if they don’t love their brother or sister who is right in front of their eyes, can they claim to love God whom they have never seen?

Rudolf Schnackenburg (1914-2002) says the argument is clear: only those who love their brother or sister can see and be able to love an invisible God.[1] But this conviction does not, as Jewish/Greek historian Philo said, “For we must not share everything with everyone, but restrict our gifts to what is suitable to the recipient. Otherwise, the most excellent and valuable thing which life possesses will destroy order and suffer defeat by its most mischievous foe, confusion,”[2] stem from general religious considerations, but specific thought. The way to fellowship with God is not through a visionary experience but active love. Now, some exploit this basic proposition in the name of love. That idea is implied in verse eleven, so those who follow it can rest assured of their love for brother and sister.[3]

Donald W. Burdick (1917-1996) says that the Apostle John should convince all of us that brotherly love is demanded by logic.[4] The hypothetical case John proposes is stated in the strongest terms: “If a person says, I love God and hate their Christian brother or sister, are lying.” They are not lying about hating some fellow believers but about their loving God. It indicates that the claim is manifestly self-contradictory. Love for God and hatred for a brother or sister cannot possibly coexist in the same heart. Thus, with typical Johannine sharp words, the claim is dismissed as an out-and-out lie.[5] Can you envision a pastor asking a believer who comes to them for counseling about their quarrel with another believer, “Do you love God?” If their response is “yes,” we wonder what the reaction would be when the pastor tells them they are a liar.

Raymond E. Brown (1928-1998) says that some today might have expected the Apostle John to contrast the claim to love God with indifference toward one’s brother or sister. However, in Johannine dualism, neither indifference nor insufficient love is the opposite of loving – that opposite is described here in verse twenty as not love or hate. Again, one might have expected John to charge any person who claims to love God and still hates their Christian brother or sister guilty of misunderstanding or incompleteness, but Johannine dualism is harsher. Just as hate is opposed to love (and God is Love).so lying is opposed to truth (and Jesus is Truth). As a result, John accuses such a person of belonging to Satan’s regime, for whom lying is part of everyday language.[6] If Father God is present in love, “the originator of lies” is in hate.[7]

John R. W. Stott (1921-2010) notes that love for God expresses a confident attitude towards Him, devoid of fear and loving concern for our brothers and sisters.[8] Perfect agápē that drives fear out of hatred also. If God’s agápē for us is made complete when we love one another,[9] so is our love for God. John does not mince his words. If a person’s behavior contradicts what they say, they are liars. To claim to know God and have fellowship with God while we walk in the darkness of disobedience is to lie.[10] To claim to possess the Father while denying the deity of the Son is to lie.[11] To claim to love God while hating our brothers or sister is also to lie.[12]

John Phillips (1927-2010) says that John now turns to the logic of love: “If we say we love God but hate any of our brothers or sisters in His family, we are liars. If we don’t love someone we have seen, how can we love God? We have never even seen Him.” Very blunt! Love and hate are opposites. Love for God should expel all hate, even toward the most cranky, critical, and contradictory of the Lord’s people. No one ever loved God like Jesus. “He went about doing good” was Peter s one-line summary of the Lord’s attitude toward people.[13] The Lord had His enemies, but He loved them. At times He had to expose and condemn them,[14] but He never stopped loving them.

Furthermore, He loved poor, lost, pagan Pilate just as much as He loved beloved, blundering Peter; it is also true that He died for the crafty, unscrupulous Caiaphas[15] for generous, open-minded Cornelius.[16] He had as big a heart of love for Barabbas[17] as He had for Bartholomew.[18] He wept as brokenly for Jerusalem – which killed the prophets and stoned them who were sent to her[19] – as He did for the bereaved and beloved Martha and Mary.[20] He was as eager to save Saul – who “was uttering threats with every breath and was eager to kill the Lord’s followers”[21] – as He was to protect the earnestly seeking Ethiopian[22] or anyone who belonged to, however unworthily, the family of God.[23]

David E. Hiebert (1928-1995) hears the Apostle John asserting that God-induced love involves the love for fellow believers. So, the Apostle asks a hypothetical question: “If someone says, ‘I love God,’ and yet hates their Christian brother or sister, what does that make them?” The clear verdict is, “they are liars!” They are either blind or a conscious hypocrite. There is an apparent contradiction between the individual’s explicit claim to love God while they continue to hate their fellow believers. The Greek text places “God” and “brother” side by side,[24] suggesting that the two cannot be the objects of opposite inward feelings. As British Bible scholar John Miller (1919-1895) stated: “One’s inward condition is easily measured by outward behavior.”[25] [26]

Stephen S. Smalley (1931-2018) says that when the Apostle John discusses the “tests by which our love for God may be discerned,” rather than by stages “learning to love Him,” it may well be that this second interpretation should be adopted unless we combine the two views. But in any case, John’s point is clear. As John stated in verse twelve, love for God is expressed in love for others. To withhold the one is to render the other impossible. Therefore, we are to love God in others and others in Him. Such is the meaning of “living in love.”[27] [28]

Edward J. Malatesta (1932-2018) notices that verse twenty is built around one core. It portrays and brands anyone who claims to know God while hating a fellow believer as a “liar.” God’s agápē occurs in this verse’s first and last lines so that it repeats itself with different words. For instance, “hates a brother or sister” and “does not love their brother or sister.” At the center of this is a devasting accusation and gives a reason for this accusation. The person who does not love their brother or sister whom they can see cannot possibly love God whom they cannot see.[29] It is as ridiculous as a blind person claiming they can see with their eyes closed when they cannot see with their eyes open.

Ian Howard Marshall (1934-2015) points out that a person may deceive others by declaring that they love God, but since God cannot be seen, there is no direct way of telling whether they truly love God. Even if they go through the outward motions of devotion to God, prayer, worship attendance, and so on, it may still be all empty show. But a person cannot so easily deceive others regarding their love for fellow Christians; since they can be seen, the person’s relation with them is also visible. (Admittedly, deception is still possible since loving acts may arise from false motives, but the opportunity is not as great as love for the unseen God.) It follows that if a person is seen not loving their brothers and sisters, they are unlikely to love God. Indeed, they cannot love God since one part of love for God is love for one’s fellow believers.[30]

John Painter (1935) notes that there have been six claims (NIV) up to this point in the Apostle John’s First Epistle made by the hypocrite opposition up to this point. They are:

1. If we claim to have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth – 1 John 1:6

• If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us – 1 John 1:8

• If we claim we have not sinned, we make Him out to be a liar, and his word is not in us – 1 John 1:10

• Whoever claims to live in Him must live as Jesus did – 1 John 2:6

• Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates a brother or sister is still in the darkness – 1 John 2:9

• Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar – 1 John 4:20

---

[1] 1 John 4:12

[2] The Works of Philo, The Special Laws, Loeb Classical Library, Vol. VII, translated by F. H. Colson, p. 169 (#120)

[3] Schnackenburg, Rudolf: The Johannine Epistles, op. cit., p. 226

[4] 1 John 4:20

[5] Burdick, Donald W., The Epistles of John, op. cit., p. 81

[6] John 8:44

[7] Brown, Raymond E., The Anchor Bible, op. cit., Vol. 30, p. 533

[8] Cf. 1 John 3:14

[9] Ibid. 4:12

[10] Ibid. 1:6; 2:4

[11] Ibid. 12:22-23

[12] Stott, John. The Letters of John (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries), op. cit., p. 170

[13] Acts of the Apostles 10:38

[14] Matthew 23:13-39

[15] Matthew 26:57, 63-65; John 11:49-51

[16] Acts of the Apostles 10:1-3 3

[17] Matthew 27:16; Mark 15:7

[18] Acts of the Apostles 1:3

[19] Matthew 23:37; Luke 19:41-44

[20] John 11:18-21

[21] Acts of the Apostles 9:1

[22] Ibid. 8:26-39

[23] Phillips, John: Exploring the First Epistle of John, op. cit., p. 156

[24] The Greek text reads: “God and the brother….”

[25] Miller, John, Notes on James, 1 and 11 Peter, 1, 11 and Ill John, Jude, Revelation (Bradford, Eng.: Needed Truth Publishing Office, n.d.), p. 90

[26] Hiebert, David E., Bibliotheca Sacra, op. cit., January-March 1990, pp. 86-87

[27] See 1 John 4:16

[28] Smalley, Stephen S., Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 51, op. cit., p. 264

[29] Malatesta, Edward J., Interiority and Covenant, op. cit., p. 297

[30] Marshall, I. Howard. The Epistles of John (The New International Commentary on the New Testament), op. cit., pp. 225-226)

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson CXL) 08/16/22

^4:20If anyone says, “I love God,” but keeps hating their brother or sister, they are lying; for if they don’t love their brother or sister who is right in front of them, how can they love God whom they have never seen?

Benjamin B. Warfield (1851-1921) examines the controversy between Augustine and Pelagius and says we must seek two roots in our dispositions for such mixed results – greediness for evil and love for good. There is not a single root for both in nature. Humanity’s “ability” is the root of nothing. Still, it is capable of both good and evil according to the motivating cause, which, in the case of evil, is human-originated, while, in the case of good, it is from God. Pelagius’[1] assertion that grace is given according to our merits took such an extreme form as to openly proclaim that individuals can come and hold onto God by their free will alone without God’s help. Augustine shows that the Scriptures teach just the opposite and then points out how Pelagius has confounded the functions of knowledge and love and how he forgets that we cannot earn merits until we love God. At the same time, the Apostle John asserts that God loved us first.[2] [3]

Bishop Arthur Temple Lyttelton (1852-1903), Suffragan Bishop of Southampton, states: We cannot love God whom we do not see, and then comprehend the tremendous invisible influence in which we live and move and have our being, to appreciate the person who is watching over and directing us and guiding all this complicated scheme of things. That is more complex and harder to do. And the world comes close around us and absorbs us. If that is our difficulty, we may take verse twenty to say, there is training for God’s children in agápē.

So, offers Lyttelton, if we accept that love of others is training for God’s agápē; for, though it is hard to grasp the invisible, we have the visible. We have people; we have a love of others, which is natural to us, and easy for us in a sense. And I think that is what the Apostle means for us to become sufficient using God’s agápē – the love of our brother and sister whom we see; this familiar friend, who is with us at every turn of our life, with whom we are continually in contact. And in our natural life in the world, this familiar friend is the means to train and draw out this outstanding faculty in us – the love of our friend and our fellowman. So, we are to train and exercise God’s agápē. And that simple, natural human affection we feel for our friends is the same faculty as that required for God’s agápē.

We must not think of this agápē as something extraordinary, says Lyttelton, some new and unknown faculty to be given to us. No doubt all God’s love is a gift: but all love is similar to the same affection. Although it is essentially going out of ourselves, loving another, and living for another, whether that other is our fellowman or God, still, the impulse is the same – the putting aside of all selfish motivations and living in and for God or those around us. That is love. So, the love of others is training for expressing God’s agápē because it is the same faculty needed for both. And in our weakness, when we cannot rise to God’s agápē, let us remember that we have our Lord’s warrant that “whatever we do for the least important of our brothers and sisters, we do for Him.”[4] And when we love our fellow believers, it is the first step to God’s agápē. We cannot pass it over; we cannot rise to the level of God’s agápē; we cannot see unless we love “those whom we have seen.”[5]

Alonzo R. Cocke (1858-1901) says it is easy to say, “I love God,” but the evidence supporting a claim of having love must be tested. The witness to the presence of God’s agápē in our hearts is love for our fellow Christians. One who claims to love God and yet hates their Christian brother or sister proves their assertions are lies. Hatred and love mutually exclude each other. Our fellow believers are visible, but God is invisible. Love for God is the primary, and love for fellow Christians is a copy of God’s agápē. Love for God causes love for His children.

Cocke continues: Love for God is invisible unless manifested with visible effects. A person’s profession of love to God is an incredible lie when there is no visual evidence. Likewise, the invisible God is not loved if the visible brother or sister is not loved. Such is the necessary connection between these two exhibits of the divine life as it flows in the agápē channel. From one fountain, the waters ever flow into these two streams: Love for God and love for our fellow Christians.[6]

Alan E. Brooke (1863-1939) states that since God is love, they who abide in His agápē remain in God and God in them. Thus, the test of love can give full assurance concerning the reality of our fellowship with God. It is a logical deduction from the very nature of God. Love has been made perfect in us when, and only when, we can look forward with entire confidence to the great day of God’s judgment, knowing that as the exalted Anointed One abides in the Father’s love, so we remain in it so far as that is possible under the condition of our present existence. Where complete confidence is not yet likely, love fails to reach perfection, for fear and dread have no place in true love. It drives them out entirely from the sphere of its activity. Love is not merely an attribute of God but His attitude. Love expresses the highest conception we can form of God’s very Being.[7]

Brooke goes on to say that fear is something of the nature of punishment, and they who experience it have not yet been made perfect in love. How then can they say that they have compassion? Because love, in whatever degree it is exercised, originates in something above and beyond us. It has its origin in God. It is in response to God’s love for us. But our claim to love can be put to an obvious test. Love is active and must go out to those who need it if it is genuine. If anyone claims to love God and does not show love to their fellow believers, their claim is not only false but reveals a deceptive character. Love will show itself wherever an object of love is to be found.

Those who will not take the first step can never reach the goal. If the sight of one’s brother or sister in the Lord does not call out their love, it shows they cannot have enough love to reach God. And for us, the matter is determined, once and for all, by the Master’s command. He has said, the first commandment is: “You will love the Lord your God with all your heart,”[8] and the second is, “You will love your neighbor as yourself.”[9] [10]

Harry A., Ironside (1876-1951) tells us to notice the Apostle John’s strong language in verse twenty. Listen to what he said earlier in this epistle, “If someone claims, ‘I know God,’ but doesn’t obey God’s commandments, that person is a liar and is not living in the truth.”[11] Then John asks this stabbing question, “Who is lying? Anyone who says that Jesus is not the Anointed One.”[12] Now John spells it out, “If someone says, ‘I love God,’ but hates a fellow believer, that person is a liar; for if we don’t love people we can see, how can we love God, whom we cannot see?” In other words, how you treat your Christian brother and sister is a test as to whether you really love God.[13]

Charles H. Dodd (1884-1973) tells us that the meaning of the last part of verse twenty is not entirely clear. The words “loveth not” (KJV) and “cannot” (NIV) might bear either of two meanings, which may be illustrated as follows. A schoolmaster might warn a lazy pupil, “Unless you start doing your lessons, you cannot become educated,” and, on the other hand, the recipient of an anonymous letter might remark, “A person who writes like that cannot be educated.” Similarly, here the meaning might be either that, unless a believer practices loving their fellowman, they are incapable of the more difficult task of loving God.

It could also be that the absence of practical charity proves that a person does not love God. The context seems to demand this latter meaning. John is not concerned with the stages by which we may learn to love God but with the tests by which it may be known whether we love Him. However, the most straightforward and convincing test is that of assistance towards our neighbors. In effect, we have a fresh interpretation and application of the evangelical commandment of love for God and neighbor. For the “first and greatest commandment” and the second, which is “like unto it,”[14] are in summation one commandment. Being the objects of God’s agápē, we are to love our neighbor in Him and Him in our neighbor; and that is what it means to “remain in His agápē.”[15]

Greville P. Lewis (1891-1976) is nothing between white and black, love and hate, in the Apostle John’s vocabulary. There is no grey area or fence to sit on. He is thinking of a professing Christian who is indifferent to the needs of their fellow Christians and may even positively dislike – or hate – a member of the Church to which they belong. He says that a person who says proudly, “I love God,” but fails to love any one of their fellow believers, is in plain words, “a liar.” Since John has just said in verse nineteen, “We love because He first loved us,” our capacity to love is our grateful and self-giving response to the undeserved and amazing God’s agápē for us. If, as a result of our love for God, we live in such intimate union with Him that we share His very nature, then love should become “second nature” to us. If this proves true, it follows that a person who says, “I have no feelings of love for this particular brother or that specific sister, and have no interest in their needs,” shows that love is not their “second nature.” Therefore, they do not love or belong to God.[16]

---

[1] Pelagius (born c. 354 AD, probably Britain—died after 418 AD (possibly in Palestine), monk and theologian whose non- orthodox theological system known as Pelagianism emphasized the primacy of human effort in spiritual salvation.

[2] 1 John 4:10

[3] Warfield, Benjamin B., The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 5, Trans. Peter Holmes, Part 2, Introductory Essay on Augustine and the Pelagian Controversy, the External History, p. 62

[4] Matthew 25:40, 45

[5] Lyttelton, Arthur Temple: Church Pulpit Commentary, op. cit., loc. cit.

[6] Cocke, Alonzo R., Studies in the Epistles of John, op. cit., loc. cit., Logos

[7] Brooke, Alan E., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, op. cit., p. 118

[8] Deuteronomy 6:5; Matthew 22:37

[9] Leviticus 19:18; Matthew 22:39

[10] Brooke, Alan E., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, op. cit., p. 123

[11] 1 John 2:4

[12] Ibid. 2:20

[13] Ironside, Harry A., The Epistles of John and Jude, op. cit., p. 181

[14] Matthew 22:38-39

[15] Dodd, Charles H., The Moffatt Commentary, Johannian Epistles, op. cit., p. 124

[16] Lewis, Greville P., The Epworth Commentary, Johannine Epistles, op. cit., p. 111

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson CXXXIX) 08/15/22

^4:20If anyone says, “I love God,” but keeps hating their brother or sister, they are lying; for if they don’t love their brother or sister who is right in front of them, how can they love God whom they have never seen?

Johannes H. A. Ebrard (1818-1888) notes that by a subtle distinction, the Apostle John writes in the former half of this verse “love” but in the latter “loving.” [1] In the former case, he would describe the actual position of one who says they love God and nevertheless blunders so far as to allow themselves to hate their fellow citizen. That’s no doubt why John felt it was necessary to illuminate the sharp contrast and, therefore, to show the furthest point to which an error-prone conscience may be misled. The Apostle speaks in the presence of the experienced fact that a person sometimes does utter their assurance that they love God while nourishing hatred against their neighbor. But in the latter case, where the Apostle is laying down a doctrinal position that merely not-hating is insufficient, he must enforce the positive requirement that Christians should love their brothers and sisters. Hence, he writes: “The person that does not love their fellow believer, etc.” [2]

Charles Ellicott (1819-1904) says that these last three verses summarize the truth, and the duty in verses ten and eleven is vivid. God made it possible for us to love Him, and the first result of our feeling this power within us and allowing it to put itself into force will be seen in pure and devout care for all whom we can help. As usual, hating and not loving are interchangeable members of the class of misbehavior. John argues on the ground that it is much easier for human nature to be interested in what comes before its eyes than the things it imagines.” [3] 

This is so true of Jesus. We would be able to love Him more if we could see Him than simply imagine Him as He sits in heaven. But our Lord told us, “You believe because you have seen Me. So blessed are those who believe without seeing Me.” [4] In other words, the Anointed One could say, “O yes, you’ll love Me as long as you can see me being with you in person, but those who will love Me even after I’m gone are the ones who will receive My blessing.”

William Kelly (1822-1888), we see here in verse twenty, we have the last of the false professions, as individualized in chapter two, as liars. Such language and conduct betray delusion, and the Apostle John does not hesitate to stigmatize that person as a liar. Our feeling toward a brother tests the truth or falsehood of our profession Godward. It is a present and tangible case. Here is my brother at my door, endowed with life in the Anointed One, and cleansed from their sins by the Anointed One’s blood; and do I allow on any pretext hatred in the heart and talk of loving the unseen God? It is a falsehood: Satan has closed our eyes.

If living faith exists, says Kelly, life would attract, and God’s agápē draw out love from us. Nor does the Holy Spirit of God abide in the saint for nothing; and where the heart treats Him as nothing in another, is it not the plain evidence that He cannot be there to give the enjoyment of fellowship one with another through the Son, by whom all the blessing comes? If “liar” is a character most embarrassing among humans, what is it in the mouth of an Apostle John and the eternal things of God? Thus, the only wise God in the evil day provides means that His children should not be deceived. For the more blessed is the love that is inspired by divine grace, the more critical it is that we should not be imposed on by what is untrue. It is a part of God’s moral government of His children that they are tried here below in various ways. But the love that is of God confides in God, abides in love whether others do or not, and has the Spirit’s enduring power to make God’s presence in our souls so that we may be calm and subject to whatever happens.[5]

William Burt Pope (1822-1903) points out two condensed arguments here. First, recalling verse ten that the invisible God perfects His agápē in us by the Spirit through our brotherly love, it is simply an intense repetition: the invisible Fountain of Love abides in us. It has its perfect operation in our devotion to its visible objects, embracing all our fellow-regenerate brothers and sisters. This is carried over into the next chapter, verse one, “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Anointed One has become a child of God. And everyone who loves the Father loves His children, too.” [6]

Brooke F. Westcott (1825-1901) makes it clear that the claim to God’s knowledge without obedience and the claim to God’s agápē without action involves not only the denial of what is known to be accurate but the falseness of a believer’s character.[7] Sight is taken as a sign of limitation, which brings objects within the range of our present powers. It is necessarily easier to love that which is like our finite selves than that infinite form we cannot grasp. And the title “brother” brings out the idea of that which is godlike in mankind to which love can be directed. They, therefore, who fail to recognize God as He reveals Himself through the Anointed One dwelling in His people [8] cannot love God. They have refused God’s help for the expression of love in action.

The other day I saw a video of a man stepping onto a manual treadmill to walk for exercise. He stood there for a while, then grabbed the handles, but the tread did not move. So, he asked a friend standing close by, “How do I turn this thing on?” His friend replied in a monotone, “Start walking.” It’s the same with God’s agápē placed in our hearts. It doesn’t do a thing until we start using it. It’s the difference between love in mind and love in action.

Henry A. Sawtelle (1832-1913) sees “hating” as opposing “loving.” In other words, unlike darkness, which is the absence of light, hate is an ever-present enemy of loving. However, like light and darkness, hate and love cannot exist together in one heart. When one moves in, the other moves out. So, in not loving, there is the condition of hating when the occasion comes. Sawtelle also points out that those who do not believe this and claim otherwise falsely profess and deny love’s very nature. That’s why the Apostle John calls them “liars.” Our love is the production (verse nineteen) of God’s agápē. But God’s agápē goes out to us to the brotherhood. Therefore, our love must embrace the same company. If it does not, it is not true love from God.[9]

Erich Haupt (1841-1910) says that the Apostle John has now unfolded that God’s agápē without the love of the brethren is impossible. Up to this point, John has not spoken a word about our love for God, only of the divine love infused into us and must approve itself as brotherly love. That we must love God enters here as a new thought, which, however, is so self-explanatory that it is introduced simply as a matter taken for granted. The emphasis lies only on the evidence that we cannot conceive of having God’s agápē without loving our family of believers. The form of the exposition has been made familiar to us in chapters one and two, but here in verse twenty, we have “if a man says” there it was “if we say;” [10] we may also compare “If one of you say,” [11] and “Some man will say,” [12] So, by saying that those who claim to love God but hate their brother or sister is a “liar,” it does not violate apostolical doctrine, but asserts that they have made a deceptive assertion of being in the actual state of God’s agápē.[13]

Alfred Plummer (1841-1926) points out that the Apostle John does not say “whom he can see” but “whom he has continually before his eyes.” The perfect tense, as so often, expresses a permanent state continuing from the past. So, his brother has been and remains in sight; God has been and stays out of sight. “Out of sight, out of mind” is an old saying that holds good in morals, religion, and society. And if a person fails to carry out easy duties before their eyes, how can we trust them to perform tasks that require an effort to remember and are difficult? And in this case, the seen would necessarily suggest the unseen: the child on earth implies the Father in heaven.

If, therefore, notes Plummer, if the ones we see are not loved, what must we think about those we cannot see? The visible brother or sister and the invisible God are put in striking juxtaposition. When we read what John says here in verse twenty, “For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen,” when read in Greek goes; “For the one not loving his brother, whom he has seen, God whom he has not seen how is he able to love?” would be misunderstood in English if left that way.[14]

William Lincoln (1841-1926) observes that two Final Covenant commands are put in the opposite order from what they were in chapter three, where it says. “We love Him because He loved us first.” That is balanced: “If a man says, I love God, and hate his brother, he is a liar; if he doesn’t love his brother whom he can see, how can he love God whom he has not seen?” And we have this commandment from Him, that he who loves God, loves His brother also. We have it already as a command in the third chapter. Then in the two first verses of the fifth chapter, the sentiment is put in a two-fold form, as is frequent in Holy Scripture. What I mean is this, if a man says he loves God, God says, you will love My people then; or if a man says, he loves His people, God says, you will love Me then.[15] In other words, don’t even think about loving God until you love your fellow man because that is the way to love Him. After all, He has already put His agápē into our hearts so we can use it for that purpose.[16]

---

[1] See 1 John 4:20-21 – Berean Literal Bible (BLB); Young’s Literal Translation (YLT); Smith’s Literal Translation (SLT); and Godbey New Testament (GNT)

[2] Ebrard, Johannes: Biblical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John, op. cit., p. 309

[3] Cf. 1 John 2:4; 3:17; 4:12

[4] John 20:29

[5] Kelly, William: An Exposition of the Epistles of John the Apostle, op. cit., Logos, loc. cit.

[6] Pope, William B., Popular Commentary, op. cit., p. 316

[7] See also John 8:44, 55; and 1 John 2:22

[8] Matthew 25:49

[9] Sawtelle, Henry A., An American Commentary, Alvah Hovey Ed., op. cit., p. 53

[10] 1 John 1:6, 8

[11] James 2:16

[12] 1 Corinthians 15:35

[13] Haupt, Erich: The First Epistle of John, op. cit., pp. 281-282

[14] Plummer, Alfred: Cambridge Commentary, op. cit., pp. 153-154

[15] Lincoln, William: Lectures on 1 John, op. cit., Lecture VIII, pp 136-137

[16] See Romans 5:5

SKEPTICS may ask, why don’t people follow the advice of numerous proverbs and maxims of forethought available for centuries? Instead, they conclude that these apply only after some rightful venture has gone “horribly wrong.” When, for instance, a person gambles and loses all they have, including their house, why didn’t they remember the old Scottish proverb, “willful waste leads to woeful want?” But didn’t the gambler know this well-worn saying from earlier years? However, it wouldn’t have done much good. So, are the maxims of morality useless because people disregard them? For Christians and Jews, the Book of Proverbs is a great example. Yet, what about other religions and philosophers?

For instance, Panchatantra stories were written in Sanskrit. Later they were translated into several languages and widely distributed. Panchatantra combines the words Pancha – meaning five, and Tantra – meaning weave. Translated, it represents interweaving five traditions and teaching threads of yarn into one text.

Here’s one to think about:

HIS action, no applause invites

Who simply good with good repays.

He only justly merits praise

Who wrongful deeds with a kind response.

It reminds us of the words of Jesus, “Bless those who curse you. Pray for those who hurt you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, offer the other cheek also. If someone demands your coat, offer your shirt also. Give to anyone who asks, and when things are taken away from you, don’t try to get them back.” (Luke 6:28-30 – NLT)

For you or anyone who may be dealing with a handicap, this story should inspire you. Glenn Cunningham was just seven years old when he nearly died in an explosion that killed his brother. He had gone to his one-room school with several siblings on a January morning. Finding the school empty and cold, Glenn’s brother Floyd started to light a fire in the small coal stove. Floyd didn’t know the stove had some hot coals from the previous night’s community meeting or that the Kerosine labeled can contained gasoline. Fire exploded out of the stove as soon as Floyd poured the fuel. Flames burned Floyd terribly and reached Glenn’s legs as he stood nearby. They ran the two miles home through the snow and were put to bed while the children went to find their mother. 

The doctor that attended Glenn and Floyd told their parents that Floyd would not live – the burns were too severe. But Glenn would probably live unless infection set in. Either way, the doctor warned the family that Glenn would never walk again. His legs were useless now. But Glenn didn’t want to be a burden on his family. So, after overhearing a neighbor tell his mother to face the fact that he would have a disability for the rest of his life, Glenn made an important decision to walk again. Fortunately, his mother believed him when he tearfully told her this. And Glenn resolved to walk again, no matter how much it hurts or how hard it was to do. He would repeat, “I’ll walk! I’ll walk,” when he lost courage. 

Glenn remembered his wonderful family. He recalled, “I can’t even imagine how horrible it must have been with all the smells and the sight of my rotting flesh. I lost all the flesh on my knees, shins, and toes on my left foot. My transverse arch was mostly gone. Yet my family kept changing the dressings and massaging my legs, though there was little muscle and sinew left to massage.”

After his legs healed, Glenn started to work on walking. His first hurdle was standing, then moving. He would stand up, holding onto a kitchen chair, pushing it slowly before him. He called that ‘walking’ and practiced until he was too tired to continue. Later he got outside and walked along the fence, holding on, so he didn’t fall. His legs were twisted, and he seemed to walk ‘crooked.’ He was just glad he was walking!   His favorite scripture was Isaiah 40:31: “But those who wait on the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint.”  

Soon he was grabbing the tail of the family mule when they went for water. He’d try to stay up with the mule as he strolled along. And he’d play with his siblings however he could. When he could go outdoors, his dad assigned him chores again. It was great for Glenn to be helpful! Glenn was walking! Now he set his sights on running. After all, he wasn’t yet ten years old, and running was part of being a kid and playing with friends. Besides, it hurt less to run than walk. Glenn said that walking felt like daggers in his feet, and running felt better. All the while, Glenn kept massaging his scarred, twisted legs and continued to try to run. He could run well if his legs were stretched out by rubbing first. His legs didn’t seem so convoluted; only infrequently would they give out from under him.

Glenn’s family moved a lot as they tried to make a living as farmers. After moving to another small town, he found himself a mile from the school. Most kids that lived that far brought lunch, but Glenn ran home to eat. That was good for his legs.

One day he saw a race advertised in the downtown store window. He quietly entered the race and won. He said, “I showed up at the track meet in my work clothes and thick-soled canvas sneakers. I was a fourth grader, and most others were high school athletes. All of them wore running shorts and spiked running shoes. I must have looked like David lined up against all the giants, but I won going away!” Glenn was officially a runner!

Glenn cemented in his mind that he wanted to become a doctor like his grandfather and that he wanted to run in the Olympics. Unfortunately, he had trouble with his schoolwork and getting credit for fourth grade and missed all fifth grade in Colorado. His hopes of going to college to become a doctor were a longshot. But so had been walking, and now he was running! He kept his hopes alive, and when they moved back to Elkhart, Indiana, he got back into his studies even while working. 

Amazingly, with no toes on his left foot and scarred legs, Glenn also played on his high school football team! He enjoyed all sports, knowing that with some massage and stretching, he could now do what most other kids did—run and play! His rehabilitation amazes us today, but Glenn didn’t make a big deal about it. Most people didn’t even realize he had conquered so much to be there.

Glenn made it to college, refusing to accept a scholarship to attend. Instead, he worked his way through. Glenn didn’t want to owe anyone anything. So, he ran on the track team, gaining the coach’s attention. Glenn ran so fast that they thought he’d be able to break the 4-minute mark. His best time was 4:04, set in 1938. Remember that Roger Bannister finally broke the 4-minute mile in 1954.

Glenn ran in the 1932 Los Angeles and 1936 Berlin Olympics, as he had dreamed of as a boy. He won Silver in the 1500-meter race in Berlin. He retired from running in 1940 after the war canceled the Olympics. However, many still consider him America’s most outstanding miler. 

Eventually, he became a doctor, married, and raised a family of ten children. He and his wife created a home for wayward boys that helped thousands with dashed dreams reach them. For years he was a motivational speaker. When people asked him about his burns, he said, “My mother and father always brought us up never to complain. I was asked to do a lot of speeches through the years, and I often talked about overcoming challenges, but I always figured I needed to do my best and never quit. Complaining about something I had no control over would have diminished what I was trying to do. I just wanted to let my running speak for itself.”

Glenn shows us that we can do anything if determined to back our dreams with hard work. And rely on the Lord to help us. So, hang in there and keep working hard to beat your challenges.  

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson CXXXIII) 08/12/22

^4:20If anyone says “I love God” but keeps hating their brother or sister, they are lying; if they don’t love their brother or sister who is right in front of them, how can they love God whom they have never seen?

Bishop Arthur Temple Lyttelton (1852-1903), Suffragan Bishop of Southampton, states: We cannot love Him whom we do not see, and to comprehend the tremendous invisible influence in which we live and move and have our being, to appreciate the person who is watching over and directing us and directing all this complicated scheme of things, is more complex and harder to do. And the world comes close around us and absorbs us. If that is our difficulty, we may take verse twenty as teaching us that there is training in God’s agápē.

So, offers Lyttelton, if we accept that love of others is training for God’s agápē; for, though it is hard to grasp the invisible, we have the visible. We have people; we have a love for others, which is natural to us, and easy for us in a sense. And I think that is what the Apostle implies as training for God’s agápē – the love of our brother and sister whom we see; this familiar friend, who is with us at every turn of our life, with whom we are continually in contact. And in our natural life in the world, this familiar friend is the means to train and draw out this excellent talent in us – the love of our friend and our fellowman. So we are to train and exercise ourselves in God’s agápē. And that simple, natural human affection we feel for our friends is the same faculty as that required for God’s agápē.

We must not think of this agápē as something extraordinary, says Lyttelton, some new and unknown faculty to be given to us. No doubt all love of God is a gift: but all love is similar to the same affection. It is essentially going out of ourselves, loving another, and living for another. And whether that other be a fellowman, or God Himself, still the impulse is the same – the putting aside of all selfish motivations and living in and for God or men. That is love. So, the love of others is, as I said, training for God’s agápē because it is the same faculty that is needed for both. And in our weakness, when we cannot rise to God’s agápē, let us remember that we have our Lord’s warrant that whatsoever “we do to the least of these His brethren we do unto Him.” [1] And when we love our brethren, it is the first step to God’s agápē. We cannot pass it over; we cannot rise to God’s agápē; we cannot see unless we love “our brethren whom we have seen.” [2]

James Macknight (1721-1800) cautions that we should let no one deceive us concerning the love people owe to God. If anyone says, of course, I love God and yet hate Christians, they are liars; They are deceivers if they are a teacher; or, if they are private individuals, they are hypocrites. For those who do not love their brother or sister, whose good qualities and various distress they have seen, how can they love God, whose excellencies are not detected by physical senses but by human reasoning based on their good works?[3] This is what Luther, Calvin, John Wesley, and other Reformers found objectional in the doctrine and practices of the Roman church. If you cannot work your way into God’s agápē, you cannot work your way into God’s heaven.

John Brown of Haddington (1722-1787) claims that our unbeatable love for God is connected with a sincere love for all His children. To pretend to love God and yet to indulge in an unkind, incompatible, and hateful attitude toward our fellow Christians is to expose us as lying about our profession, the Anointed One as our Savior, and to all the declarations in the Scripture concerning true love to Him. For if we do not show love to our fellow believers in the faith and fellowship of the Gospel, we can see and in whom we discern the image of God, how can we ever love an invisible God?[4]  

Augustus Neander (1789-1850) feels that to impress on Christians the obligation of brotherly love, the Apostle John again reminds them that through God’s agápē to them, their love was first kindled; and then goes on to show that devotion to God necessarily involves love to our fellow man. John makes it clear that our love for Him comes from His loving us first. If anyone says “I love God” but keeps on hating their brother or sister, they are telling a lie, for if they don’t love their brother or sister who is right there in front of them, how can they love God whom they have never seen?[5]

Albert Barnes (1798-1870) says it is unnecessary to correctly interpret this passage to suppose that someone[6] not loving their brother or sister but still contending that they love God is intentionally deceiving anyone. The sense is that this must be a false profession. It is more reasonable to expect that we should love someone we have seen and know personally than someone we have not seen. The Apostle John is arguing about human nature as it is, and everyone feels that we are more likely to love one with whom we are familiar than a stranger. If a professed Christian, therefore, does not love one who bears the Divine image, whom they see and know, how can they claim to love the unseen God in whose image they were created?

Richard Rothe (1799-1867) says that now the Apostle John calls our attention to the self-deception into which we are apt to fall concerning our love. Because between Him and us, there is such a vast space. The coldness of our love measures the greatness of the distance. Therefore, when we regard love for God as something which must be essentially different from ordinary love, we readily agree on the simplest form of showing our love for God. We admit the rationality of the summons to love God but conclude that it does not require any special effort on our part other than just to tell Him we love Him. That way, it is not such a burden to us.

Thus, we are inclined to regard them as distant requirements rather than those near at hand because there seems to be no immediate need to fulfill them, and they are presented to us only as an idea.[7] In other words, we accept that when we see someone suffering without a home, clothing, or food, we pity them. But for heaven’s sake, don’t ask us to find shelter, clothing, or food for them. Especially if it’s our home, our clothing we must give, or food we must prepare and then feed them.[8] For some, that’s taking love too far.

Irish pastor of the Fisherwick Presbyterian Church, Belfast, Dr. James Morgan (1799-1873), points out that several text clauses are constructed to light up their meaning. “A person may say, ‘I love God.'” They may say it and think it and yet not do it. In that case, they are playing a game with themselves. On the other hand, they may say it and not think it. In such a case, they are hypocrites. In the middle of such self-deception or hypocritical profession, a person “may hate their Christian brother or sister.” The person who so speaks and acts that way is to be pronounced as “a liar.” There is a total inconsistency between what they say and do. Their conduct towards others contradicts their profession of being in God and He in them.

An argument, says Morgan, is next used to prove the inconsistency of professing love to God while others are treated with hate. This is the Apostle John’s message here in verse twenty. This is assumed to be an impossibility. And it should be. Their brother and sister are God’s children. Can anyone love a person and hate their child? Our brothers and sisters are representatives of God, and in hating them, we hate God. For John to confirm the argument, he adds, “God gave us this command: “If we love God, we must also love each other as brothers and sisters.” [9] We say we love God. Of that love, the great proof is that “we keep His commandments.” But one of His commandments is that we love one another. [10]

William E. Jelf (1811-1875) states that the form of the question in the Greek text pōs dynamai, “how can” a person love God whom they have not seen, refers to the reader’s reasons. It is absurd to suppose that they could do so. As the love of the invisible God requires more incredible mental energy than the love of the visible creature, it is contrary to reason that an individual would claim the firmer mental energy while the easier is still out of their reach. It doesn’t matter if it’s because of their will or their power, for the force depends on the choice and the will up to a certain point of control. God’s agápē is indeed the source and necessary condition of a Christian’s love for others, and yet this has its basis in the natural tendency of human-to-human love, though this being stifled by sin and requires God’s agápē to develop and perfect it.

No person can rise to God’s agápē, insists Jelf, unless they first have such agápē for their fellowman, but this does not rise to the dignity and purity of Christian grace until it is elevated and purified by the former. A person with no affection towards those they see can have no fondness for one they have not seen. There are two reasons why the absence of God’s agápē argues the lack of love for others. 1. The love of others is the foundation, the root of God’s agápē; therefore, the latter cannot exist without the former. 2. Mankind’s love flows from God’s agápē; therefore, if the former does not exist, neither does the latter.^[11]

John Stock (1817-1884) urges Christians to love one another; in this agápē stands the sign that they have passed from death unto life.[12] The more this agápē abounds, the clearer is the manifestation that we believers are not predestined to God’s harsh judgment but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus the Anointed One[13] for His sake only and not for our most imperfect love. We are of the Father of all mercies and the God of all comfort,[14] accredited as being right in God’s eyes and having eternal life.[15]

---

[1] Matthew 25:40, 45

[2] Lyttelton, Arthur Temple: The Church Pulpit Commentary, op. cit., Vol. 12, Love to Men, pp. 308-310

[3] Macknight, James: Literal Paraphrase, op. cit., p. 97

[4] Brown, John Haddington: Self-Interpreting Bible, op. cit., p. 1328

[5] Neander, William: First Epistle of John, op. cit., Chapters IV, V, p. 272

[6] Barnes, Albert: Notes on the N.T., op. cit., p. 4870

[7] Rothe, Richard: The Expository Times, op. cit., November 1894, p. 87

[8] See Matthew 25:36-40

[9] 1 John 4:21

[10] Morgan, James: An Exposition of the First Epistle of John, Second Edition, T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1866. 375

[11] Jelf, William E., First Epistle of St. John, op. cit., pp. 67-68

[12] 1 John 3:14

[13] 1 Thessalonians 5:9

[14] 2 Corinthians 1:3

[15] Stock, John: Exposition of First Epistle of John, op. cit., p. 392

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson CXXXI) 08/11/22

^4:20If anyone says “I love God” but keeps hating their brother or sister, they are lying; if they don’t love their brother or sister who is right in front of them, how can they love God whom they have never seen?

It makes little difference what a person claims about loving God. The fact is, they are lying about loving God if they do not love others. It is irresistible logic. The greater implies, the lesser. Conversely, avoidance of the lesser denotes the impossibility of the greater. One side of the coin cannot be a valid currency if the other side is false. We do not love God if we do not love Christians.

The word “liar” occurs five times in John’s epistle,[1] more than in any other book in the Bible. A “liar” is someone who attempts to deceive by conveying disinformation. Calling someone a “liar” is a harsh term intended to get attention. To claim fellowship with the Light and walk in darkness is a lie.[2] To claim belief in the Father and yet deny the Son is a lie.[3] Finally, it is also a lie if they claim to love God and do not love Christians. These three lies constitute a spiritual lie, a doctrinal lie, and a relational lie. Notice that John uses “brother” twice in this verse and ten other times in this epistle.[4] 

COMMENTARY

Cyprian (210-258 AD), bishop of Carthage, again addresses the Jews by pointing out what their Scriptures say about their falling under God’s severe wrath because they have forsaken Him to worship idols. He recalls what he told the Jews earlier about God’s children and the devil’s brood. He then quotes John: “Everyone who hates their brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life.”[5] Again Cyprian repeats what he said to the Jews before about those who say they love God but hate their brother are liars. If you can’t love the one you see, how can you love the one you can’t see?[6] This will only label them liars who think they are walking in the Light of truth but instead are stumbling around in the darkness of deceit.[7]

It brings up a pertinent question, one asked by Augustine (354-430): “Why does man not see God?” He chooses to answer right away instead of going into a long discourse. He says: “Because he has no love.”  And the proof that he has no love and cannot see God is because “He does not love his spiritual brothers and sisters.”   Since God not only lives in you but also lives in your spiritual brother and sister, not to love them is therefore not to love God. So, there is no use in wanting to see God, to love Him when we can’t even love our spiritual brother or sister who we do see.[8]

Someone asked Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) whether or not the ten commandments were placed in proper order because loving one’s neighbor came before receiving God’s agápē. Is it because our neighbor is better known to us than God? According to the Apostle John, “If we don’t love people we can see, how can we love God, whom we cannot see?”[9] Consequently, in the ten commandments, the first three belong to our love for God, while the other seven pertain to our love of neighbor. Therefore, the precepts of the decalogue are not set in proper order.

Aquinas says, “I totally disagree!” The Ten Commandments are as sufficient as the mind is ready to grasp what they say. Hence, the commandments needed to direct people to God; since to do the opposite is confusing. Thus also, in an army that is as committed to the commander as to the objective, it is first necessary for the soldier to be subject to the commander. Secondly, they must be in coordination with the other soldiers.[10] The same goes for our loyalty to God and His commandments.

John Trapp (1601-1669) tells us that if a person says, I love God, they don’t need to say it out loud as though they were bragging. The Apostle Paul clarified this when he wrote, “Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful, or proud.”[11] The Anointed One loves it when we do things privately.[12] Those who love Him are not ashamed to show it in their actions. Trapp tells that when Master Bartlet Green (1529-1556),[13] after being beaten and afflicted with rods by Bishop Edmund Bonner (1500-1569),[14] greatly rejoiced. Yet he would never mention anything about it lest he perceived it as glorifying himself too much.[15]

Trapp then quotes Plato, who stated that ““An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”[16] This pokes at those who brag about their external Christianity but have little inside. Trapp also takes a saying from the Roman poet Juvenal,[17] who wondered how he could love someone he’d never seen. So, how can he love God? That is, says Dr. John Rainolds (or Reynolds) (1549-1607),[18] they who cannot endure taking a glimpse and ray of holiness in a Christian brother or sister will much less be able to abide the Light of the Sun of righteousness, and the most ornate, spotless, and vast holiness that is in Him?[19]

John Owen (1616-1682) tells us what John says here in verse twenty; as he sees it, God has endowed our nature with a faculty and ability to concentrate on ourselves. Therefore, many understand nothing of love but the obedience of their minds and souls to things visible and sensible, capable of present natural enjoyment. For things unseen, especially those that are eternal and infinite, they supposedly worship with respect and adoration. Still, they cannot understand the purpose. And John does grant that there is more difficulty in loving things invisible than those that are always visibly present.[20] However, this divine love has more attention and prevalence in the minds of humankind than any other kind of love whatsoever.

Matthew Poole (1624-1679) states that knowing God is the love fountain, ours is but a stream: His agápē is the stimulus, the pattern, and the practical resource for our love: His is the first love, ours is out of respect and reverence for Him. But, says Poole, the great difficulty implied here is that our present dependence upon our sense of a loving and invisible God must be just as significant as those we see and converse with daily. Therefore, let us consider the comprehensiveness of these two things, God’s agápē and our fellow believers, that they are the roots of all that service we owe to God and humanity, which fulfills the whole law.[21] He helps us see the falsehood and absurdity of so-called believers with their pretending to have reached the renowned level of devotion and sanctity, who neglect the duties of others.[22]

John Howe (1630-1705)  says that the Apostle John’s purpose at present is not to use words in verse twenty, either of love to God, or our brethren, either together or one at a time: but comparatively only, according to that connection which they have with one another; and the difference of the one from the other respecting their objects, as the object of the one is somewhat visible, and of the other relatively invisible.

Nevertheless, there is one thing necessary to be introduced in this intended discourse concerning the acceptance of love here, and it is this; that the Apostle John, in this little account about love, as this epistle may do, for the most part, be the Epistle of Love. It is not designed to treat love as a philosopher, that is, to give us a precise formal notion of it, but to speak of it with a sense of freedom. We should not exclude the traditional idea of love as it is seated in the inner person but comprehend its apt expressions and characterizations. And therefore, speaking of love for God, John tells us, “Anyone obeys His word, love for God is truly made complete in them.”[23] [24]

Daniel Whitby (1638-1726) states that if we have more opportunities to share God’s agápē, and perform it with little difficulty, then how will we perform what is more difficult? Now let’s look at our Christian brothers and sisters. Since they are the object of our senses, we daily converse with them; their wants and miseries being apparent, it should naturally move us to compassion. But, on the other hand, it is less challenging to express their love to them we see than to God. Who else can be present in our minds to motivate us to be more involved, something that does not naturally occur to us and which we cannot endure that makes it more difficult to love Him than to love our fellow believers?[25]

William Burkitt (1650-1703) says that the Apostle John, in these words, prevents an objection. Some might be ready to ask, “Who is it that does not love God? Is there any living who do not love Him?” The apostle replies, “If someone says, ‘I love God,’ but hates a fellow believer, that person is a liar.” It is impossible to love God and not to do what God commands: and if we do not exercise love to our brethren, whom we daily see and converse with, how can it be imagined that we love God, whom we never saw?[26]

Leonard Howard (1699-1767) says convincingly, let no one pretend to love God and the Anointed One but will have nothing to do with their fellow Christians. Those who neglect such opportunities to express their love to others and those whose communication with those they see is based on just trying to be nice are far from discharging their obligation to God, whom they cannot see. This is the greatest pretention of love. Those who continue to do so are not only unkind but insincere.[27]    

---

[1] Ibid. 1:10; 2:4, 22; 4:20; 5:10

[2] Ibid. 1:6; 2:4

[3] Ibid. 2:22, 23

[4] Ibid. 2:9, 10, 11; 3:10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 21; 5:16

[5] Ibid. 3:15

[6] Ibid. 4:20

[7] Cyprian: Treatise XII, Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews, Bk. III ⁋3

[8] Augustine: Ten Homilies on 1 John Homily 9, 1 John 4:17

[9] 1 John 4:20

[10] Aquinas, Thomas: Summa Theologica, op. cit., Part 2, Question 100, Article 6, pp. 1126-1127

[11] 1 Corinthians 13:4

[12] See Song of Solomon 2:14

[13] Bartholomew [Bartlet] Green was a wealthy Roman Catholic who converted to Protestantism

[14] Edmund Bonner was the bishop of London who supported King Henry VIII’s antipapal measures but rejected the imposition of Protestant doctrine and worship during the reigns of King Edward VI and Queen Elizabeth I. For centuries Bonner was characterized as a monster who enjoyed burning Protestants at the stake during the reign of the Roman Catholic Mary I.

[15] See Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, published by the John C. Winston Co., (no date), Ch. XIII, p. 235

[16] One of Plato’s quotes, no part of his writings

[17] Juvenal, Satires

[18] John Rainolds was president of Corpus Christi College, and dean of Lincoln College, Oxford

[19] Trapp, John: Commentary upon all books of New Testament (1647), op. cit., p. 478

[20] 1 John 1:20

[21] Matthew 22:37-39

[22] Poole, Matthew: op. cit., loc. cit.

[23] 1 John 2:5

[24] Howe, John: op. cit., (Kindle Locations 19-27)

[25] Whitby, Daniel: op. cit., p. 468

[26] Burkitt, William: Notes on N.T., op. cit., p. 733

[27] Howard, Leonard: The Royal Bible, op. cit., loc. cit.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson CXXX) 08/10/22

^4:19We love because God first loved us.

Bruce G. Schuchard (1958) says that with the verb “love,” the Apostle John refers to that historical point when God’s love was manifested in Jesus. Christian confidence is found not in our love for God but God’s love for us. Thus, knowing that our sins are forgiven, that we were loved without deserving it, saved by His mercy, and destined for fellowship with God because He was willing to pay any price to save us. Knowing this is a perfect love that drives fear away. It is not because of what we have done that gives us such confidence before God, but because of what God has done for us.

And so, if grace is theology, then ethics is gratitude. John certainly provides us here with the idea that Christians love one another partly because they are grateful that God loves them. The first step in loving is that God made an effort to start setting the process in motion so that His love for us would go on to our loving others.[1]

Ken Johnson (1965) hears the Apostle John say that true love is only obtained by those who believe Jesus is God’s only begotten Son. Those who think this guarantees a place in heaven may speak boldly about it.[2]

Peter Pett (1966) asks, “What then does this passage tell us about God’s agápē and what our love should be in a relationship?” Pett then offers several things to answer that question:

a) Agápē is of God. He is its source and producer.[3]

b) We love because, by His gracious goodness, we are born of God and know God.[4]

c) God is agápē to those in the light.[5]

d) God’s agápē was made fully known in sending His unique Son into the world that we might live through Him.[6]

e) God revealed His agápē by sending His Son to remedy our sins, that is, to be the means of turning away from God’s disgust and hatred of immorality.[7]

f) God so loved us that this agápē should make us love one another.

g) God continually abides within us so that His agápē might be perfected in us as we grow from one degree of glory to another.[8]

h) We know that He abides within us because He has given us of His Spirit.[9]

i) Because of His agápē, we have beheld and witnessed that the Father sent the Son to be the world’s Savior. His agápē for us has brought this truth home to our hearts.[10]

j) It is God abiding within us in His agápē which results in our confessing Jesus to be the Son of God.[11]

k) Our contemplating of Him brings to our hearts His great agápē so that we know He is continuing love to all who are in the light. Thus, through His agápē, we know and believe that He abides in us and we in Him.[12]

l) His agápē being made perfect within us, coming home to us and possessing our hearts, and making us more aware of the truths about Him, and what He has done for us and of what He is, gives us boldness in the day of judgment.[13]

m) His making us perfect in love, His guaranteed purpose in the Anointed One, drives out all fear. Once we have His assurance of love within us because we have been made His through the Anointed One, we will no longer fear His judgment – how then can we not love both Him and those on whom He has placed His agápē?

David Guzik (1984) believes that the phrase, “We love Him,” is a great statement; thus, John declares the heart of every faithful follower of Jesus the Anointed One. It cannot be put more boldly than, “we love Him.” But that’s not all. He loved us first. It declares our love for Jesus and tells us when He loved us. Some people imagine that Jesus loved us because He knew we would love Him. But He loved us before that, and even before the worlds were created, when our only existence was in the mind and heart of God, Jesus loved us.

Furthermore, this verse tells us from where our love for Jesus came. It comes from Him. Our love for God is always in response to His love for us; He initiates, and we respond. We never have to draw God to us; instead, He draws us to Himself. So, we love Him because He first loved us: This tells us why we love Jesus and how we can love Him more by loving others more.[14]

^4:20 If we say we love God but hate any of our brothers or sisters in His family, we are making that up.  Because if we can’t love someone we see, how can we love God, who we have never seen?

EXPOSITION

We go back to what John said here in this epistle in 2:4: “If we say we know God but do not obey His commands, we are lying. The truth is not in us,” and then in 2:9: “Anyone who says He is walking in the light of the Anointed One but dislikes his fellow man is still in darkness.”  Put that together with what he writes in verse twelve in this chapter, “If we love each other, it proves that God is living in us.  By loving each other, God’s agápē has completed the circle, being made perfect through us,” and you can’t help but get the whole picture.

Few things make God any more joyful than when He sees His children loving one another because He knows His agápē is making it possible.  That’s what made David burst out in song on his way to the tabernacle, “Oh, how wonderful, how pleasing it is when God’s people all come together as one.  It is like the sweet-smelling oil poured over the high priest’s head, running down his beard and flowing over his robes. It is like the gentle rain from Mount Hermon falling on Mount Zion. It is there that the Lord has promised His blessing of eternal life.”[15]  Therefore, this is more than just a suggestion or John’s opinion; it is something John states emphatically.

In chapters one and two, we saw several false claims about spirituality.[16] For example, here in verse twenty is a false claim to love. This person professes to love God; however, claiming to love God and simultaneously hate Christians is entirely inconsistent. John’s problem with the false teachers was they disconnected the application of truth from the principles of God’s Word. They were great at talking but short on walking.  They claimed to love God, but they hated God’s people. 

It makes little difference what a person claims about loving God; they lie about loving God if they do not love Christians.  This is irresistible logic.  The greater implies, the lesser.  Conversely, default in the lesser denotes the impossibility of the greater.  One side of the coin cannot be genuine, and the other is counterfeit.  We do not love God if we do not love Christians.

The word “liar” occurs five times in 1 John (more than in any other book).  A “liar” is someone who attempts to deceive by conveying misinformation.  This insulting term is intended to get attention.  To claim to fellowship with God and walk in darkness is a lie.[17]  Those who claim to believe in the Father and deny the Son are lying.[18]  The claim to love God and not love Christians is also a lie.  These three lies constitute a spiritual lie, a doctrinal lie, and a relational lie.

Notice that John uses “brother” twice in this verse.  His reference is to love fellow Christians.  He uses “brother” twelve times in this epistle.  Both “brother” and “brethren” occur seventeen times. Here is a tricky question. How can we love God whom we have not seen if we do not love believers who we can see? Love for the unseen God always manifests as visible love for God’s children. One must always accompany the other. There is an inviolable relation between God’s agápē and human love. 

Some scholars say that a new section begins in verse twenty, but verses twenty-one and twenty-two are closely associated with what precedes. What is this love of which the Apostle has been speaking? Is it love for God or our fellow man? Both; love for our brethren is organically connected with love for God. To love God and hate one’s brother or sister is impossible. Seeing assists it; therefore, it is easier to love people than God. If a person fails in the more manageable, will they succeed in the more difficult?

Moreover, to hate one’s brother or sister is to hate God. Jesus made it clear,  “The one who listens to you listens to Me. The one who rejects you rejects Me. And rejecting Me is the same as rejecting God, who sent Me.”[19] Note the negative tone. John has no definite person in view but anyone who may be of such foolish character. In chapters one and two, we find several false claims about spirituality.[20]  Here in our verse is a false claim to love. This person professes to love God; however, claiming to love God and simultaneously hate Christians is inconsistent. John’s problem with the false teachers was their refusal to apply the truth of God’s principles in His Word.  They were great at talking but short on walking. They claimed to love God, but they hated God’s people.

---

[1] Schuchard, Bruce G., Concordia Commentary, op. cit., p. 491

[2] Johnson, Ken. Ancient Epistles of John and Jude, op. cit., p. 79

[3] 1 John 4:7

[4] Ibid

[5] Ibid. 4:8

[6] Ibid. 4:9

[7] Ibid. 4:12

[8] 2 Corinthians 3:18

[9] 1 John 4:13

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid. 4:15

[12] Ibid. 4:16

[13] Ibid. 4:17; Ephesians 1:4

[14] Guzik, David: Enduring Word, op. cit., loc. cit.

[15] Psalm 133

[16] 1 John 1:6, 8, 10; 2:4, 6, 9, 22; 5:10

[17] Ibid. 1:6; 2:4

[18] Ibid. 2:22-23

[19] Luke 10:16

[20] 1 John 1:6, 8, 10; 2:4, 6, 9, 22; 5:10

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson CXXVIX) 08/09/22

^4:19We love because God first loved us.

John Phillips (1927-2010) feels that the Apostle John could not say it enough; “We love because He loved us first.” He loved us with a causeless and ceaseless love. Moses reminded the children of Israel that God loved them simply because He loved them.[1] There was no other explanation. Centuries later, Jeremiah reminded the Israelites that God loved them with a timeless love.[2] When it comes to love and to “the love that drew salvation’s plan.”[3] All the initiative was and is with God. God is love! That is the driving force behind the divine plan to provide redemption for the fallen ones of Adam’s ruined race. John could not have said it any better than he did in his Gospel.[4] [5]

David E. Hiebert (1928-1995) believes that the opening line to verse nineteen could still be in line with the original if translated as: “Let us be loving because He loved us first.” It reveals the remarkable fact that God’s agápē in the Anointed One is the basis of inspiration for all the love that stirs believers’ hearts. The words “because He loved us first” explain the operation of love in Christians. The adverb “first” stresses that God took the initiative to start this agápē affair. He revealed His agápē for humanity to awaken love in them.[6]

Warren W. Wiersbe (1929-2019) notes that two new words came into John’s vocabulary here: fear and torment. And this is written to believers! So, is it possible that Christians can live with distress and terror? Unfortunately, many professed believers experience apprehension and impending danger daily. And the reason is that they are not growing in God’s agápē.

Wiersbe notes that we have adopted the Greek word for angst into our English vocabulary: phobia. Phobias of all sorts are found in psychology books; for instance, is fear of Acrophobia – “heights;” Belonephobia – “pins and needles;” Catagelophobia – “being ridiculed;” Dystychiphobia – “accidents;” and one that many parents suffer from, Ephebiphobia – “their children becoming teenagers,” etc. But there is no Greek phobia for what the Apostle John was writing about – “anxiety over being judged,” so Wiersbe calls it “Krisisphobia.” John already mentioned this solemn truth,[7] and now he deals with it again. If people are afraid, it is because of something in the past that haunts them, something in the present that upsets them, or something in the future that threatens them. Or it may be a combination of all three. A believer in Jesus the Anointed One does not have to be afraid of the past, present, or future,[8] for he has experienced God’s agápē, and this agápē is being perfected in him day by day.[9]

Stephen Sl. Smalley (1931-2018) says that the opening of this verse that “we love” is fortified because “He loved us first.” Not only can we love because of God’s prior and primary love, but also, we must love Him and others in return. God’s agápē for His children and in them may result in the exercise of love “even towards those who do not seem to invite it.”[10] Love then starts with God, goes through us to others, and returns to God. That is what the Apostle John was talking about when he said the “perfected love” removes all doubt so that we have confidence on judgment day.[11] [12]

William Loader (1944) says that verse nineteen reasserts this principle: We love because He loved us first. The one action follows the other not only as an obligation. God’s agápē in the first place also enables us to love others. Following this stream of God’s agápē along its line of fulfillment from God through to human loving, John reasserts that claims to love God by people who harbor hate towards their fellow Christians are an exercise in fraudulence. At best, such a response may be sincere and devout religion, but it has not grasped that the God to be loved is the one whose existence and energy is to love all people. It is worshipping, in effect, another god, even if it calls it the God and Father of our Lord Jesus the Anointed One. At worst, it may even justify hate and discrimination based on its wrong understanding of God.[13]

David Jackman (1947) says that theological knowledge and convictions are proven and deepened by experience. Our experience of God’s love is very much the same. Because it is grounded in His unchanging character (God is love), as we are in a daily relationship of trust and obedience with Him, we are constantly in touch with that divine love and learn to rely on it more and more. The bottom line is that the God who is Love wants His children to have confidence.[14] We can have complete faith in Jesus, God’s Son, because He shed His blood for our forgiveness. Now we can call God “Father” and know that He accepts us without question for the sake of His beloved Son.

Meanwhile, says Jackman, punishment is entirely foreign to someone who is forgiven and loved. So, as the Amplified New Testament beautifully expresses it, “The perfect love of God in the Anointed One throws fear out the door and expels every kind of terror.” When we are in union with the Anointed One, we are as He is. Does the Lord Jesus cringe in terror before the Father? Of course not. Then, we may share His boldness, confidence, and freedom of speech. He has loved us with an everlasting love that will never let us down or go. If we are always afraid of what Father may do to us, we do not love Him, and if we do not love Him, it is because we do not believe He loves us.[15]

Robert W. Yarbrough (1948) says that the gloom of judgment is now dispersed by the light of love, which “is fully perfected with us.” Love is perfected not at some remote distance but by the impact of the God who in His Son lives “up close and personal” with His people. Love “is Jesus’ image in us.” If God, the consummate manifestation of love, is with people in such an intimate and ongoing way, then that perfecting activity may be termed “full.” God’s direct and transformative presence is the active agent in the voice of the verb “perfected.”

Since fear of death, hinted at regarding “the day of judgment” in verse seventeen, is so deeply ingrained in the human psyche that the Apostle John now addresses it in greater detail in verse eighteen. The first clause, “there is no fear in love” (“perfect love drives out fear”), speaks of that fear as a phobia. These cautions against leaping to the conclusion that “fear [of God]” is something that John rejects categorically when other biblical writers regard it positively. John is more likely to have in mind the fear of the coming judgment (so most commentators). In verse seventeen, John has just ruled that out based on the love that God perfects among His people. The biblical commendation of a healthy fear of God is therefore not mitigated here in verse eighteen. Also, we should not interpret John’s statement as suggesting that fearlessness is a sure sign of confidence before God. He would hardly be making a virtue of shameless arrogance.

Now, in verse nineteen, the Apostle John concludes his affirmation of the triumph of divine love. Any lack of assurance caused by fear of judgment is thereby overcome. John restates a point he expressed slightly differently in verse ten (and that the Apostle Paul states in Romans.[16] The “we” here in verse nineteen contrasts with the “the one who fears” in verse eighteen. That person lacks the full assurance of God’s love, while “we” possess that assurance based on God’s initiative; they have discovered that “God made the first move in expressing love.” This detection has made a difference in how they regard one another: they love.[17]

Gary M. Burge (1952) advises that in verse seventeen, John makes the remarkable statement that a life inspired by God, a life shaped by this quality of Christian discipleship, exhibits a love that is made complete.[18] However, the NIV misses an important connective with the preceding verses: “This is how love is made complete among us.”[19] That is, by everything said thus far, by the principles outlined above, God’s agápē is perfected among us. Now a different emphasis is apparent. God’s agápē is perfected not through our perception of it or our experience but our expression of it.[20] God’s agápē reaches completion by the degree to which it is shared among us.

[1] Deuteronomy 7:7-8

[2] Jeremiah 31:3

[3] From the hymn “At Calvary,” by William R. Newell 1895, Stanza 4

[4] John 3:16

[5] Phillips, John: Exploring the First Epistle of John, op. cit., p. 154

[6] Hiebert, David E., Bibliotheca Sacra, op. cit., January-March 1990, p. 86

[7] 1 John 2:28

[8] Hebrews 13:8

[9] Wiersbe, Warren W., Be Real: Turning from Hypocrisy to Truth (The BE Series Commentary), op. cit., pp. 154-155

[10] Cf. Romans 5:6-8

[11] 1 John 4:17

[12] Smalley, Stephen S., Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 51, op. cit., p. 262

[13] Loader, William: Epworth Commentary, op. cit., p. 57

[14] Cf. 1 John 3:1-2

[15] Jackman, David: The Message of John’s Letters, op. cit., pp. 128-130

[16] Romans 5:8

[17] Yarbrough, Robert W., 1-3 John (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), op. cit., pp. 258-262

[18] Cf. 1 John 4:12, 18

[19] Ibid. 4:17

[20] Ibid. 4:12

[21] Burge, Gary M., The Letters of John (The NIV Application Commentary), op. cit., pp. 189-190

---

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson CXXVIII) 08/08/22

^4:19We love because God loved us first.

The enjoyment of God in us is a different matter, says Gäbelein. If it is not factual to us and we do not enjoy it, there is something that keeps it from happening. For instance, would we not recognize the honor and privilege bestowed upon us if the Queen of England or the King of Spain should pay a visit to our home? If we did not take the time and effort to show our appreciation, we would have no enjoyment of their presence. In the same way, to have the reality and enjoy the wonderful truth that God permanently resides in us and we in Him, we must practice what the King of Heaven said, “All who love Me will do what I say. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with each of them.”[1] We must dwell in love, the very nature of God, and display it towards Him and our brothers and sisters. John makes it very clear here in his Epistle, “If we love each other, God lives in us, which brings His agápē to full expression in us,”[2] and, “God is love, and all who live in love live in God, and God lives in them.”[3]

“That’s why,” states Gäbelein, “God’s agápē is made perfect in us; we can be without fear on the day when God judges the world. We will be without fear because we are like Jesus in this world. It has nothing to do with our love, nor with seeking an experience of being ‘perfect in love.’” It is His agápē that drives out fear. If we believe and know what God has made us in His infinite grace, what the Anointed One is, that as He is, so are we, how can we fear anything! The coming day of judgment we await not only without any fear but with boldness, for the day will only bring the full display of what the Anointed One is and what we are in Him and with Him – the knowledge of His perfect love.^[4]

John Neville Figgis (1866-1919), a British historian, political philosopher, and Anglican priest, offers us an illustration. You know how it is when you don’t care about a particular relative getting married and feel obligated to give them a wedding present. It would seem to you like a waste of money. So, cannot we be more open-minded in our gifts to the God we love and who loves us? We’re not talking about money, though that is an excellent reality test for many people. But every day, every hour almost, we can be giving something to Jesus. Therefore, give Him a present – some personal item you decide not to buy to support a missionary effort; some sorrow or humiliation you can turn into joy and strength for His sake; some evil thought put away to concentrate on Him; sell some complex piece of artwork we own to serve Him, or some revengeful act or nasty fight we’re about to get into because we are His friends.

God does not expect us always to win just to impress Him with successful accomplishments. We are all only called on to please Him with our best effort. Perhaps we can only say, “Lord, I failed, but I did my best; I gave it a good try. I have not succeeded this time, but I tried to do it for You.” So don’t brag about success, even if it comes to you through great sacrifice and results. But, on the other hand, if your extreme efforts result in scorn, humiliation, grief, and self-contempt because others thought you were a religious fool, you can still give Him that. What Jesus gave His Father on Calvary was it a failure or success? Some of His disciples thought He had failed. But they knew it was a success when they saw Him after the resurrection.[5]

For Albert Barnes (1872-1951), this passage is open to two explanations; either (1) that the fact that He first loved us is the ground or reason why we love Him, or (2) that, as a matter of fact, we were persuaded to love Him because of the love He manifested towards us through the fundamental foundation of our love may be the excellency of His character. If the former is what it means, and if that were the only basis for love, it would be mere selfishness,[6] and it cannot be believed that the Apostle John meant to teach it is the only reason for our love for God. It is true, indeed, that it is a proper ground of love, or that we are bound to love God in proportion to the benefits which we have received from His hand; but still, genuine love to God is something which the mere fact cannot explain that we have received favors from Him.

However, the original reason for loving God is separate from the question of whether we are to be benefited or not. There is that in the Divine nature which a Holy Being will love, apart from the benefits they are to receive, and from any thought even of their destiny. It seems to me, says Barnes, that John must have meant here that the fact that we love God is traceable to the grace He used to bring us to Himself, but without saying that this is the sole or even the main reason why we love Him. It was His agápē manifested to us by sending His Son to redeem us, which will explain the fact that we now love Him, but still, the actual ground or reason why we love Him is the infinite excellence of His character.[7] [8]

Harry A. Ironside (1875-1951) points out that we come to the practical side in verse nineteen. If you consult the Greek manuscripts, you will find that the word “Him” does not appear. It is omitted in all the older manuscripts. Correctly it reads, “We love because He loved us first.” Some may feel there is a mistake; it should read, “We love Him because He loved us first.” But take it just as the Spirit of God originally wrote, “We love because He loved us first.” If it was meant only to love God, then we would not need to love anyone else. Think it over, and you will see how precious it is just to know how to love.

Many will talk about loving Him but not His other children! It is easy to talk about loving the Anointed One and loving God yet be cold, unkind, and discourteous toward those for whom Jesus died. The test of whether we love Him is found in how we behave toward all His sons and daughters, and that is a test! You say you love Him, but you do not love Him a bit more than you love God’s child of whom you think the least. Just try to guess who that is, that argumentative, cross-grained person who always seems to upset you, and yet you know they belong to the Lord Jesus the Anointed One, that they are a member of the Anointed One’s Body. You do not love the Anointed One any more than His members, so the correct translation is, “We [know how to] love only because He loved us first.”[9]

Amos N. Wilder (1895-1993) agrees that if you can’t love your brother or sister whom you’ve seen, how can you love God whom you haven’t seen? This follows from the fact that “God is love” and that all love is “of God.” Wilder takes issue with how the KJV translated the Greek text here “How can he love God?” is probably to be rejected. The NIV & NASB reads: “cannot love God,” and Young’s Literal Translation renders it, “God – whom he has not seen.” The Greek manuscript has: “how is he able to love?” The theme here reminds us of Jesus’ words that loving others is like loving Him.[10] It cast a dark shadow over all religious groups that do not fellowship with particular Christian churches. In the Christian sense, the proof that love is real lies in the apparent action to which it leads.[11] Real love for God shows itself in obedience to His commandments. In support of the test, the great double commandment[12] is invoked in verse twenty below.[13]

Paul W. Hoon (1910-2000) says this verse cites the act of divine revelation in which Christians believe, express, and define the character of the love they practice. The priority of God’s agápē to humanity (He first loved us) means that this original universal love is the ground of human love. The word first has the idea of “from the beginning” and suggests the eternal, unconditional character of God’s agápē. While God loves us in a decisive act in His Son’s Incarnation and Atonement, He has always been loving. This existence and nature have never been anything other than love. But His agápē is not a general feeling of compassion offered to all creation; it is the personal love of a personal God on an individual basis: Yes, love is a personal thing, put into action by persons and exercised by persons. That’s why nothing but a unique Incarnation, and the self-sacrifice of the Anointed One, could either sufficiently reveal God’s agápē for humankind or call on all humanity to love God.”[14] All this is considered personal because God, who is Love, lives in us through His Spirit and brings all of this with Him.[15]

Dr. John Neville Figgis (1866-1919) was an English historian, political philosopher, Anglican priest, and monk of the Community of the Resurrection. He comments on God’s agápē and man’s response. That, says Figgis, is the meaning of our life as Christians. God’s agápē, His kindness as our Savior comes first. That allows us to become surrounded by God’s agápē. It is so near; it envelops us completely. However, for some, it takes too long to discern it. When they do, it comes with all the force of a fresh discovery. In the words of an English poem, it was “Closer is He than breathing, nearer than hands or feet.”[16]

Yet, for many, He seems so far above us, and we are so tiny that we cannot believe it. Then one day, you discover that He actually cares for you. There is nothing that individualizes like love. That is a wonderful thing, says Figgis. It makes one jump for joy to know that not only does God let us love Him, but He will let us help Him and give Him the best we have; all made better by giving not only what we have but what we are, “ourselves, our souls and bodies, a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice,”[17] and so make God rejoice. Has it ever occurred to you that you can make God, make Jesus, rejoice? We are often told that our sins, pride, and willfulness make Him miserable once more; we renew for Him Gethsemane and dig those nails deeper. We do. But also, we can make Him glad, assist Him, and make it easier for Him to do His work in our lives and others, His never-ceasing work of saving the world, and bring a fresh note of joy even among the angels in heaven.[18] [19]

[1] John 14:23

[2] 1 John 4:12

[3] Ibid. 4:16

[4] Gäbelein, Arno C., The Annotative Bible, op. cit., pp. 156-157

[5] Figgis, John Neville: The Church Pulpit Commentary, op. cit., Vol. 12, God’s Love and Man’s Response, pp. 304-306

[6] Cf. Matthew 5:46-47

[7] See John 15:16

[8] Barnes, Albert: New Testament Notes, op. cit., pp. 4869-4870

[9] Ironside, Harry A., The Epistles of John and Jude, op. cit., pp. 178-179

[10] Matthew 25:40

[11] See 1 John 3:17

[12] Matthew 22:37-39

[13] Wilder, Amos N., The Interpreter’s Bible, op. cit., 1 John, Exposition, p. 288

[14] Hoon, Paul W., The Interpreter’s Bible, op. cit., 1 John, Exegesis, p. 287

[15] Romans 5:5

[16] Alfred, Lord Tennyson: The Higher Pantheism

[17] Romans 12:1

[18] Luke 15:10

[19] Figgis, John Neville: The Church Pulpit Commentary, op. cit., Vol. 12, pp. 303-306

---