First Epistle of John, Chapter 5_20
One of the texts that prove the divinity of Jesus Christ is the text of the first epistle of John, which says (this is the true God) referring to Jesus Christ:
Chapter 5:20
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, that we may know him who is true; and we are in the truth, in his Son Jesus Christ.
👈 This is the true God and eternal life 👉
Context of the text:
19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.
20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, that we may know him who is true; and we are in the truth in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.
21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.
We will divide, God willing, the refutation of the text into three points:
1/ The problem between the commentators regarding the interpretation of this text and this Greek demonstrative pronoun (Otus) is the true God. Does it refer to the Father or the Son?!
2/ From a linguistic perspective, John’s method and the context of the text, which one do the commentators favor, the Father or the Son?!
3/ Assuming that it refers to the Son, what will be the result? The pronoun This one (οὗτος, Joutos) refers to a person, but it is far from clear whether it should be understood as a reference (1) to God the Father or (2) to Jesus Christ. … ” lJohn,
which began with an example of stunning grammatical obscurity in the prologue, continues to the end to offer us examples of unclear grammar ) … “The first letter of John, which began with an example of astonishing grammatical ambiguity in the introduction, continues to the end to provide examples of unclear grammar..) It is clear from the commentary of the net bible translation that this text suffers from disagreement among interpreters and difficulty in preferring whether the demonstrative pronoun refers to the father or the son. The second point: 1/ Let us see the commentary of Bob Atlee, professor of Bible interpretation, on this part: “we are in Him who is true; in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.” The first phrase “in Him who is true” refers to God the Father (see Special Topic John 17:3), but the person referred to in the second phrase, ” the true God,” is harder to identify . In context it seems to also refer to the Father, . The grammatical ambiguity might be purposeful, as it is so often in John’s writings,. )
2/ Let us
see Alford’s critical commentary on the New Testament text in the way the demonstrative pronoun Oates is used in the text and in his writings:
( John belongs not to the nearest substantive, but to the principal one in the foregoing sentence
, 2:22 and in 2John 1:7: and that the subject of the whole here has been the Father , who is the ὁ ἀληθινός of the last verse )
3/ And in Gill’s commentaries on the Bible :
( the true God ”, as the Alexandrian version and some others, and the Vulgate Latin, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions read; that is, God the Father,
who is the true God, in opposition to
the false gods of the Heathens. 4/ In Meyer’s commentary on this text:
(It lies in the very nature of the case that οὗτος may refer to the principal subject , . 1 John 2:22; 2 John 1:7 The nature of the case is as in 1 John 2:22, and 2 John 1:7. 5/And in his comments also: ( God and Jesus Christ, are always so definitely distinguished throughout the whole Epistle that it would be strange if, at the close of it, and, moreover, just after both subjects have been similarly distinguished immediately before, Christ—without further explanation, too—should be described as ὁ ἀληθινὸς Θεός, especially as this designation is never ascribed to the Son in the writings of John ) ἀληθινὸς Θεός (he is Alithenus Theos) especially since this designation was never attributed to the Son in the writings of John) 6/ We comment on William Addy’s interpretation in this regard in that he says (the true God refers to the Father) 7/ Because many deceivers have entered the world, who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.” (2 John 1:7). In Meyer’s Commentary: The demonstrative pronoun OT refers back to the Antichrist (ho me hamologontes) (ho planus), the deceiver.
👈(He is Antichrist)👉
(Oates) refers to the deceivers who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ and not to the closest person mentioned to him.
8 / And in the first letter of the Gospel of John, Chapter Two:
21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and that no lie is of the truth.
22 Who is the liar, but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? 👈 This is the antichrist, who denies the Father and the Son
9/ We conclude with this decisive text from the tongue of John himself that the true God is the Father only:
And this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God 👈 and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. (John 17: 3)
In Thayer’s dictionary, the Greek word (monos) means alone from the Father he was alone is God
The third point: Even if we assume that Oates is correct, it refers to the son closest to the name Reference:
Does the meaning of the second chapter, verse seven, in the second epistle of John mean that Christ is the deceiver, according to the same logic (God forbid):
“For many deceivers have entered the world, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist” (2 John 1:7).