"THAT WHICH WAS FROM THE BEGINNING" (5)
“THAT WHICH WAS FROM THE BEGINNING” (5)
TR At the beginning of the readings you spoke about having in this chapter the Man. Will you say a little about it?
JT At the end of the chapter it is formally stated that He is “the true God, and eternal life”, 1 John 5: 20, and also that “we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ”. 1 John 5:20. The chapter really treats, as I understand it, not exactly of Christ as He was here in flesh, the previous chapters treat of that, but rather of Him as He is now. The previous chapters present what is from the beginning, whereas this chapter views the Lord as the Christ and as the Son of God. It opens with that statement, “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ”. 1 John 5:1. That is a testimony in addition to the testimony of the apostles; it is not the apostles’ witness here, it is the Spirit’s witness. They were qualified to witness of what was from the beginning as having been companions of the “Word”, but the Spirit also was to witness, and this chapter is connected with the Spirit’s witness, as to Christ as He is now; and therefore you have the statement that He came “not by water only, but by water and blood”. 1 John 5:6. It is the Spirit now that bears witness.
RSS The apostles should bear witness because they had been with Christ from the beginning; John 15: 27.
JT Here the Spirit is said to be witness; therefore it suggests that here we have come to what is established in Christ, not so much now as He was as Man. The first statement in the chapter is, “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God”. 1 John 5:1. The platform is changed in this chapter because He is in testimony presented as the Christ, having died and risen and [p. 390] been glorified.
BTF It has always been difficult to understand the statement, “This is he that came by water and blood”. 1 John 5:6.
JT I think the best way to put it is that He came into the sphere of testimony in that way. He has come, not now by incarnation, but by death, or, more correctly, by the means of cleansing.
JS That was a moral necessity.
ANW Whereas chapter 4 is incarnation.
JT Yes, “Jesus Christ come in flesh”. 1 John 4:2. You have more definitely the order of man in the previous chapters, what He was as witnessed in His pathway here; whereas “the Christ” is the Man who carries out the purpose of God, and all things are established in Him now.
AR Is that in resurrection?
JT It implies resurrection; He has come by death.
AR “God has made that same Jesus both Lord and Christ”. Acts 2:36.
FL The witness of the Spirit follows the exaltation of Christ; that is, the Spirit comes when Christ is glorified, and the witness that accompanies Him is that Man according to flesh has been removed, purification has been effected.
JT First, you have the statement, “it is the Spirit that beareth witness” 1 John 5:6, a remarkable statement! It shows that the platform is changed. As here in flesh, the Lord said, “I am ... the truth”. John 14:6. He is not here now, but the Spirit is here, and He also is said to be “the truth”. You have a full witness in the Spirit; the apostles could not say they were the truth, only the Spirit could be an adequate witness, so that you have what is correlative on earth to what is in Christ in heaven. Then we have the three-fold testimony, the Spirit, the water and the blood.
JS In the gospel it is “blood and water”. John 19:34. Why is the order reversed [p. 391] here?
JT If it is a presentation of the truth from God’s side, obviously the blood must come first. The blood was taken inside the veil and placed on the mercy seat; the blood was for God, so that clearly in the presentation of the truth from the divine side, as in Romans, it is the blood first. The blood is in Romans 3:25, “whom God has set forth to be a mercy seat through faith in his blood”. It is a question of God declaring His righteousness. The water is in Romans 6; it is connected with baptism. Here in John what is in the mind of the Spirit is not to justify God in regard to sin, but rather to bring about the state in the saints suited to God; therefore the prominence is given to the water.
RSS It is cleansing by death; it removes you altogether.
JT It removes you from your own mind and heart here. The water does not remove you from before God judicially; it is the blood that does that, because the life was in the blood.
FL Expiation is in connection with the blood.
JT In connection with sin the victim is slain and the blood carried within for God’s eye, and the carcass burnt. If it is a question of God vindicating Himself, it must be blood. There is nothing said about water there. If my mind, heart and affections are to be purified, the water is essential; you must have water. I think, therefore, the importance of the water being mentioned is witness; it does not detract from the witness of the blood; it has its own value.
RSS Why does it say “not by water only”? 1 John 5:6.
JT In case there might be any weakening as to the atonement on the divine side.
FL The contrast is with the flood; that was water only. There was an intolerable condition that God must remove, but it was done by water only. The time had not then come when there could be expiation, but when God removes all flesh in the cross [p. 392] of Christ it is not water only, it is the blood that gives us a standing in the resurrection world.
JT Quite; if it is water only, there would be nothing left. Therefore you have in chapter 1 the standing maintained. “The blood of Jesus Christ ... cleanseth us from all sin”. 1 John 1:7.
AR How would the water apply in John 3:5; “born of water and of the Spirit”?
JT The principle of cleansing is there, but it is a very initial stage.
JLJ In Hebrews 10:22, we have “bodies washed with pure water”. Is that the same?
JT Pretty much.
WHF We have been set aside in the spirit of our minds in the water, and in the blood we have been set aside before God.
JT I think the blood gives us a standing. It was put on the mercy seat and before the mercy seat, so that while it denotes that the sinner has been fully dealt with, it also denotes a life that is acceptable, the life of Jesus. There is full expiation, but there is also a standing before God for man.
RSS The remark was made, that “This is he that came”, 1 John 5:6 is not the Lord coming in incarnation. Why then is it “he that came”?
JT It is to prevent any thought of building upon testimony rendered in Christ after the flesh. Much is often made of the life of Jesus, where His death is ignored. The fact that He came by water and blood puts the man after the flesh out of court altogether; he has no place in connection with Christ now. There can be no structure reared except consequent on the death of Jesus. He became flesh, but there is nothing built up on that. He must be alone if it is only incarnation, but coming by water and blood is to give us a footing.
FL So in the testimony at Pentecost He is presented not only on the ground of His exaltation,
[p. 393] but also on the ground of His death. That is the testimony, and the Spirit supports that testimony.
JT Hence you might say that Peter’s address in Acts 2 brings in this Man that came by water and blood, and that the result is, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Acts 2:37. There is the means of re-establishing things in the water and the blood, and then the Spirit was there. “Repent and be baptised every one of you” (there is the principle), “and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost”. Acts 2:38. That is the situation now.
BTF Would you say the new man is built up on what we have here?
JT Yes; quite so. The new man is according to the truth “in Jesus”, Ephesians 4: 20 - 24. The apostles were to speak “all the words of this life”. Acts 5:20. But the new man is a new creation, and could only exist through the death of Christ.
FL What you have emphasised in verse 6 is of all importance. The Spirit is the truth. The One that passed through death could not be testified to independently by the apostles; they could not testify of where He was, of the acceptance of the sacrifice, and of the great High Priest going in. This must be by the Holy Spirit come down from heaven.
JT The apostles take you along from the baptism of Christ and show you all His wonderful works, words and ways; they can lead you right on to the time when He ascended. They were witnesses of all that; but if you are to learn anything of the Lord as ascended, you are dependent upon the Spirit.
ARS And when the Lord spoke of the Spirit He said, “He shall bear witness of me”. John 15:26.
JT It is pointed out in the end of John 15, that the Lord said to His disciples, “ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning” John 15:27; that is the basis of chapters 1 to 4 of this first epistle of John; but the Spirit was to bear [p. 394] witness also, which is chapter 5. The Spirit bears witness of much more of course than what is in chapter 5; what He is engaged with here is eternal life.
JS Is the assembly supposed?
JT The truth here underlies the position of the assembly. The assembly is established in life, but its special privileges are beyond this.
ARS It says, “Spirit, water and blood” 1 John 5:8; do you connect that with what goes before?
JT The Spirit is the witness. Not a cloud above, not a spot within, the latter is by the water, the blood removes the clouds above, all is clear before the throne of God. Often there is a clear apprehension of the value of the blood before God as to one’s sins, but the effect of the water as relieving the heart from the unclean state in which man is by nature is not known. Not a spot within. A perfectionist might build up on that; but it really comes about by efficacious application of the water.
CAM Where it says “the witness of men”, 1 John 5:9, does it refer to the apostles?
JT I would rather regard it as a general statement. I think it is more the general contrast. Under certain circumstances we would receive the witness of men, but the witness of God is greater, and found in these three things.
Rem Christ dies for the man that sinned, and He was presented as the righteous Man; but it is as in resurrection we have part with Him, not as the Man of perfection in the flesh.
JT We know and have part with Him as He is now.
FL You were referring to the life of Christ on earth as not being by itself sufficient; that life must necessarily connect itself with His death; water and blood are essential, and the Spirit coming and identifying Himself with the witness of water and blood would save us from regarding the death of [p. 395] Christ as only that of a martyr. Christendom is a system built up of men largely occupied with Him as the holy martyr, but in this witness of the Spirit we are preserved from both errors, from regarding the life of Christ as propitiatory, or His death as that of a martyr only.
JT I believe the witness of the water is much less understood than the witness of the blood. In actual experience it is but little known, I fear; the conscience is merely eased, but how much is there freedom in one’s mind and heart from the man that sinned?
WHF Would you say the water and blood removed everything out of the way of the eunuch? Does water connect with communion with God?
JT If you want to go in, the laver is that which meets you.
ANW John gives the blood and the water in his gospel, but not the Spirit until the Lord had ascended.
JT It is the blood first; “forthwith came there out blood and water”. John 19:34. It shows one difference between the gospel and the epistle. The gospels axe usually from the divine point of view.
ANW It is the only gospel that emphasises His death in this way.
WB Is the witness to a dead or a risen Christ?
JT It is to a Christ who died and lives. He came by these things. If it is a dead Christ, you could hardly put it in that way; the Spirit has Christ as He is now in His mind. How has He come in testimony as He is now? By water and blood! So He has the means of recovery. The witness is to establish us in the great fact that we have eternal life, and that life is in God’s Son.
RJC What are the particular facts the Spirit gives witness to? You distinguished between His testimony and the testimony rendered by the apostles.
[p. 396] Their testimony ended with the resurrection, after that you must have a divine Person come down.
JT It is the Spirit that bears witness, for the Spirit is the truth. The Spirit coming in bears witness of the whole range of truth in Christ. Only a divine Person could be the truth. Of course the apostles themselves were employed by the Spirit in presenting the testimony of Christ in heaven, but then they could also witness to what they saw and heard of Christ on earth. Peter says, the gospel was declared by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven.
FL So the High Priest, Jesus, has gone in, and the question is as to His acceptance. Will the universe of God go on; will all that has to be established stand; is it on an adequate foundation? We are dependent upon the Spirit to witness as to the truth of all this.
JT It is formally stated that the Spirit is the truth; therefore, as here, He witnesses to the whole scheme of truth. There are details and the three-fold witness is to convince us. The Spirit from heaven, being a divine Person, bears testimony to the whole truth. But God graciously takes account of us, and therefore gives three witnesses; it is God taking account, in grace, of our position here. It is as if God were to say, ‘I am so desirous you should be in every way satisfied that I provide a three-fold witness’. It is on the principle of Hebrews 6:17, “Wherein God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath”.
FL In that case there are two things, here there are three things, and they all agree to one purpose; each witness testifies to the same thing.
JT Yes; so in Romans 3:23: “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God”. God has proved that conclusively. Now, having made the case good from His side, He wants to make the case good from [p. 397] our side; what is witnessed here clears us, and sets us up in life in Christ, His Son.
WB Would you say, that the water and the blood are more a witness to what took place in the death of Christ; whereas the Spirit is witness to Christ glorified?
JT Yes; and all bear witness to one point.
WLP What is that one point?
JT That God has given to us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. Verse 10 is another point as a believer, you have the witness in yourself. Verse 10 is the permanent witness in yourself; it is an immense thing to have Him all the time, the constant testimony of the Spirit witnessing to the soul as regards God and the great purpose of God, eternal life.
BTF You do not find it in the letter of Scripture, but a living link between yourself and God.
JT Quite so; you have it in yourself. There are very few Christians that pay attention to the witness within. If anyone disbelieves God’s witness he makes Him a liar.
WLP It must be an outside witness. The witness within one is the Spirit. How could we make Him a liar if the witness is in us?
JT It is a separate statement; he that does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the witness given of God; that is objective; God has made His case good. If you were to bring witnesses and commit yourself to a statement, to disbelieve that would be to make you a liar.
FL In connection with the witness of Christ, we get the same thing in principle which applies to the Holy Spirit. In John 3:31,32, “he that cometh from above is above all, ... what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth”. That is true also of the Spirit, “he has set to his seal that God is true” John 3:33; that is the opposite of making Him a [p. 398] liar.
RSS He that believes on the Son of God has the witness in himself; does that suggest a new order of man?
JT I would say so, but of course faith discerns that He is more than a new order of Man. He is a divine Person, as an Object of faith. How earnest God is that we should believe the witness! Our brother spoke of the difficulty of defining eternal life, but God is bent on impressing us that He has given it to us, and that it is in His Son.
WB It is in the Son, the testimony is to the position of it?
JT Quite; and that it is given to us. The closing verses are written that we might know that we have it.
FL It is because we are in Him. As having it, we are not viewed apart from His Son.
JT “He that hath the Son hath life”. 1 John 5:12. Having the Son is not in the way of possession as property, you have Him in your soul in the way of testimony received.
FL It is really perhaps a little on the line of the living sap that runs in the living branch in the vine; there we are viewed as in Him.
RSS In Matthew 16:16, Peter confessed, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”, and the Lord said, “upon this rock I will build my church”. Matthew 16:18. It is an apprehension in the soul of who that One is. He had said “Whom do men say that I am?” Matthew 16:13. It was a question of the apprehension of the Son. In that way we have the Son.
JT A Unitarian could not have the Son. He might come a long way on the line of Jesus Christ as a man, and that is what they build on; but this epistle condemns that in toto. It condemns it unsparingly. If one has not the Son one has not life, nor has he the Father, as the second chapter testifies. I think it might be helpful to bear that in mind;
[p. 399] having the Son is the testimony of the Person received in the soul.
RSS John 9 is an illustration of it; the man who was cast out believed on the Son of God.
JS The question is, “Who is He?”
RSS He wanted to find a Man after another order, no doubt.
JT There was a witness there that his eyes could take account of: “Thou hast both seen him, and he it is that talketh with thee”. John 9:37. He had taken the testimony into his soul, he says, “Lord, I believe”. John 9:38. He also worshipped Him, which shows that he recognised the deity of Christ.
ANW Is “Son” a little fuller than “Son of God”?
JT “Son of God” would bring in responsibility of rejection; it is God rejected.
BTF Would you make a difference between the life in “Jesus Christ come in flesh” 1 John 4:2 and life here? The actual life would be the same, but here it is in the Son of God.
JT He has come with the means to put us in possession of the thing. It was with the Father and witnessed to by the apostles, but this chapter brings out what the Spirit brings in. We must bear in mind that the position of it is in Him. In Romans 6:23 we read, “The wages of sin is death; but the act of favour of God, eternal life in Christ Jesus, our Lord”; whereas here it is “in his Son”.
RSS Is there a distinction between “Son” and “Son of God” as used in verse 10? “He that believes on the Son of God has the witness in himself; he that does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the witness which God has witnessed concerning his Son”, 1 John 5:10.
JT I think where it is “his Son” it is the peculiar way in which God takes account of the Person; “his Son”, not “the Son”, so that God’s affections [p. 400] are bound up there; whereas I think the “Son of God” puts the rejector into a serious position; he has to say to God in regard of it.
FL Something like Psalm 2:12, “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry”. It is a serious position.
JT In the expression in Matthew 28:19, “baptising them to the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”, the Persons are in mind; whereas the “Son of God” refers to a new order of man, as we have been saying. But He was here in testimony to God. Now God testifies of Him.
FL So in Matthew 11, it is “the Son”; that divine Person here in manhood.
HG “This is the witness, that God has given to us eternal life”. 1 John 5:11.
JT It seems as if it has reference to the witness which is so much emphasised in the passage so that our souls might be assured of the great blessing of everlasting life. I think God would have us thoroughly assured as to this great blessing. It is a very remarkable passage, and the word witness is so prominent, because God is so desirous to assure us.
PHP Therefore God gives us now three witnesses.
JT That there might be no shade of doubt in our souls.
ANW So the Spirit comes first; we should not understand it at all without the Spirit.
CAM I suppose the additional witnesses emphasised the truth in that way. The light of this was known to Peter when the Lord told him the Father had revealed it to him. That was before the witnesses here.
JT Yes; and there it was “the Son of the living God”. Matthew 16:16. It was not eternal life that was in question. You could say of a man like Peter that he had the Son.
FL Figuratively such an one has walked on the water to go [p. 401] to Jesus.
RSS I confess to have difficulty in understanding this life that God has given to us. We have not eternal life in ourselves, we have it in Him. In what sense do we have it in Him?
JT You would not like to have it anywhere else; it is the fixity and permanency of the thing. When things are in Christ risen from the dead it is on the line of establishment; things are fixed there and so here, this life is in His Son. - If we had it in us we might lose it.
JT The net might break again. One thing involved is establishment of souls. The net did not break, although there were so many fishes in John 21:11. The light in that figure establishes our souls in security as to everything in Christ risen from the dead.
FL “I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish”. John 10:28. It is eternal life and security.
JS Verse 13 — “That ye may know”. 1 John 5:13.
AAT The gospel is objective and the epistles subjective. We want to know where eternal life is.
JT John says in the gospel, “these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing, ye might have life through his name”. John 20:31. In the epistle he says, “These things have I written to you that ye may know that ye have eternal life”. 1 John 5:13. That is the difference. In the gospel it was, “that ye might have life in his name”, but here it is “that ye might know that ye have eternal life who believe on the name of the Son of God”. 1 John 5:13.
Ques Is that conscious knowledge, and does it not involve enjoyment?
JT Surely it involves enjoyment if you have it as verse 13 presents it.
FL Mr. Darby’s note on verse 13 would make it read, “These things have I written to you that ye may have the consciousness that ye have eternal life who believe on the name of the Son of God”.
RSS “This is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son”. 1 John 5:11. Is that an objective statement?
JT I think so. The point here is not “words of eternal life”; they convey knowledge as to it, but verse 13 is that you might know that you are in possession of it. The “words of eternal life” would disclose what it is, irrespective of whether you have it or not, but it is being brought to light now. The question is, who has it, and who knows he has it? Now the gospel is that they might have it, and this epistle is that they might know that they have it.
JS The point is where it is and who has it.
JT That is the point. What the life is is found more in the gospel.
RJC Would it be fair to assume that numbers have eternal life that are not conscious of it? You have no difficulty in including all the people of God in eternal life?
JT All believers have it from the divine side. In John 20 we read of having life in His name. There is nothing said as to the consciousness of it. But the epistle is to give us the consciousness of having it. It does not make it any surer from the divine side, but it is surer to me practically. The person that is conscious of having it is in victory.
RSS Eternal life suggests a certain character of life. Now what is the character?
JT I think it is well to recall the Lord’s word, “Ye search the Scriptures, for ye think that in them ye have life eternal”, John 5:39. It was remarked that it is difficult to get a definition, and I think that is right, for John 17:3 is scarcely that fully. The Lord appealed to the Scriptures: “Ye search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me”. John 5:39. It seems that the Scriptures should be looked into; the testimony they present, in type or otherwise, as to Christ [p. 403] in regard to death, enables us to gather up some thoughts as to what eternal life is. It would therefore require patient search. It is quite clear it is a moral thing, and requires spiritual perception. It is a gradual unfolding in the Scriptures. I think the testimony of eternal life came out especially in Abraham’s time; it was then God began to speak of blessing. Men’s lives were becoming short, so that the necessity for life was more obvious; hence God announced to Abraham the blessing. I believe every man of faith had exercise as to why he had to die, as, for instance, Joseph. He said, “Behold, I die”. Genesis 50:24. They all recognised it as inevitable, and yet what they said in dying indicated that they had glimmerings of another life.
WLP Is that other life eternal life?
JT Yes. You gather up the elements in the Scriptures until you come to Christ, who is formally presented to us as it.
WLP But with us it is to live in an order of life different from that to which we are accustomed in nature.
JT It has been pointed out that you must have light and atmosphere in order to live, and clearly you must have food.
AAT In the Jewish mind it was a long existence of life in the flesh.
JT That is what the young man had in his mind; whereas men like Abraham and Joseph had no thought like that, because they recognised death was upon them, and yet they had the light of another life.
FL They were willing to live and die as pilgrims and strangers, because they had the light of a resurrection day.
JT Quite so; and all their exercise about burial indicated that they had that light. Christ “has abolished death and brought to light life and incorruptibility though the gospel”. 2 Timothy 1:10. This chapter shows [p. 404] how we can be partakers of it, and we have the assurance that the net will never break again.
FL Verse 11 treats of “eternal life”, but verse 12 of “life” in the abstract. Life in any connection, not alone eternal life, is in the Son; life in its broadest aspect is in the Son, hence “that eternal life” is more limited than “life”.
RSS Do you say, that the thought of the young man in saying, “What must I do?” was not right? We can understand that the doing is wrong, but was not the desire after eternal life good?
JT The desire was right, but the thought of giving up was not there.
CAM Nobody, whether in Old Testament times or at the present time, would have any knowledge of it except as beyond death.
ANW Was not the patriarchs’ light as to life dependent upon their knowledge of the true God?
JT “I am the Almighty God” Genesis 17:1; that is where it came out.
RSS Abraham knew God as the God of resurrection.
JT The Lord’s quotation, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”, Matthew 22:32 is of great help. He added, “for all live for him”. As we said before, wherever Christ is presented in the Old Testament in relation to death, there is some light as to eternal life. It is seen in Isaac received back from the dead in a figure. “I am the Almighty God”, was confirmed in Christ. Christ is the power of God.
FL Wherever death comes in God brings into view the presentation of life, and that connects itself invariably with Christ.
RSS In Isaiah 53 it is seen. Christ is viewed there in relation to death.
JT The Man is there with whom the pleasure of Jehovah prospers. When you come to Christ Himself,
He is “the true God and eternal life” 1 John 5:20; there you have it formally in a Person; that is, Christ as He is now. The apostle in 1 John 5:20, is not referring to what he had seen and heard and handled; it is more what Christ is now, and that helps as to the location of eternal life. It is not in the wilderness, it is in the Son, who has passed out of the world through death. He is risen and glorified.
RSS In the beginning we had the expression of eternal life in the Lord on earth. Will you connect the two?
JT There it was in Him only, but chapter 5 shows how we come into it. The three-fold witness precludes all thought of man in the flesh having part in it. As believers on the Son we have it, and it is in Him.
FL How we come into it is by eating His flesh and drinking His blood. That is the appropriation of Him in death.
JB Is there a similarity between this book and Joshua?
JT Yes, especially in the early chapters of Joshua; all believers are seen to have life, we have it there; it is not in the wilderness, it is very important to keep before us the location of it.
FL One might say the beginning of this epistle answers to the manna, but the end implies eating His flesh and drinking His blood.
BTF You mean in regard to the location that the environment is all heavenly, not earthly; it is connected with heavenly things enjoyed on earth?
JT I would say rather it is beyond death. The point in eternal life is the victory of the saints rather than their heavenly privilege.
WB Why is prayer introduced?
JT Because it is the time of asking, and therefore you have a good bit about prayer in this chapter. It all goes on the line of victory, that you might not [p. 406] be harassed here. But it is asking “according to his will” 1 John 5:14 here. As in eternal life, we think of God’s will, not of our own.
FL We, as an exclusive people, I mean those in the good of redemption, now have brought to us through the Spirit what will be universal in the world to come; now it is in evidence in the sphere of the Spirit.
ANW Is it in this way idols are spoken of?
JT It is helpful to connect that with the Lord’s word in John 17. In this chapter you have, “[p. 405] He is the true God and eternal life;” 1 John 5:20; in that passage you have, “this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent”. John 17:3. All that is presented in Jesus. There is the knowledge of the true God, and then on the other side the knowledge of the Man in the presence of God; that is also in Jesus; therefore you have the additional statement in the epistle, that He is “eternal life”. The saints are to be free, on the one hand, from idolatry, in the knowledge of the true God; and on the other hand, free from lawlessness and the pressure of death in the knowledge of Jesus Christ whom He sent.
Pages 407 - 486 — “Beginning of the Glad Tidings of Jesus Christ, Son of God”. Belfast, 1915 (Volume 30).