Bible Survey - 1, 2, 3 John
Randy Peterman · Dec 7, 2014
Bible Survey, No. 48
Holly Hills Bible Church
https://hollyhillsbiblechurch.org/teaching/messages/492644845934

Transcribed from the recording by SermonAudio, so expect the occasional misheard word.

1st, 2nd, and 3rd John were some of the first books of the Bible that I ever read as a young reader. I have to confess that the first part of the Bible that I ever read was Genesis at the very beginning, usually on Sunday mornings on the way to church. I recall doing this regularly in Carson City, so that would have been around 10 or older. I would read the first part of Genesis on the way to church because I thought, oh, I haven't read the Bible all week long. And I'd just open up and I'd read and I'd read the creation account and then we'd get to church and that would be about the extent of it for a while.

And then I thought maybe that was insufficient. as I can tell by the smiles on your faces, that you also think that might not be the most optimal reading plan. And so I decided I would try to read some other parts of the Bible, and so I flipped through the Bible and I found short books, because that increased the likelihood that I might actually complete something. So, 2nd and 3rd John were awesome, because they only had 14 verses each.

I want to say this. The second part is something that I think is kind of interesting. I have taught junior high and high school Sunday school classes for quite some time now. Well, not in the last decade, so time before that. During that time, I offered $20 cash to any student that would memorize 2nd or 3rd John. I said, you can tell people, I memorized the whole book of the Bible, it's only 14 verses, and I'll give you $20 cash if you can recite it to me. And I have never had anybody take me up on that offer, ever. But I'm going to tell you, also in this classroom, if you will memorize 2nd or 3rd John, or 1st John for all intents and purposes, and recite it to me, I will go to the bank and I will give you $20 cash out and you can have it. No one has yet to take me up on such a simple offer. There are too many marketing offers that have fine print.

The fine print is that you have to have memorized it. After that, I like to operate under the belief that as believers we're gathered together in integrity, so that shouldn't be a problem. It's not their main thrust, but isn't it amazing how that's what used to be a regular pattern. Memorization of the books of the Bible.

And we've lost that kind of a focus and concentration. I will also confess to you that I have never memorized 2nd or 3rd John either, but I did memorize all of Colossians chapter 3 in junior high. OK, so that being said, let's actually take a look at this in context of not my youthful teaching scenarios. First, second, and third John are three letters that neither attribute themselves to John directly, nor are they particularly dated.

So we have to kind of look at the best guess information that we have. The gospel of John, is written very much like 1st, 2nd, and 3rd John. The Greek language, the patterns that are there match it. And it is attributed by writers within a close time in the church history to John. So it's not like, oh, this doesn't say it's John. It's probably any number of 6th grade kids in Greek school. It's not that. This has been attributed.

And I have references there on your handout of some people that were important in church history within the next couple centuries of time. Actually, I'm sorry, the next century of time that would have come in and been important to have written about these things. So there is corroboration on it, but you're not going to, you know, like Paul's letters almost, you know, not almost, Paul's letters start by Paul and whomever he's writing from to Yeah, Paul an apostle, and then he says, grace and peace to you.

He has patterns that are very Pauline, and John isn't quite writing the same way. Do people ever go by the topical thing? Because any time you think of writing about love, you immediately think of John, because gospel, that's a major The writing content and the writing style is very, very consistent. And Al, your point is well made, that the content is related, what we find in the Gospel of John, what we find in 1st John, 2nd John, and 3rd John. And in fact, 2nd and 3rd John letters mirror his concerns from 1st John, which also includes important theological overlap with what is in the Gospel of John. So there's a lot of Velcro there holding them together.

That is like a copyrighted name, isn't it? Am I allowed to say that? So, after kind of covering broadly the date, being approximately 90 A.D. with estimates going plus or minus about five years from what I could find. The other thing that I think is important as we dig into First John, I've got a brief outline. I've discovered that my previous outlining form was maybe not optimal for the Sunday School class, so we'll try to hit some hot topics instead.

But in the outline here, we're going to hit a lot of topics that are going to deal with John's very Jewish background. And he writes very absolutely. He reminds me of young, argumentative Randy who writes very, who said things in very absolute statements and would fight to the death over those absolute statements.

But he's doing it because he's Jewish. I did it because I was a punk. John writes some very absolute statements, but he does it, in the Jewish culture there's a principle, and my dad taught me about this, and you can look it up on the internet, so it must be true. There's this principle called the Semitic Totality Concept, and it's this idea that because something is true, you do it. And when you read the Jewish writings, James, everybody's familiar with James, where James says some hard things, and we kind of go, wow, that is a little rough there, James. rubs me the wrong way with my Western Greek thinking style. And John does the same thing. So if it's true, you do it. So when we see some of his absolute statements about salvation, or if this, if you know God, then you do not sin. Anybody stumble over that in reading 1 John?

No, nobody's raising their hand. For the record, Internet, I had that problem. You have the problem with if you don't love your brother whom you've seen, how can you say you love God? If you haven't practiced in your world of reality, how can you jump to the spiritual and say that you're loving God?

And so John writes with this very absolute language, but then he also is going to give us some good, solid handling of the failure. He doesn't ignore the fact that believers sin, he just says it shouldn't be normal. So we'll take a look at that briefly. But I wanted to mention the term Semitic Totality Concept because it is a cultural, historical perspective that we don't carry today in the United States and it's important that when we read an author we understand their perspective.

Paul's ministry was to which people group? The Gentiles. Were the Gentiles known for their morally upright lives? The Greeks often revered within philosophy for thinking, were known for thinking about things, but they could think about it all day long, and it didn't really matter if it showed up in their lives.

One last point on the Semitic totality concept. Why does God in the law tell the Jews that they need to have it written in something that's attached to their body, and they need to always be talking about it? Any guesses? Based on the Semitic totality concept?

If the law is to be the guide in your life, it needs to be constantly in focus. If it's true, you do it. But if you don't know it, it's not true, so you won't be doing it. So constantly be talking about it over and over again. Memorize it, as we talked about memorization earlier. Memorize it, take it in, and constantly have it in front of you so that you're doing it. Because it's true, and you're constantly reminded that it's true.

In our culture, we like to ask the question that Pilot asked, what is truth, right? What is truth? We'll pontificate on the variations. Why? Yeah. Yeah, because I'm the dad. All right, any other thoughts on that? My dad looked like he was going to say something. No? Nothing? Okay. All right. Well, let's dig in. The introduction here I think is really fantastic. I distinctly remember when Roger taught 1 John with me. He really emphasized something that I thought was really cool about these first four verses.

John writes, what was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, and what we have looked at and touched with our hands concerning the word of life. And the life was manifested and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us. What we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us, and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, with His Son Jesus Christ. These things we write, so that our joy may be made complete." Now, what are the words that he repeats over and over in those first four verses?

What kind of vocabulary does he use? Okay, life, yeah. Witness. He says, I saw it, I heard it, I'm testifying to it, and he writes it in the plural, that he wasn't alone in seeing or hearing this, and touching it, and holding it, and the thing is that this is very descriptive, hands-on language. This is the kind of language you would want to hear from somebody if they were testifying to something.

There's a podcast, it's kind of like a radio show for those of you who are not familiar with the term, called Serial that's come out this year. A journalist is investigating a murder trial that came out in an unexpected way. And as she's doing this journalism, she's putting together these 45 minute long audio programs that kind of outline what she's discovered.

And what has bothered her the most is that the testimony of various people is inconsistent. The testimony of various people that are involved with this trial is something where, well, this person says this time, this person says they're doing this, and there's really big inconsistency and questionable behavior. And so their testimony isn't reliable. Like Harry Mason used to challenge, it's just hearsay. Yeah. And in the case of John... Yeah. In the case of John here, these are very real, factual, confirmed, unified. He says we, plural.

So the key thing here is that what he's testifying to, what he saw manifested, was legitimate, was historically accurate, and he's talking about the implications of that legitimate, historically accurate thing. And the testifying is about the life of Christ. Stan? he's not saying I, he's saying we.

There's a plurality of witnesses. Right, which in Jewish mindset, having at least two, but here he's saying we, probably indicates the disciples for sure, if not more. Probably the ones that saw Christ after he was resurrected. Yeah, multiple folks, well for 40 days Christ was on the earth in his resurrected form at different times, revealing himself to different people, so that it's written that there were hundreds of witnesses. Not one witness, not two, hundreds.

When he talks about the fellowship with the Father and the Son, is that Is that just a common belief that they're sharing? Or is it some kind of communication? Because it doesn't seem like God literally speaks to us. Well, He speaks to us through His Word, and His Spirit reveals Himself to us. There have been various times in in my walk that I've probably wrestled with the question of how do we know what God is trying to communicate to us if it's extra biblical. But the first place we start is if we think that the Spirit is telling us something that doesn't line up with what is already in Scripture. Not only, but it is predominantly that, but I think I can prove to you from John's writing that that's the case, and if you want we'll go to the Gospel of John.

One of my favorite verses of New Testament referencing Old Testament as John 1.1 in the Gospel of John 1.1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God, and he continues to describe that Christ is the very Word. And so when we talk about having fellowship with God and reading the Word, it's easy for us to see this as just a bound document.

But it's actually reflective of Christ. his character and his personhood in black and white and sometimes red or blue or any number of other colors that they might print the Bible in. So the text of Scripture being Revelation is a piece of that. They didn't have the New Testament written and bound and compiled and translated into English or even other languages necessarily quite that early. So this is going to be a very communal, relational faith. God's still revealing things through the Word. And they're getting these letters.

They want to have fellowship with these readers because God has revealed something to John or to the group that John was with. And they're personally extending that New Testament truth to them in fellowship, which they wouldn't have had the day before the letter arrived, necessarily, depending on what it is now.

The commonality of attitude and motivation that the scripture talks about, we have felt that if we walk in fellowship with one another, and it's used in the same sense as this fellowship with God, And that fellowship isn't necessarily that Pat and I go out and have lunch together. There's a world of fellowship, usually along the lines of, let's go talk about it over lunch. The fellowship we have is the commonality of our belief in the truth of Scripture, the dependability of Scripture, as you said, revelation of God's character attributes. And he's going to talk about this fellowship principle again in the next couple of verses.

So I think he answers your question also in context. So we can take a look at that. But the principle of fellowship is hard because existentially we don't always feel this warm, cuddly, kumbaya Jesus feeling, right? Is that part of what you're asking? What does this fellowship mean?

The relationship is stable and static. Static is a programming word, I apologize. The relationship is constant and unvarying. Salvation is secure, but that doesn't mean that I'm walking in fellowship. In my relationship with my wife, it's the same. There's times when I'm certainly married to her. I still have the ring. We haven't filed for divorce. We're really, really married. But there are times when I open my mouth and say some really wonderful gems of stupidity, and we might be out of fellowship, but we're not out of relationship. in part. Well, but it goes beyond belief.

The belief creates the relationship. The fellowship comes from unity of mind and unity of understanding and unity of behavior and life lived out. And that's why he goes into, in the rest of his letter here, talking very practically about what this life is looking like ideally. Again, with the Semitic totality concept, it's what it looks like perfectly. Quoting straight out here, if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, the word translated that way, and the blood of Jesus Christ is cleansing us from Yeah, and that was the the next verse I was going to go to so thank you al because that is I Won't even have to read it out loud because he recited it from memory word for word so but the idea is that this fellowship is in the light as But because we're walking in the light as he is in the light we have fellowship We don't have fellowship because We all belong to the same club in some kind of social construct. We have fellowship because we belong to the same Father through the work of the Son. We may be out of fellowship temporarily in a relational earthly conditional sense.

I mean, if I call you a jerk, which I'm not, for the record, if I call you a jerk, that may cause you to have maybe some questionable feelings towards me, right? You're like, wow, that Randy guy's kind of, you know, not very nice. And you and I might not have a relationship that's healthy, right? We might be out of fellowship. But that doesn't change the fact that Christ died for you and Christ died for me. It may mean that you go talk to the elders and be like, Randy, my needle a little coming along side. Because he's using his mouth in a non-Christlike way. And then I might have to come back to you and say, hey, I'm sorry, I was a jerk for saying you're a jerk. And then our fellowship is restored, hopefully, because of forgiveness. But the relationship with Christ never changed. That foundation is always there. Does that feel more solid to you, or am I beating a dead horse? I don't want to do that either.

Your life sounds more like fellowship. It's something we may do. But it's temporary. It's not a relationship-ending behavior. Stan? Well, fellowship and relationship, primarily fellowship, has to do with a person and not a concept or not a belief or not a philosophy or something like mysticism or some general idea that it's a person. It's Jesus. That's where the fellowship and relationship begins and ends. That's it. It is centered on Christ and that's why it's in the light and it's in God's provision there.

So John is going to say something here in verse 9 that is important, in verse 10, and then 1 and 2 that I think we really, really need to get out of 1 John. before we hit the rest of 1 John. They're written in this order so that we don't get to play what I will say devil's advocate and say that we have to be perfect once we're saved.

So in 9 he says if we confess our sins he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. So this confession of sin leads to what state? fellowship and righteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us. So if you say, I am not a sinner, I don't need to be saved, I don't need forgiveness of sins, then you're not a believer. The gospel, the core of the gospel, is critical to salvation.

You can't run into somebody and say, And remember, these are Jewish believers who are probably surrounded by very strong Old Testament law-believing Jews who say, oh no, I believe in God. You've heard that before, right? Even today. Oh, I believe in God. Oh, and you talk about Jesus and they're like, whoa, whoa, I'm not a born-again Christian. I'm just like a Christian Christian.

And I always have to laugh at that. It's like, what does that mean? What do you think that means? Is this a one-time salvation or is this an ongoing? Well, salvation is once and for all, and he's going to say that later on, and we're going to hit that. Is this particularly the word of salvation? Because the reason I'm asking this is I think sometimes we can read this and it makes... I mean, are we supposed to be continually confessing our sins? And is it going to be continually faithful to forgive us of our sins and cleanse us from them? and how does that compare to our position and condition?

Do you know what I mean? I think I know what you're asking. I'm going to, using the word confess this here, I'm going to confess to not having a knowledge of the language in the Greek to understand if this is referring in my dad's... ...which basically means to agree with God. Okay, but is this talking about responding to the gospel? Okay, this is just an ongoing... Yeah, okay. That's what I thought, but I just want to make sure.

Because it's easy for me to misspeak on the Greek. and tell you lies, so I don't want to do that. There's a key thing in this, and that's that we think of confess, and we think of, okay, let's spill the beans and talk about it. Go to the Catholic priest. Yeah, and we think that when the word means to agree with God about the sins. Yeah.

The analogy that I've used in the past is, you know, Nancy and I used to live in an apartment building that had a trash chute. And when it was time to take out the trash, Nancy and I just agreed that, yes, it's time to take out the trash. And I dumped it in the chute and walked away. We didn't sit there and take the trash out and meditate on it and think about it and talk about it and get all obsessed with the trash and say, is this trash?

Yes. Okay, we're done. You didn't eulogize it. Do you remember when we opened this package? Yeah. Morgan, you had your hand up. Those were really good eggs. Yeah. Morgan, did you have something? I'm just not understanding, is it, do we continually bring up, like, I mean, I understand what Lauren is saying, like, we don't like to be cruel to all of our peasants, but, like, when we said we address it with the Lord, and agree, like, oh, that was cool, and then He's faithful to...

Yeah, so here's the important thing. He is not, listen to what he doesn't say in this, because I think what you're asking, I'm going to restate this the wrong way. Okay, to exaggerate what I think you're asking, and you can tell me if I'm right. If we confess each of our sins item by item, list point by list point, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us for the sins we listed, but not the ones we didn't list. Is that what you're asking?

Okay, that's not what he's saying. He's saying that if we confess our sins plural, and we understand that we sinned, he's not looking for the itemized list, because that's what I thought for some time, and I would actually spend a good amount of time thinking over the last, you know, did I jip somebody with a bad baseball card trade as a little kid, or, you know, I don't want to miss one, because I'd hate for him to be forgiven like 99.999 clears the soap, but still with some sin. You know, that's not That's not what he's talking about. It's the principle of sin, not the itemized list of sin.

Al? I think of the example of Jesus with his disciples at the Passover, where he took the basin and the towel, and he washed the disciples' feet when he came to Peter. Peter said, not just my feet, Lord, but all of them. And Jesus said, no, I don't need to do that.

You are clean through the word which I've spoken to you. So we've been cleaned, so to speak. We only need to get our dirty feet washed to get back in the right attitude and relationship. And that word confession was used. In the early church, things like the Augsburg Confession wasn't a confession of your sin. It was a confession of who God was and who we were in His sight and what we needed to do to get back in relationship.

Yes, in agreement. I think we have to be careful. Are we called to behold the Lord or behold the sin? Yeah, definitely. And John's going to get into abiding later on and talk about this relationship aspect. You had a question. To me, it kind of means acknowledge that we do still have a connection with God. And he's going to go into that in chapter 2, 1 and 2, and we're blowing through our time and not through 1 John, so we're going to keep moving forward here. In verse 10 he says, if we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us. So no believer who has been properly presented with the gospel and understanding is going to say, I don't have sin, I don't sin now that I'm saved. So get that. Take that in for a second. John is saying that no believer who has sinned but then responded to the gospel and is saved is going to say he has no sin. Okay?

So, when we get into the rest of the book here, when you read through it and he says believers don't have sin, he's talking about a pattern. He's not saying that they will literally not have sin, because if they did, they would contradict verse 10 and be liars and not be, probably, you know, you get the point. They're saying you'd be self-contradicting. there are whole segments of Christianity, entire sanctification, sinless perfection, whole segments of Christianity that hold to doctrines contrary to that verse you just read. Yeah, they don't get it.

So, in chapter 2, verses 1 and 2, he says, my little children, I'm writing these things to you so that you may not sin. So that you may not sin, not because you won't sin, but optimistically or ideally, when you understand these principles, sin will not be a regular part of your life.

If anyone sins, because he knows it's going to happen, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous. We need an advocate with the Father. One, the sins that we commit when we confess them, they're forgiven, and he knows they're going to be there. Two, if we say we have no sin, we're liars. we're not going to be able to say that none of us is sinless. And three, we have an advocate who is with the Father, and then in verse two, he himself is the propitiation for our sins or the satisfaction to God's demand for righteousness and the penalty for sin, and not for ours only, but for those of the whole world. So Christ's effective work on the cross paid for all sin so that all of the earth and the sin that was a consequence of that, and God's dissatisfaction from that sin, is paid for in Christ. But our sins are paid for, and when we confess them, conditionally, we can be reminded that we are made righteous in Him. Is anybody still ready to lose their salvation? I hope not, but if so, let's hammer this out, because I don't want to move on. I'd rather not get to second and third letters, if there's questions on that, because that's way more important. Pat.

It seems pretty amazing, as this verse says, He didn't die for our sins alone. Correct. He sends the whole world, so sin is not an issue anymore. Sin has already been, my understanding is right, completely dealt with in everybody's life. Well, it is paid for. All we have to do is accept the gift. It doesn't give you life unless you believe in Christ. That's the living part. The sin issue looks like it's settled. Nothing gets in the way of anyone responding to the gospel and having that fellowship that we were just discussing in depth with God. All they do is believe. And it's because the sin was dealt with. but they have to believe to be part of the fellowship, to be part of the relationship.

If anyone sins in this fourth class condition? I have no idea. No, a fourth class would be something quite different. This would be if anyone sins and it's assumed that they will. That's the first class condition. Yeah. Alright. And then Morgan was next and then my mom in order. Yeah.

So the issue of sin as a mover or shaker that would separate us from God is dealt with. The principle of sin is dealt with. That's not to say that we won't deal with sinning in the flesh. The presence of sin, yeah, is a good word, Al. We're free from the power of sin, but not the presence of sin. Alright, hold on a second, my mom had something to say.

Just, again, following along the same line of thought, that for every person on the earth, Jesus paid an adequate price for their sin, to cover their sin. However, until you believe you are still dead in your trespasses and sins, and therefore you must believe, then your sin is washed away from you. Otherwise you're going to stay. If you don't believe, you will pay the price for all of eternity.

I was going to say, what helped me was the principle of sin nature, which is what Paul talks about in the book of Romans, the first numerous chapters up to 8. And I think John is saying the same thing here. We have this sin nature, and from that sin nature is going to emanate sin. And we can't stop that. And so you can either look at it and say, I sinned, I lost my salvation, so much for that. Or you can say, Jesus has forgiven past, present, and future sins, even though my sin nature is going to cause me to sin now and into the future.

And as I become stronger in my faith and standing firm, I'm going to be able to have stronger faith and be able to live what he's talking about here. It's not an automatic. It's something that I'm going to grow into. Like Vern taught in Hebrews, we're going to grow into this. Yeah. Sanctification is progressive and we're going to hopefully grow over time. It's that darn same nature. Yeah. Well, and so John addresses that with the principle of abiding. But we're going to jump past an important thing.

So in chapter 4, there's these couple verses that turn out to make for a great kid's song. Actually, but it's great for adults too. But 1 John 4, 7 and 8, Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love. So, it turns into a great song.

King James works a little bit cleaner for that. So, there's this principle of love, and John is very concerned that not only is the issue of sin addressed in our relationship with God, but also the issue of this life of Christ lived out amongst ourselves, that we would love one another. And 2 John and 3 John are actually very briefly concerned with the implementation of that in the body. And so we'll hopefully take a look at that for just a moment.

In the latter half of 4 there we see this principle of abiding. That's not a word. I made it up. It must be real. But we see that there's this principle of abiding starting in verse 12. No one has seen God at any time If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us. By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit." And John chapter 15 is the abiding chapter. When I was discipled at about 20, 19 and 20 years old, We went over this principle of abiding and it really revolutionized my understanding of my walk with the Lord.

Because it talked about this dwelling relationship rather than this concept of I have to do good enough to get God off my back so he's not mad at me. And it was like, oh man, I'd been spending a lot of energy legalistically trying to sin, then confess the sin.

Well, trying to sin. I'm going to own up to that. I was trying to sin. I wasn't like, oh, surprise. I was trying to sin. And then confessing that sin and then feeling really sorry. If God knows how sorry I am, then maybe he'll be OK. And I had this sin cycle and this pattern of really fake repentance.

Yeah, like the book of Judges, yeah. But instead, it was liberating to discover that there's this principle of abiding. That God wants to dwell in me, and I dwell in Him. That's really different. And Christ lives in me, and His life flows out through me, and I'm like a branch. And he'll bear fruit through me, like Galatians talks about. That was very liberating in contrast to legalism.

Now, that was liberating for me, that's liberating for any of us that are believers, but imagine growing up in a Jewish culture and the idea of the eternal God dwelling inside of you gets presented to you for the first time when you grew up with God Dwells in the Temple. That kind of changed your life a little bit, huh? I would hope. Be a bit exciting?

So John talks about this principle of abiding and he takes that and he wants them to understand that more deeply. Now, we're running out of time, so I feel like I have to cut something out or we'll never get all of this done and that's cheating, right? We have to hit each book.

So when we look at John's second letter here, he says, The elder to the chosen lady and her children, whom I love in truth, and not only I, but also all who know the truth, for the sake of the truth which abides in us, there's that word again, and will be with us forever, grace and mercy and peace will be with us, from God the Father, from Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.

I was very glad to find some of your children walking in truth, just as we have received commandment to do from the Father. Now I ask you, lady, not as though I were writing to you from a new commandment, but one which we have had from the beginning, that we love one another." They already had the truth, right? They already were, you know, it's true so do it kind of a mindset, but they were really focused on the truth, but they didn't grasp this abiding love and this abiding fellowship that happens within the body.

And so he reminds them, you need this love part, you need not just the truth part, not just the righteousness part, but this loving part, this abiding fellowship that we have together in Christ. So that's a very key and important element of 2 John, that there's this truth and love and it works out. Now, we said that these letters were similar to the Gospel of John's writing. Can anybody remember any part of the Gospel of John's writing where he talks about truth and love? There was a fat woman at a well? No? The woman of some area? No? No one? Okay.

So, John chapter 4. I stole that joke, that's not original to me. The key there though is that he says they're going to worship him in spirit and in truth. There's going to be this love and there's going to be these elements of relationship that are deeper than that. The third letter of John and this this one is kind of interesting because it reveals something that is kind of an owie for The church body that is receiving this He in verse 9 so so third John verse 9 I wrote something to the church, but I Diotrephes, who loves to be first among them, does not accept what we say. For this reason, if I come, I will call attention to his deeds which he does unjustly, accusing us with wicked words, and not satisfied with this, he himself does not receive the brethren either, and he forbids those who desire to do so, and puts them out of the church. This guy is an early recorded cult leader. It's the church of diatrophies.

I hope I'm saying that right. But even if I'm saying it wrong, he was a jerk. That's the second time I've ever heard of somebody as being a jerk in the Sunday school class. I'm doing good. But John, earlier, coming back up there, In verses 5 and 6, Beloved, you are acting faithfully in whatever you accomplish for the brethren, especially when they are strangers.

So, they're loving strangers. In the second letter, he says, hey, also have this love aspect. In the third letter, and this might be to a different group of people, we're not entirely sure, but in the third letter, we get this principle that these people understand love. which is really cool. So some people were getting it. Not just truth, but also love.

But then the issue of truth came up because they had a guy who didn't like the truth. So the correction is coming. But then the thing that I think in verse 13 makes me just slightly sad. This isn't a depressing book per se, but 13 makes me sad. I have many things to write to you, but I'm not willing to write them to you with pen and ink. But I hope to see you shortly, and we will speak face to face.

Man, I would have liked to have known what he was going to write. That would have been awesome, to have maybe more than 14 verses in 3 John. What is it that the Spirit would have inspired him to say? Well, the Spirit didn't. So, I won't try to imagine something in there, but as a teacher, I always think, oh, there could have been more. What would it have been?

I don't know. So, it's very exciting, but we don't know what it is. Alright, so I've blitzed through these things and I wish that I could have said so much more. Take time if you have during the week. I know it's busy with the holidays and everything else. If you can, read through 1st, 2nd, and 3rd John.

There's really cool stuff. When you see those absolute statements, remember that he's writing from a Jewish perspective. But he's got some really cool things because he wants to see your lives changed. And I think that's pretty awesome. Any other thoughts or questions?

The witness on the earth is the spirit and the blood and the water. You're in 1 John. Yeah. In 1 John 5, 7 and 8. For there are three that testify. Well, let's go back one further. Yeah, but you can't... So in expositing you have to, or in study, when there's a for, or a therefore, or a sense, you kind of need to make sure you have the greater context of that. John, unfortunately, is in a series of fours.

So if we step back to three, we see, for this is the love of God, that we keep His commandment, and His commandments are not burdensome. And so when we talk about His commandments, it's not the law. It's that we love one another in biblical principles from the New Testament. For this is the love of God that we keep His commandments.

Verse 4, for whatever is born of God overcomes the world, and this is the victory that has overcome the world, our faith. What's our faith in? Our faith is going to be in Christ here, who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God. Verse 6, this is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ. Now how did Christ come from water and blood? Okay, is it the piercing? I don't know, is it? Okay, all right. Not with water only, but with water and with blood. The baptism. Okay, that's how I understand this. Am I correct in understanding it that way, Dad, or is it... I think it's one of those things where we probably, you know...

Better to come back? Let's deal with it next week. Let's deal with it next week, okay. Yeah, because I... All right. So so, Pat, are we am I accurate in saying next week we'll start the lesson? OK, we'll answer this next week because wow, that's the that's the first time we've had a cliffhanger ending in this class. He's been doing it during the main service for the last couple of months.

So but yeah, when we start the next lesson, we'll try to address this in a thorough, careful way. I have a question on that one. I was hoping no one would ask that one because I had some questions for my dad too. I was going to give you my best answer and then keep asking my dad if I'm right. We'll come back to that next week.

Let's close in prayer. Heavenly Father, we come before you. We thank you for the truth of your word. We thank you that we can study it. We thank you for the life of Christ that comes and that we can abide in you. and that you abide in us. We pray for a fruitful week as we do that, and we pray for your return. We pray for the return of Christ. We just thank you in Jesus' name. Amen.