I am confused on 2 John 7

by hamsterbait 5 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hamsterbait

  maybe I have ranted on about this before -

  But in view of Galatians 1: 8, I want to just clarify in my mind what this passage is actually saying.

  My angle this time is in relation to Romans 11, where Paul says that the promises to the jews under messiah's reign would be fulfilled.

  When this epistle says not to greet a brother who denies Christ coming in the flesh -

  WHAT exactly is he referring to?

  That the person claims Christ was NEVER on earth ( this is the meaning touted by the Witchtower - yet it makes no sense - If Christ had never been born of a virgin in Bethlehem Christianity would never have started)

  Or does he mean that Christ will return in the Flesh to govern Israel, as denied by the WT? In which case we should be shunning all the dubbies.

  Either way it cannot apply to people who have masturbated (at least twice to porn) or to practices indulged in by husband and wife in the delirium of passion before Jehovah changed his mind (again)

  HB
• 

  flipper

  HAMSTERBAIT- I get confused on the john all the time. Always trying to figure out what to read there
• 

  sir82

  It is a repudiation of docetism - nothing more. Certainly the WT's application of that verse to the practices mentioned above is inapt, to put it mildly.

  Here is a basic intro to the idea of docetism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism
• 

  belbab

  Here are some alternative thoughts on 2 John 7.

  Some so called Christions were not acknowledging that Christ must show up in thebeliever's own flesh. The flesh here is not the flesh of Jesus that they were denying. Even Tacitus and Joshephus, historians of that time, recognized he came in the flesh.

  If someone wants to associate and fellowship with followers of Christ and at the same time pursue the lusts
  of the flesh, then one should not say a greeting to him, such as well- come, glad to see you, fair-the-well, or Good-bye (God be with you) etc.

  Romans 13:13,14 KJV

  Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness,
  not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.

  But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh,
  to [fulfil] the lusts [thereof].

  Also, Gal. 3:27

  For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

  belbab
• 

  wobble

  I think John is simply referring to the same thought he had in his earlier letter,1 John 4 v2,that some were denying that the incarnation was a fact,i.e that Jesus was fully human.

  Much has been made by some of Johns use of the participle is in the present tense,which may mean John had in mind a future incarnation at the 2nd coming.I think though it is possible John just used Greek that way without kind of embedding a doctrine,he simply establishes the Good News that God came to us fully human.

  Love

  Wobble
• 

  Narkissos

  Docetism of some kind is indeed the most widespread interpretation; but it is not unchallenged.

  In the similar statement in 1 John 4 we have the perfect tense -- "to confess Jesus Christ (as) having come in the flesh" is opposed to "not confessing Jesus" (at all?). A famous variant for the second term has luei ("destroys, dissolves, separates") instead of mè homologei ("does not confess"), which gives the passage a more (or more clearly) anti-Gnostic ring. Taken separately, the present tense of 2 John 7 ("coming in the flesh") might be understood as future, but this sense is hardly the most natural and it is strictly impossible in 1 John 4: it would then require that the closely parallel expressions in those two passages are referring to completely different topics -- which is most unlikely.

  Otoh a purely historical reference (to a past "event") would have rather called for the aorist tense. One nuance of the perfect suggests an "established fact" with permanent (hence present) consequences, and the author of 1 John uses it a lot with reference to the central "mystery" of his faith, which cannot be reduced to a (past) "historical event"; cf. 1,1ff, "what we have seen and heard... about the word of life", et passim.