1 John 2:19

The relation of these antichristian teachers to the Church of Christ. They were formerly nominal members, but never real members of it. They are now not members in any sense. Note the repetition, so characteristic of S. John, of the key-word -us", which means the Christian Church. It occurs 5 times in this one verse.

They went out from us It was their own doing, a distinct secession from our communion: in the Greek, -from us" comes first for emphasis. It is incredible that the words can mean -they proceeded from us Jews". What point would there be in that? Moreover, S. John never writes as a Jew, but always as a Christian to Christians. -Us" includes all true Christians, whether of Gentile or Jewish origin. Comp. S. Paul's warning to the Ephesianpresbyters; - From among your own selvesshall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them" (Acts 20:30); where the Greek is similar to what we have here: and -Certain men, the children of Belial", are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known" (Deuteronomy 13:13); where the Greek of LXX. is still closer to this passage.

but they were not of us They have a foreign origin. The single act of departure (aorist) is contrasted with the lasting condition of being -of us" (imperfect). -Of us" here is exactly analogous to -of the Father" and -of the world" in 1 John 2:16. It is difficult to bring out in English the full force of the antithesis which is so easily expressed in the Greek. -From out of us they went forth, but they were not from out of us"; where -from out of us" (ἐξ ἡμῶν) is of course used in two different senses, -out from our midst" and -originating with us."

they would no doubt have continued with us Better, they would have abided with us: there is nothing in the Greek to represent -no doubt," and the verb is S. John's favourite word -abide" (see on 1 John 2:24). Almost all the earlier English Versions go wrong as to -no doubt". Tyndale and Cranmer have -no dout", the Genevan has -douteles", and the Rhemish -surely". Probably these are attempts to translate the utiqueof the Vulgate, permansissent utique nobiscum: and the utique, which is as old as Tertullian (De Praescr, Haer.III.) is a mistaken endeavour to give a separate word to represent the Greek particle ἄν. Oddly enough, Wiclif, who worked from the Vulgate, has nothing to represent utique; -they hadden dwelte with us. Luther inserts -ja"; -so wären sie jabei uns geblieben"; which looks as if he also were under the influence of the utique. There is a similar instance John 8:42, where Wiclif has - sothliye schulden love Me", Cranmer, - trulyye wolde love Me", and the Rhemish, - verelyye would love Me", because the Vulgate (not Tertullian) gives diligeretis utique Mefor ἠγαπᾶτε ἂν ἐμέ. The meaning here is that secession proves a want of fundamental union from the first. As Tertullian says: Nemo Christianus, nisi qui ad finem persevcraverit. Note that S. John does not say -they would have abided amongus (ἐν ἡμῖν)," but - withus (μεθ' ἡμῶν)". This brings out more clearly the idea of fellowship: -these antichrists had no real sympathy with us".

but they went out that they might be made manifest As the italics in A.V. shew, there is no Greek to represent -they went out". -But that" or -but in order that" (α'λλ' ἵνα) is an elliptical expression very frequent in S. John's Gospel (John 1:8; John 9:3; John 13:18; John 14:31; John 15:25). We may often fill up the ellipse in some such way as -but this took place", or -this came to pass, in order that". S. John's favourite construction -in order that" (see on 1 John 1:9) again points to the Divine government of events. It was in accordance with God's will that these spurious members should be made known as such. The process which all through his Gospel the Apostle depicts as a necessary result of Christ's coming, still continues after His departure; the separation of light from darkness, of the Church from the world, of real from unreal Christians (see introductory note to John v.). S. John assures his readers that the appearance of error and unbelief in the Church need not shake their faith in it: it is all in accordance with the Divine plan. Revelation of the truth necessarily causes a separation between those who accept and those who reject it, and is designed to do so. God does not will that any should reject the truth; but He wills that those who reject should be made manifest. S. Paul states this truth the other way; that the faithfulneed to be distinguished. -For there mustbe also heresies among you, that(ἵνα) they which are approved may be made manifestamong you" (1 Corinthians 11:19).

that they were not all of us Or, that not all are of us, as in the margin of R.V. But this is doubtful; the Greek being οὐκ εἰσὶν πάντες, not οὐ πάντες εἰσιν. The Greek is somewhat ambiguous, but certainly we must have -are" and not -were". Two ideas seem to be in the Apostle's mind, and his words may be the expression partly of the one, and partly of the other: 1. that these antichrists may be made manifest as not really of us; 2. that it may be made manifest that not all professing Christians are really of us.

In this verse S. John does not teach that the Christian cannot fall away; his exhortations to his readers not to love the world, but to abide in Christ, is proof of that. He is only putting in another form the declaration of Christ, -I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of My hand" (John 10:28). Apostasy is possible, but only for those who have never really made Christ their own, never fully given themselves to Him.