In my previous study I mentioned that John was actually separating believers from unbelievers, or the good seed from the bad (cp. Matthew 13:30, 41-43). This separation is made through John’s words, paraphrasing, “whoever transgresses or goes beyond (G3845) the doctrine of Christ (i.e. the Gospel containing Christ’s words and deeds) does not have (echo; G2192) God, but he who abides in the doctrine of Christ has (G2192) both the Father and the Son.” But, what does John mean? The Greek word echo (G2192) can be understood in a number of senses, according to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon. For example, it can simply mean ‘to hold’ or to ‘possess’ a thing or to ‘hold’ oneself to a position or teaching etc. It also carries with it the idea of a close relationship, such as the marriage bond, or the bond of family or friendship. I believe it is in this sense, the idea of a close relationship, that we should understand having God. In other words, the antichrists are not in a close relationship with God, according to John (2John 1:9).
Moreover, the Greek word ‘parabaino’ (G3845), translated “transgresses or goes beyond the doctrine of Christ” is used in only two other places in the New Covenant text. It is used by the Pharisees in Matthew 15:2, and Jesus in verse-3, then it is used by Peter in Acts 1:25, when he described what Judas had done.
It is difficult to understand exactly what the disciples of Jesus were doing in Matthew 15:1-2 that offended the Pharisees. Probably it was not that they didn’t wash at all before the meal, because that sort of thing was the custom throughout the land. Presumably, their point of contention had to do with the many washings that had to be done (Mark 7:3-4). So, by practicing normal, everyday etiquette the disciples were found to transgress the tradition of the elders. Nevertheless, Jesus told them that the practice of their traditions, transgressed the Law of God (Matthew 15:3; Mark 7:6-8). Jesus’ rebuke of the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23 is a classic example of how following the tradition of the elders actually caused the adherent to break the Law of God. In other words, their practice of the traditions of the elders went beyond the Law of God, which resulted in wickedness (cp. Matthew 7:37).
In the case of Judas (Acts 1:25), he was a young political zealot, the son of Simon the zealot (cp. John 12:4; 13:2). Judas is referred to as Iscariot (John 13:26; 14:22), and the term probably refers to his being a member of the feared sicarii, which were “a splinter group of the Jewish Zealots who, in the decades preceding Jerusalem’s destruction in 70 AD, strongly opposed the Roman occupation of Judea and attempted to expel them and their sympathizers from the area.”[1] The point is, that Judas was a political zealot, which is, no doubt, why he was stealing funds from the purse of the Twelve (John 12:1-6). Betraying Jesus was probably an attempt by him to get Jesus to accept the office of Messiah, not as Jesus was using it, but as Judas, the zealot, perceived it should be used, namely against the Romans. This political effort on Judas’ part went beyond the doctrine of Christ (2John 1:9) and resulted in wickedness (cp. Matthew 7:37).
The antichrists also went beyond the doctrine of Christ and, in fact, denied him (1John 2:18, 22), but how was this done? In the previous texts where parabaino (G3845) is found the Pharisees and Judas were deeply involved in practicing another worldview, as it were, and this practice is what denied the word of God and ended in wickedness. During the first century AD, the Jewish authorities sought many ways to snuff out the Jesus Movement, but failed. Late in the Gospel era and a few years prior to the Jews’ war with Rome, they developed a worldview without Christ, known as Judaism today, but during the first century AD, it didn’t exist until about the time Paul was imprisoned and sent to Rome. Years earlier, Jews had been looking for the coming of the Messiah, when the Lord would redeem his people. Nevertheless, the Judaism that developed in opposition to the Gospel denies the need of a Savior / Messiah. As was explained by my Jewish friend, Howie, in an earlier study, “You have a personal relationship with God as you would have with a parent. He cares about you, wants you to live successfully, and towards that end… Then, He gives you the oral and written Laws/Teachings, a prescription for life. Internalize and believe in that prescription and… And, finally, You will find resurrection and everlasting life.”[2]
This is a prescription for salvation without the need of Christ. It denies Jesus is the Messiah and even denies the need of any Messiah (2John 1:7; cp. 1John 2:18, 22; 4:3). It is a worldview that goes beyond the word of God and denies the truth of the text (cp. Deuteronomy 18:15-19). Whoever does such a thing does not nor could he ever have a close relationship with God—the Father and the Son (2John 1:9).
___________________________________________________
[1] See Sicarii in Wikipedia. See also my earlier study in the Gospel of Luke: A Traitor at the Table of the Lord.
[2] See my earlier study in First John: Antichrist – Salvation Without Christ!
Smoodock's Blog 