HOW TO TREAT DISFELLOWSHIPPED PERSONS? (I) WHO WERE THOSE THAT CHRISTIANS SHOULD NOT WELCOME INTO THEIR HOMES?

INTRODUCTION

For 72 years from the year 1952, Jehovah’s Witnesses were forbidden to say a greeting, even a short one like “hi,” to a disfellowshipped person. However, The Watchtower of August 2024 changed this by writing that it now was allowed to say “a simple greeting” to disfellowshipped persons. There was one exception, though it was still forbidden to say a greeting to those who were termed as “apostates.” On page 29 we read:

In stating that Christians should not even “say a greeting,” was John adding to the apostle Paul’s direction found at 1 Corinthians 5:11 “to stop keeping company” with people who had been removed from the congregation? Were John and Paul discussing the same kind of sin? Evidently not.

Consider the differences between the circumstances addressed by each apostle. Paul wrote with regard to a man who was committing sexual immorality. About 43 years later, John wrote with regard to apostates and others who actively promote false teachings and wrong conduct.For example, some were teaching that Jesus was not the Christ.—1 John 2:22; 4:2, 3…

Thus, John warned fellow believers to avoid being fooled by these deceivers and false teachers. He directed Christians never to accept such ones into their homes or even to greet them. Greeting someone who promotes falsehood would give him an opening for presenting his twisted, corrupt teachings. Something similar could happen if a person commented on apostate computer blogs or social media. Anyone who would welcome an apostate with a greeting would become “a sharer in his wicked works.”

The one who wrote this article evidently had not studied the letters of John thoroughly. He says that those whom Christians should not greet were 1) Christians who had become apostates advocating false teachings, and 2) apostates who denied that Jesus was the Christ. Both claims are wrong. In what follows I will show that:

THE ANTICHRISTS, WHOM THE CHRISTIANS SHOULD NOT WELCOME INTO THEIR HOMES WERE NOT APOSTATES BUT MEMBERS OF ANOTHER RELIGION, PROBABLY THE GNOSTICS

THE ANTICHRISTS’ DENIAL OF JESUS CHRIST

In order to understand the important expressions in the letters of John, we need to understand the setting and the background of these letters.

THE BACKGROUND OF JOHN’S WORDS ABOUT JESUS CHRIST

In his writings, John speaks much about “the truth” (alētheia). In his gospel, the word is used 24 times, in 1 John, it is used nine times, in 2 John six times, and in 3 John five times. In order to stress the truth, John contrasts the truth with the opposite, namely, the lie (pseudos). The most important issues in John’s letters can be seen in 1 John 2:22. 23 (above) and 4:2 (below):

²² Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one that denies the Father and the Son. ²³ Everyone that denies the Son does not have the Father either. He that confesses the Son has the Father also…

² Every inspired expression that confesses Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh originates with God.

John uses simple words. But the meaning of these words is impossible to understand without knowing their background.

1. The antichrist represents the lie. But who are the antichrists?
2. One important truth (alētheia) is Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh. The antichrist denies this (2 John 7). But actually, what does this mean?
3. The expression denies that Jesus is the Christ is based on the same lie as denying Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh. What is this lie?
4. What does it mean that Everyone that denies the Son does not have the Father either?

The answers to all these questions are connected with the false teachings of the Gnostic with the name Cerinthus, who lived at the end of the first century CE when the apostle John also lived. Regarding Cerinthus, I quote from The Encyclopedia Britannica (above) and from Matt Slick (below):

Cerinthus (flourished c. AD 100) was a Christian heretic whose errors, according to the theologian Irenaeus, led the apostle John to write his New Testament Gospel.

Cerinthus was probably born a Jew in Egypt. Little is known of his life save that he was a teacher and founded a short-lived sect of Jewish Christians with Gnostic tendencies. He apparently taught that the world was created by angels, from one of whom the Jews received their imperfect Law. The only New Testament writing that Cerinthus accepted was the Gospel of Matthew. Cerinthus taught that Jesus, the offspring of Joseph and Mary, received Christ at his baptism as a divine power revealing the unknown Father. This Christ left Jesus before the Passion and the Resurrection. Cerinthus admitted circumcision and the sabbath and held a form of millenarianism.

Cerinthianism is a heresy taught by Cerinthus (died approximately A.D. 100) that deals with the person of Jesus.  It stated that “the Christ” came upon Jesus at his baptism and left him just prior to his crucifixion.  Essentially, Cerinthus taught that the Christ and Jesus are separate beings.  He taught that Jesus was born naturally without the Virgin birth.  Cerinthus was educated in the wisdom of Egyptian issues from Ephesus.  So, he would’ve had a mixture of Christian theology and paganism.[1]

 If one reason why John wrote his gospel was to defend Jesus and his nature from the viewpoints of Cerinthus and the Gnostics, that would also be the reason why he wrote his letters, because these letters, even more than the gospel speak against the views of Cerinthus.

THE IDENTITY OF “CHRIST” (KHRISTOS)

We now have the background for understanding the setting and expressions of John’s letters. The truth was that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. But the lie was that Christ was a spirit person different from Jesus. At his baptism, the spirit “Christ” came down from heaven and resided in Jesus. Before his death, “Christ” left Jesus and went back to heaven.

The important issue in the letters of John is the true nature of the man Jesus.

We read in 1 John 2:22:

Who is the liar (pseudos) if it is not the one that denies (arneomai) that Jesus is the Christ?

Without understanding the background, the reader most likely will draw the conclusion that the liar denies that Jesus is the Messiah (Christ) who was promised in the Hebrew Scriptures. However, what John had in mind, as the context shows, was the lie that “Christ” was not a designation of Jesus but that “Christ” was a spirit apart from Jesus.

The words in 2 John 7 confirm this:

persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.

The verb form “coming” is present participle in Greek. Greek present is not a tense but it can refer to the past, present, and future. In this case, the reference is to an event that happened many years before John wrote his letters. So, its reference must be past, and the verb refers to the sojourn of Jesus on the earth as a human being (“in the flesh”). (See 1. John 4:2 where “coming is perfect participle)

When John uses Jesus and Christ together, he takes as a point of departure that Jesus is the Christ, the promised Messiah. This is not what the antichrist denies. But the antichrist denies that the person with the name “Jesus Christ” had come in the flesh. This denial is based on the view that “Christ” is a spirit that has not come in the flesh. We note that the deceiver is not called “the antijesus” but he is called “the antichrist” because the denial is related to “Christ” and not to the man Jesus.

The words in 1 John 2:23 (above) and 4:14, 15 (below) also are related to the false viewpoints of the Gnostics:

²³ Everyone that denies the Son does not have the Father either. He that confesses the Son has the Father also.

¹⁴ In addition, we ourselves have beheld and are bearing witness that the Father has sent forth his Son as Savior of the world. ¹⁵ Whoever makes the confession that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, God remains in union with such one and he in union with God.

Cerinthus believed that Jesus was a man among other men, but a man with a special wisdom. He did not believe that Jesus was the Son of God and the savior of the world. The point in the verses is that if we say that a person is a son, we imply that there also is a father. And conversely, if we deny that a person is son, we also deny that another person is his father. The words “he that confesses the Son, has the Father also.” means that when we believe that Jesus is the Son of God, this means that we also believe in the Father of Jesus. If we do not believe that Jesus is the Son, we neither believe that God is Father. The Gnostics did not believe that Jesus was the Son of God.

[1] . https://gracechurchnc.com/2020/03/22/cerinthus-false-teachings-on-jesus/.

WHO WERE THE ANTICHRISTS?

In the last section, it was shown that the most important doctrine of the antichrists was that «Christ» was a spirit who descended into Jesus and later left him, and that Jesus was a normal human with great wisdom but not the Son of God. The consequence of denying that Jesus is the Son of God is the rejection of God as Father. These viewpoints were expressed by Cerinthus and the Gnostics. However, the members of the Governing Body claim that the deceivers were apostate Christians who had been disfellowshipped. I will now discuss some verses that, at first glance, could seem to support the view of the Governing Body, namely 1 John 2:18, 19:

¹⁸ Young children, it is the last hour, and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now there have come to be many antichrists, from which fact we know that it is the last hour. ¹⁹They went out from us (eks hēmōn), but they were not of our sort (eks hēmōn); for if they had been of our sort (eks hēmōn);  they would have remained with us (meth hēmōn). But they went out that it might be shown that not all are of our sort (eks hēmōn). (1 John 2:18,19 NWT13)

Would not the words “they went out from us” show that the antichrists had previously been a part of the Christian congregations? No. The Greek constructions do not suggest that. The word ekserkhomai (“come out of; go away”) is active, so the persons were not expelled from the congregation, which would acquire a passive construction.

 Let us then look at the expression eks hēmōn. This is a genitive construction, and it can mean, 1) “from us,” 2) “from ours (= from something belonging to us),” and 3) “from our sort.” The expression eks hēmōn occurs five times in verse 19. Because this expression logically has the same meaning all the five times it occurs, we can find which of the three meanings John had in mind by comparing these five instances.

¹⁹ They went out from us (eks hēmōn), but they were not from us (eks hēmōn); for if they had been from us (eks hēmōn); they would have remained with with us (meth hēmōn). But they went out so that it might be shown that not all are of from us (eks hēmōn).

¹⁹ They went out from our sort (eks hēmōn), but they were not from our sort (eks hēmōn); for if they had been from our sort (eks hēmōn);  they would have remained with us (meth hēmōn). But they went out so that it might be shown that not all are from our sort (eks hēmōn).

¹⁹ They went out from what belongs to us (eks hēmōn), but they were not of what belongs to us (eks hēmōn); for if they had been of what belongs to us (eks hēmōn);  they would have remained with what belongs to us (meth hēmōn). But they went out so that it might be shown that not all are of what belongs to us (eks hēmōn).

The example with “from us” does not fit, and the same is true with the example of “from our sort.” It does not give good meaning by saying “they were not from us” or “from our sort” because “from” is a preposition indicating direction that does not show that someone belongs to a group. As a matter of fact, both of these renderings would result in a meaning of the text that is nonsensical and contradictory.

For example, the first clause of 1 John 2:19 would read, “They went out from us.” But the next clause would appear to contradict this statement by declaring, “but they were not from us.” The third clause seems to up the ante by disavowing that such ones were ever “with us” to begin with; “for if they had been from us they would have remained with us.” And of course, this would contradict the first that “they went out from us.” The same is true for the rendering “from our sort.” Clearly, the occurrence of the words eks hēmōn five times show that 1 John 2:19 cannot be referring to Christians leaving the congregation voluntarily or by disfellowshipping.

On the other hand, the example “what belongs to us” fits well in all instances:

¹⁹ They went out from what belongs to us (eks hēmōn), but they were not of what belongs to us (eks hēmōn); for if they had been of what belongs to us (eks hēmōn); they would have remained with what belongs to us (meth hēmōn). But they went out so that it might be shown that not all are of what belongs to us (eks hēmōn).

 The expression “what belongs to us” may refer to the extant holy scriptures in the days of John, the books of the Hebrew Scriptures and the different parts of the Christian Greek Scriptures that had been written. If the rendering “what belongs to us” is correct, the mentioned persons went out of, or went away from the true religion that is found in the original documents of the Bible, and they did not go out of Christian congregations.

However, in view of the historical facts, the rendering of most translations, “they went out from us,” which is linguistically wrong, would historically fit well because, as the four quotations below show, the Gnostics were “Christian sects.” They had several beliefs that were taken from Christian scriptures, and these were mixed with many other religious and philosophical ideas. From one point of view, the Gnostics could be termed “Christian sects” as some scholars do, because they had adopted so many traits of true Christianity. Therefore, it could be said that “they went out from us” or “they went out from what belongs to us (Hebrew and Christian scriptures and doctrines).”

Some descriptions of the Gnostics follow:

Gnosticism (from Ancient Greek: γνωστικός, romanized: gnōstikós, Koine Greek: [ɣnostiˈkos], ‘having knowledge’) is a collection of religious ideas and systems that coalesced in the late 1st century AD among early Christian sects. These diverse groups emphasized personal spiritual knowledge (gnosis) above the proto-orthodox teachings, traditions, and authority of religious institutions.[1]

While scholarly views on the origins of Gnosticism present what can be a bewildering array of competing theories, they can broadly be divided into two schools of thought. The first holds that Gnosticism originated outside of Christianity and later came to wrap itself in a Christian form. The second holds that Gnosticism originated from within Christianity, and that the Gnostics had always seen themselves as Christians. Both schools of thought have had numerous great minds enter the fray on their side, and arguments from both sides must be taken seriously. However, the weight of the evidence we now possess falls on the side of those who see in Gnosticism a thoroughly Christian movement.[2]

A few things must be made clear at the outset of any discussion of classical Gnosticism or Gnostic Christianity. First, it is not a single Christian sect; rather, it’s a label that’s been applied, in modern times, to a range of Christian sects. Thus, not everything said about “Gnosticism” will apply uniformly to all of these sects. On top of that, some sects that don’t precisely fit the label happen to have some aspects in common with other sects that were more clearly Gnostic in nature. The concept itself is fungible.[3]

Gnosticism is one of the earliest and most significant heresies that arose during the formative years of Christianity. It is a complex system of beliefs that incorporates dualistic, mystical, and esoteric elements, emphasizing secret knowledge (from the Greek word gnosis meaning “knowledge”) as the means of salvation.[4]

The Governing Body has agreed with the view that the antichrists were the Gnostics. In an online article discussing the subject “What is the coming of Christ” some misconceptions about this coming are discussed, and we read:

Misconception; The words of 2 John 7 show that Jesus will come in the flesh.

Fact: The Bible verse states: “Many deceivers have gone out into the world, those not acknowledging Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh.”

In the apostle John’s day, some denied that Jesus had come to this earth as a man. They were called Gnostics. Second John 7 was written to refute their false claim.[5]

The decievers and antichrists in the letters of John were not disfellowshipped Christians. But they were the Gnostics who had used a great part of Christianity as a basis for their faith, and they had mixed it with philosophical and foreign religious ideas.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

[2] https://gnosticismexplained.org/the-origins-of-gnosticism/

[3] https://earlychristianhistory.net/gnostic.html

[4] https://www.monergism.com/gnosticism

[5]. https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/jesus-coming/.

ANALYZING 2 JOHN 7-11 IN THE LIGHT OF ITS CONTEXT

On Friday, March 15, 2024, Mark Sanderson gave a talk on JW Broadcasting telling about some new treatments of serious wrongdoers. (2024 Governing Body Update # 2). A letter entitled “Adjustments to handling serious wrongdoing in the congregation” was sent to the elders. Sanderson mentioned that the members of the Governing Body had come up with a new interpretation of 2 John 9-11, namely, that Johns’s words do not refer to all disfellowshipped persons but only to disfellowshipped apostates. I will now analyze this new viewpoint in the light of the context of John’s letters. And my first task is to make an outline of these letters from the point of view of true and false doctrines.

The letter from the Governing Body to the bodies of elders said regarding 2 John 9-11:

3 (3) We also clarified our understanding of 2 John 9-11, which we learned applies specifically to apostates and others who actively promote wrong conduct, not to all those who have been removed from the congregation.

23 Second John 9-11 warns us of a contaminating influence, saying: “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him.” Who are Christians instructed to avoid? The context indicates that this refers to “everyone who pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching,” and therefore it applies to apostates and those who actively promote wrong conduct. Such ones should not be greeted by individual Christians, visited by the elders, or invited to attend Christian meetings.

This new interpretation is completely flawed because it contradicts the context instead of being supported by the context. I will now consider the contexts of the letters of John, and then make a detailed analysis of the context of 2 John 6-11. Below, I quote these words:

6 And this is what love means, that we go on walking according to his commandments. This is the commandment, just as YOU people have heard from [the] beginning, that YOU should go on walking in it. 7 For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.

8 Look out for yourselves, that YOU do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that YOU may obtain a full reward. 9 Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching (didakhē) of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching (didakhē) is the one that has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to YOU and does not bring this teaching (didakhē), never receive him into YOUR homes or say a greeting to him. 11 For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.

The issue is who these persons were who Christians should not receive into their homes and greet. The present view of the members of the Governing Body is that these people are disfellowshipped apostates but that the words do not refer to other disfellowshipped persons. This is a completely wrong viewpoint because John does not speak about disfellowshipped persons, be they apostates or not, in his letters.

THE CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF 2 JOHN 7-11

The understanding of these verses is quite simple if the grammar and the context are considered, and the reader does not interpret the verses in the light of preconceived ideas:

• Which people should Christians not receive into their homes and greet? The clear answer is: “Anyone (who) does not bring this teaching (didakhē)” (verse 10)?
• Because of the article before “teaching,” thus making “teaching” definite, this teaching” must refer back to something that already is mentioned. What is its antecedent?
• The words “this teaching” (didakhē) are also mentioned in verse 9, and both expressions of “this teaching” refer back to the words at the beginning of verse 9, namely “the teaching (didakhē) of the Christ.”
• What is “the teaching (didakhē) of the Christ.”? The answer is found in verse 7, “confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh.”
• Who were the “persons not confessing Jesus Christ as comingin the flesh”?
• Those who were not “confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh,” according to verse 7, were the deceivers and the antichrists.
• So, the simple answer to the questions in point 1) is that those whom the Christians should not receive into their homes and greet were the deceivers and the antichrists and not disfellowshipped persons!

THE WRONG UNDERSTANDING OF 2 JOHN 7-11

The letter to the elders says:

Who are Christians instructed to avoid? The context indicates that this refers to “everyone who pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching,” and therefore it applies to apostates and those who actively promote wrong conduct.

This is a shortcut showing that the members of the Governing Body try to read their preconceived ideas into the words of John, and at the same time the context is ignored. If we apply Greek or English grammar and syntax to 2 John 7-11, it is impossible to contradict the seven points above. The persons who Christians should avoid were the deceivers and the antichrists! John had already warned about these persons in his first letter, showing that the antichrists were those who did not believe that “Jesus was the Christ” and that “Jesus Christ had come in the flesh,” because they believed that “Christ” was a spirit that entered and left the man Jesus. Those who believed this were Cerinthus and the Gnostics.

A WARNING ABOUT FOLLOWING THE ANTICHRISTS

How shall we understand the words of 2 John 8 and 9?

8 Look out for yourselves, that YOU do not lose (apollumi, aorist subjunctive) the things we have worked to produce, but that YOU may obtain (apolambanō, aorist subjunctive) a full reward. 9 Everyone that pushes ahead (proagō, present participle) and does not remain (menō, present participle) in the teaching (didakhē) of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching (didakhē) is the one that has both the Father and the Son.

In contrast with verses 7, 10, and 11, that express a factual historic situation — deceivers and antichrists have gone forth — verses 8 and 9 are hypothetical.

These verses refer to possible actions that may occur in the future if the Christians would be deceived by the deceivers and the antichrists. In verse 8, John warns Christians that they must look out so they do not lose what they have worked for and lose their reward. This is shown by the Greek verbs translated as “lose” and “obtain,” which are aorist subjunctives. Greek subjunctive is similar to English conjunctive and refers to possibilities and not to facts. But without understanding Greek or English grammar, any reader of verse 8 will understand that it does not refer to things that have happened but to things that may occur in the future.

What can we say about verse 9? There are no verbs in the subjunctive in verse 9. However, the verbs “push ahead” and “remain” are present participles, and participles can refer both to factual and hypothetical situations. Anyone who reads the English text of verse 9, will understand that the actions have not occurred but may occur in the future. New Jerusalem Bible has a rendering stating explicitly that the actions are hypothetical:

⁹ If anybody does not remain in the teaching of Christ but goes beyond it, he does not have God with him: only those who remain in what he taught can have the Father and the Son with them.

The meaning of 2 John 8, 9 is the same as the meaning of 1 John 3:7:

⁷ Little children, let no one mislead YOU; he who carries on righteousness is righteous, just as that one is righteous.

The false interpretation of the members of the Governing Body is as follows:

• Which people should Christians not welcome into their homes? The clear answer is: “Everyone who pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching.”
• These are persons in the Christian congregations who in the future will not  follow the teachings of God.
• This means that John in verses 8 and 9 does not tell his readers that they must avoid persons who at that time had not remained in the teaching of Christ. But John’s words refer to persons in the future will not follow God’s truth, Christians who are apostates and who have been disfellowshipped.

The interpretation of the members of the Governing Body is that John referred to Christians in the future who will become apostates, and these persons must be avoided. So, John’s words are very restricted, according to the members of the Governing Body. They do not refer to those who already had denied that Jesus is the Christ and had denied that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh. But they refer to a future group of people who will have left the Christian congregation.

Based on this false interpretation, the members of the Governing Body claim that they have Scriptural basis for shunning those who they say are apostates, including those who have resigned from their congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Those who Christians shall not receive into their homes and greet, are those who deny “this teaching,” that “Jesus is the Christ” and that “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh.” An application of John’s words in 2 John verses 10 and 11 to so-called apostates is a false interpretation and a violation of the truth of the Bible.

WHY CHRISTIANS SHOULD NOT RECEIVE THE ANTICHRISTS INTO THEIR HOMES

The Christians and the antichrists acted in different ways

DENYING AND CONFESSING THE SON OF GOD

There are two Greek words that express the difference between the Christians and the antichrists. I use definitions of Louw and Nida:

homologeō: “to make an emphatic declaration, often public, and at times in response to pressure or an accusation.”

arneomai: “to refuse to agree or consent to something.”

The following passages uses these two Greek words:

1 John 2:22, 23

²² Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies (arneomai) that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one that denies (arneomai) the Father and the Son. ²³ Everyone that denies (arneomai) the Son does not have the Father either. He that confesses (homologeō) the Son has the Father also.

1 John 4:2, 3

² YOU gain the knowledge of the inspired expression from God by this: Every inspired expression that confesses (homologeō) Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh originates with God, ³ but every inspired expression that does not confess (homologeō) Jesus does not originate with God. Furthermore, this is the antichrist’s [inspired expression] which YOU have heard was coming, and now it is already in the world.

1 John 4:15

¹⁵ Whoever makes the confession (homologeō) that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, God remains in union with such one and he in union with God.

2 John 7

 ⁷ For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing (homologeō) Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.

The liar (arneomai) denied that Jesus is the Christ, and this is a contrast to those who confess (homologeō) the Son, according to 1 John 2:22, 23. Those who confess the Son do this with a public declaration, as the definition of the word is. How does the liar, the antichrist, deny Jesus Christ?

THE “INSPIRED EXPRESSIONS” (PNEUMA) OF DENIALS AND CONFESSIONS

The Greek word pneuma (“spirit”) has a great number of different meanings and references, I would say about thirty such meanings and references. Because of this, translators often use the general word “spirit” as a translation of pneuma, and the reader must find its reference. In some contexts, the use of “spirit” may cloud the reference of the word.

One meaning of pneuma that is important in our context is “divine inspiration” (Liddell & Scott Greek-English Lexicon) or “inspired utterance.” In order to illustrate this use, I quote 2 Peter 1:20, 21 (above) and John 6:63 (top middle), 1 John 4:1 (bottom middle), 1 Corinthians 12:10 (below):

²⁰ For YOU know this first, that no prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. ²¹ For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit (peuma).

⁶³ It is the spirit that is life-giving; the flesh is of no use at all. The sayings that I have spoken to YOU are spirit (peuma) and are life.

¹ Now concerning the spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want YOU to be ignorant.

¹⁰ to yet another operations of powerful works, to another prophesying (profēteia), to another discernment of inspired utterances (peuma), to another different tongues, and to another interpretation of tongues.

When prophets spoke, they were carried along by holy spirit. Because of this, their words were inspired. Jesus said that his words “were spirit,” so here pneuma has the reference “inspired utterance.” At 1 Corinthians 12:10, the NWT renders the plural of pneuma as “inspired utterances.” The literal meaning “discerning/interpreting spirits” does not make sense, because pneuma must refer to some quality of humans and not to different spirit persons.

1 Corinthians 12:10

Prophecy (expressing prophetic utterances).	Discern/interpret prophetic utterances (spirits).
Speaking in tongues.	Interpreting the tongues.

The chart below of 1 Corinthians 12:10 shows the justification for translating pneuma in the plural (literally, “spirits”) as “inspired utterances.” The purpose of the spiritual gifts described in chapter 12 was to impart miraculous knowledge to Christians at a time when only a few of the books of the Christian Greek Scriptures had been written.

One of the gifts of the spirit was speaking in tongues (foreign languages). These languages the members of the congregation would not understand, and therefore, someone had to be given the miraculous gift of interpreting the language that was miraculously spoken. The bottom row of the table shows that verse 10 first lists “different kinds of tongues” and then follows “interpretation of tongues.”

Another of the gifts of the spirit was “prophecy,” and after “prophecy” is mentioned, “discerning/interpreting spirits” follows. The expression “prophecy” implies that someone was given the ability to make “inspired utterances.” These inspired utterances would not be understood by the members of the congregation, and therefore, someone had to be given the miraculous gift of interpreting the inspired utterances. This gift is expressed by the Greek words diakrisis pneuma, literally “discerning/interpreting spirits.” This literal rendering makes no sense. But what we expect after the words diakrisis pneuma—just like speaking in tongues and then interpreting the tongues— is the interpretation of the inspired utterances. The word diakrisis means “to discern, to distinguish between, to interpret,” and then it is logical that the following word pneuma refers to “inspired utterances” and not to spirit persons. The two parallels with utterances and interpretation of utterances are seen in the table below.

I will now look at the use of pneuma in the letters of John. I will first consider 1 John 4:6:

⁶ We originate with God. He that gains the knowledge of God listens (akouō) to us; he that does not originate with God does not listen (akouō) us. This is how we take note of (gonōskō) the inspired expression (pneuma) of truth (alētheia) and the inspired expression (pneuma) of error (planē).

The word pneuma in this verse does not refer to a spirit person, and neither does it refer to something abstract. But it must refer to characteristics of humans. Let us take the verb ginōskō (“to know”) as our point of departure. John says that “this is how we know (“take note of”) the pneuma of truth and the pneuma of error. To what does “this” refer? To the verb akouō (“listen”) and the expressions “listens (akouō) to us” and “not listen (akouō) to us.” The verb akouō refers to words that are spoken or written. Thus, pneuma together with alētheia (truth) must refer to the inspired words spoken by John and his companions, and conversely, pneuma together with planē (error) must refer to words inspired by the wicked one. Thus, the rendering of the NWT as “inspired expression” instead of “spirit” is justified by the context.

I will now make an analysis of 1 John 4:1-3:

¹ Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired expression (pneuma), but test the inspired expressions (pneuma) to see whether they originate with God, because many false prophets have gone forth into the world.

² YOU gain the knowledge of the inspired expression (pneuma) from God by this: Every inspired expression (pneuma) that confesses (homologeō) Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh originates with God, ³ but every inspired expression (pneuma) that does not confess (homologeō) Jesus does not originate with God. Furthermore, this is the antichrist’s [inspired expression] which YOU have heard was coming, and now it is already in the world.

The use of pneuma in 4:6, which must have the meaning “inspired expression,” as is discussed above, suggests that the five occurrences of pneuma in verses 1-3 also must be translated by “inspired expression” as well. But let us look closely at these three verses.

The issue here is how to distinguish between different pneumas to see which ones that are from God and which ones are not. According to verse 2, pneuma from God speaks, it confesses that Jesus has come in the flesh. Those who speak are living persons. This is an exhortation from John to his fellow believers. This shows that pneuma is related to human beings and not to good spirits (angels) and bad spirits (demons).

 Verse 2 says that “every pneuma that confesses…” Humans are not called “spirits,” but pneuma is connected with speech, with confession of someone. Therefore, pneuma must refer to the inspired expressions made by humans. When a human confesses that Jesus has come in the flesh, he speaks the true words of God, inspired expressions. John says in verse 1 that Christians should not believe that every “inspired expression” originates with God. The reason that is given is that “many false prophets have gone forth into the world.” This confirms that the pneuma that “does not confess Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh” are words of the false prophets, inspired expressions from a wicked source.

So, the antichrists did not only have a wrong belief, but they made “emphatic declarations of their beliefs” just as did the Christians. On this background, we understand the truth in the description of The Watchtower of August 1, 1974, page 465:

Note that in 2 John verse 7, the apostle John says that “many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.” Then John gives the warning to be on guard and not to receive such ones into one’s home, for these are active propagandists of false teachings, deceitful advocates of wrong conduct. They should be given no foothold from which to make further infiltration. One should not even greet them, so as to avoid being a sharer in their wicked works

The Christians confessed that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh. The antichrists who were called “deceivers,” denied this. And this denial was expressed by their words because they were active propagandists who wanted to spread their message to the Christians by visiting them in their homes. This is the reason why the members of the Christian congregations should not receive the antichrists into their homes and greet them as their guests.

But what is the meaning of 2 John 11:

11 For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer (koinōneō) in his wicked works.

When someone visited a home, it was the custom to greet him as a guest, so he would feel that he was welcome in the home. Therefore, “saying a greeting to him” is the same as receiving him into the home. A Christian would not be “a sharer in his wicked works” by saying “hi” to the person. But if the Christian “says a greeting”, greeting him as a guest into his home, he would be “a shearer in his wicked works.”

The verb koinōneō has the meaning, «to share one’s possessions, with the implication of some kind of joint participation and mutual interest.” (Louw and Nida) And the corresponding noun koinōnia has the meaning, “fellowship, a close mutual relationship; participation, sharing in; partnership; contribution, gift.” (UBS lexicon) The words in 1 John 1:3 help us understand the meaning of being “a sharer”:

³ that which we have seen and heard we are reporting also to YOU, that YOU too may be having a sharing (koinonia) with us. Furthermore, this sharing (koinonia) of ours is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.

By receiving the antichrists into their homes, the Christians indicated “a joint participation and mutual interest,” and they got a friendly relationship, just as the Christians had with the Father and with his Son, as we see in 1:3. As I have shown, the antichrists were deceivers who were active propagandists, and this was “wicked works.” If a Christian allowed the antichrist to express this propaganda in his home, he had a responsibility for this propaganda. What he should have done was to refuse any contact with the antichrists and warn others about them, just as John did.

The wrong view of the members of the Governing Body: The ones Christians should not greet and invite into their homes are apostates who have been disfellowshipped or have resigned from the Christian congregation. The correct view: The ones Christians should not greet and invite into their homes were the antichrists, the Gnostics, who denied that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh.

CONCLUSION

It is absolutely clear from the letters of John that those who Christians should not invite into their homes were the antichrists, who probably were the members of the Gnostic “Christian” sects. The members of the Governing Body have not stopped applying the words of John to all disfellowshipped and resigned Jehovah’s Witnesses.

These words are now applied to disfellowshipped and resigned Witnesses who are said to be apostates. According to the context, this is an impossible application. The context shows that the reference only is to the antichrists, who probably where the members of the Gnostic sects.

The important point is that the words of John about not inviting persons into the homes of the Christians can only be applied to the antichrists who lived in the days of  John. And these words cannot be applied to other groups who are living today. Christians today can apply the laws and principles found in the Bible to the situations today. But words that were applied to particular persons or groups living in the past cannot rightly be applied to persons and groups today. Doing this, would be a clear violation of the Holy Scriptures.