52 Et non sit nullus in corde tuo. Three Mss. et non sit ullusin corde tuo ["and let there not be any in thine heart, (only) let Christ be in thine heart"]. One Ms.: et nullus in corde tuo; another: et nullus sit in corde tuo [with the same meaning]. Ben. Bodl. Mss. vary, no two reading alike. One, "et ne sit ullus." The reading most like St. Aug. would be, "et ne sit nullus," "and lest there be none."
3 Mendax. Gr. yeu=doj. Vulg. Mendacium. In the following clause et om. as kai\ in Cod. Alex. In ipsa, Gr. e0n au0tw=, taken as referred to xri/sma, "in the unction" (Lat. two Mss. in ipso.) Vulg. in eo, "in Christ."
9 Scitote Vulg. genw/skete as imperative, "hence learn ye to know that, &c." Were it indicative, "to know that He is righteous is to know that, &c." probably o@date would have been repeated as in 5, 15, oi@damen-oi@damen.
17 Vocemur et simus. Vulg. nominemur et simus. Cod. Alex and other authorities, klhqw=men kai0 e0sme\n (received by Lachmann). Mill in l. cites as from Augustine, but without specifying the place: Qui vocantur et non sunt, quid prodest illis nomen? [The very words of this passage.] Verum hic loquitur de nomine quod a Deo tribuitur: hic non est discrimen inter dici et esse. [Which looks rather like an expression of dissent, by Mill himself or some other.]["kai/ e0smen," Westcott and Hort, "and such we are," Rev. V These closing words of ch. iii. 1, wanting in Auth. V.-J. H. M.]
18 Et nos non cognoscit mundus: a reading of which there are no traces in the Mss.: it seems to be an expository gloss: "therefore (because we are sons of God) the world knoweth us not. Namely, because the world knew not Him, it knows not us."
20 Ed. Ben. places the colon before in carne: "in the flesh He was God, &c." But [Aug. several times uses ambulare, without an object.-J. H. M.] ambulabat seems to require an object to complete the sense, and the antithesis between erat and latebat is more emphatic when in carne is given to the former clause. So Bodl. 150, Laud. 116.
6 ["Cannot sin," &c.-Augustine maintains that the one sin which the Christian cannot commit is violation of charity; he cannot do otherwise than love, and do acts that flow from love, if he be a Christian. No doubt this indicates a great truth, for love expresses the inner essence of the believer's life and character. But the strong language of the apostle is not met by this partial statement.
Better acknowledge the apparent contradiction between "does not commit sin," "cannot sin," and "if we say, we have no sin, we deceive ourselves." The apostle does not solve the problem. Meyer, who discards many explanations of the first two phrases,-as, sinning knowingly and wilfully, committing mortal sins and many others specified by him, thinks that the solution lies in the fact simply that the apostle desires to emphasize the contrast between born of God and a sinner. He does not show how emphasizing a contrast explains a contradiction (which he discovers in the passage). Jonathan Edwards and Ezek. Hopkins, following many others with whom Westcott coincides, judge that the alleged impossibility of sinning relates to total character, or prevailing habit; the Christian may be surprised, overtaken, beguiled by sin, but fights against sin, does not consent to sin with his whole heart; "he does not wish sin." It has been added that as to his nature-renewed; as to the new life-life from the Spirit of God,-his divine sonship and sin are irreconcilable contraries. In part, these suggestions and definitions may meet the difficulty which the apostle, doubtless wishing to present a high ideal of the life of one born from above, leaves for practical solution by those who have passed from death unto life.-J. H. M,]