1 John 4:18

18. Proof of the preceding statement that perfect love will give us boldness, by shewing the mutually exclusive nature of love and fear. Love moves towards others in the spirit of self-sacrifice: fear shrinks from others in the spirit of self-preservation. The two are to be understood quite generally; neither love of God nor fear of God is specially meant. In all relations whatever, perfect love excludes fear, and fear prevents love from being perfect. And the two vary inversely: the more perfect the love, the less possibility of fear; and the more the fear, the less perfect the love. But, though as certain as any physical law, the principle, that perfect love excludes all fear, is an ideal that has never been verified in fact. Like the first law of motion, it is verified by the approximations made to it. No believer’s love has ever been so perfect as entirely to banish fear; but every believer experiences that as his love increases his fear diminishes. It is worthy of note that S. John here abandons his antithetic method. He does not go on to state anything about him that feareth not. And rightly, for the absence of fear proves nothing: it may be the result of ignorance, or presumption, or indifference, or unbelief, or inveterate wickedness.

Tertullian quotes this verse in insisting on the duty of suffering martyrdom, adding “What fear would it be better to understand than that which gives rise to denial (of Christ)? What love does he assert to be perfect, but that which puts fear to flight, and gives courage to confess (Christ)? What penalty will He appoint as the punishment of fear, but that which he who denies is to pay, who has to be slain, body and soul, in hell” (Scorp. XII.). Simon Magus is said to have “freed his disciples from the danger of death” by martyrdom, “by teaching them to regard idolatry as a matter of indifference” (Origen c. Celsum VI. xi).

ὁ φόβος κόλασιν ἔχει. As R.V., fear hath punishment. ‘Torment’ would be βάσανος (Matthew 4:24; Luke 16:23; Luke 16:28). Wiclif has ‘peyne’ representing poena in the Vulgate. Other Versions have ‘painfulness’, Luther Pein. Κόλασις, common in classical Greek and not rare in LXX., occurs only here and Matthew 25:46 in N.T. Its primary meaning is ‘pruning’, and hence ‘checking, correcting, punishing’: whereas the primary meaning of βάσανος is ‘testing’, and hence ‘trying by torture, tormenting’. Comp. ἵνα τὴν λείπουσαν ταῖς βασάνοις προσαναπληρώσωσι κόλασιν (Wis 19:4).

ὁ δὲ φοβ. The δέ, omitted in A.V., connects this clause with the first one, ἀλλʼ … ἔχει being parenthetical. Wiclif has ‘forsothe’ and Purvey ‘but’, the Genevan, Rhemish, and R.V. have ‘and’. None are satisfactory, owing to the preceding ἀλλά. The passage is a good instance of the difference between ἀλλά and δέ (sed and autem, sondern and aber). The one introduces a sharp opposition, the other a qualification, objection, or contrast. Winer, 551, 552. The present participle indicates a constant condition: the habitual fearer is necessarily imperfect in his love.

S. Paul teaches the same doctrine; ‘Ye received not the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but ye received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father’ (Romans 8:15). The servile fear, which perfect love excludes, is therefore altogether different from the childlike awe, which is a necessary element in the creature’s love for its Creator. Even servile fear is necessary as a preparation for perfect love. ‘The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom’; and it is also the beginning of love. The sinner must begin by fearing the God against whom he has sinned. Bengel gives the various stages thus: ‘Neither love nor fear; fear without love; both fear and love; love without fear’. Fear is the child of bondage; love of freedom. In this case also the bondwoman and her son must be cast out (Galatians 4:30).