For Beloved (here and in verses 7 and 11) see comments on 2.7.
Do not believe every spirit means do not trust every spirit to speak the truth, do not accept as true what every spirit says. For the verb see comments on 3.23.
Spirit is used here with the meaning “spirit of man.” It refers to the seat or source of man’s insight, feeling, and will; compare comments below on meaning (2). One may have to make explicit this specific meaning, for example, by using here ‘every man’s spirit,’ ‘every human spirit.’
In the Biblical view of life, the spirit of those who serve God is somehow connected with or inspired by God’s Spirit. At the same time a man’s spirit may be said to represent that man himself. This may lead to such a rendering of verse 1a as “do not believe all who claim to have the Spirit, but test them to find out if the spirit they have comes from God” (Good News Translation), using the word in question first in the meaning “Spirit of God,” next in the meaning “spirit of man.” It may be preferable, however, to use the term only in one meaning. Then one may keep to Good News Bible for the first part of the sentence but change the second into ‘whether what they have comes from God,’ ‘whether it is the Spirit of God they have.’ Or one may render the whole sentence as ‘do not believe everyone, but examine thoroughly whether it is God’s Spirit which inspires them (or which they have).’ In these renderings the word is used only in the meaning “Spirit of God,” in which meaning it occurs also in verse 2a.
The alternatives discussed are equally possible. The translator is free to choose the one that best fits the possibilities and the limitations of the terms for “spirit” in the receptor language.
† The Greek word translated spirit (also in 3.24; 4.2-3, 6, 13; 5.[6,] 7-8) has a very wide area of meaning: (1) “movement of air,” “wind” (John 3.8a), “breath,” “vital principle,” “(life-)spirit”; (2) the source or seat of man’s insight, feeling, and will, the representative part of the inner life of man. Since spirit is that which leaves a person at death (compare Matt 27.50; Luke 23.46; John 19.30), it is also used to designate (3) the human soul after it has left the body, and (4) other incorporeal beings, not human, such as angels, good and bad spirits, which have the power of knowing, desiring, and acting, and are thought of as having some kind of personality.
Finally, the word occurs to designate (5) “the Spirit” in the sense of “God’s Spirit,” “the Holy Spirit.” Used in this meaning it refers to that which differentiates God from everything that is not God, to the divine power that produces all divine existence, to the divine element in which all divine life is carried on, and to the bearer of every application of the divine will. All those who belong to God possess or receive “the Spirit” and hence have a share in his life. The having of “the Spirit” can also serve to distinguish the Christians from all unbelievers.
Some languages have one term that can be used in all, or almost all, occurrences of the term concerned; for example, “spirit” in English, geest and cognates in Dutch and some other Germanic languages. The same is reported from some Indic or Indonesian languages, using words related to Sanskrit atman ‘breath (of life),’ or jiwa ‘life-principle,’ or to the Arabic ruh ‘breath (of-life).’ But in many other languages two or more distinctive terms must be used.
As to the rendering of meanings (1), (2), (3), and (4), the difficulty is usually not so much how to find possible terms in the receptor languages, but rather how to choose the most appropriate term, or terms, and to decide which one to use where. The reason for this difficulty is that in the receptor language the semantic fields covered by the term in question are not any more neatly divided and kept apart than the meanings of the Greek word.
Meaning (2), which is found in the present verse, has been rendered in some versions by ‘thoughts,’ ‘mind,’ or ‘disposition’ (in one language literally ‘following,’ referring to ways of thinking and believing and the acts connected with them). A few others have shifted to ‘word(s),’ probably due to the consideration that what one says is an indication of what is in one’s mind. As a rule this shift is not to be recommended, especially because “spirit” has a wider application than “word,” and the two belong to different semantic domains.
It is the rendering of meaning (5), “the Spirit” in the sense of “the Holy Spirit,” “the Spirit of God” (see verse 2), which forms the most crucial problem.
Some translators have tried to express this meaning by a term for “wind,” or for “soul-stuff.” This is less satisfactory, however, since such a term usually lacks the concept of personality.
Others have used ‘breath/vital-principle’ with good results. In some cultures, however, God is viewed as giving such a vital-principle to animate beings and plants, but not as having or requiring it himself, since he is of another order of existence. Consequently, to say that God has the vital principle would mean equalling him to earthly beings.
Others, again, have successfully employed a term of category (2). Then one of the dangers the translator has to be aware of in some cultures is that ‘the spirit’ in this sense is part of the living person and can only be thought of as an independent entity when that person has died. Therefore the use of a term of category (2) may imply that the Holy Spirit was the product of God’s death.
Finally one may use a rendering that belongs to category (4), referring to incorporeal beings, not humans. This is, again, a possibility that should be carefully verified, because terms of this kind often have a connotation of evil intent.
To avoid the problems and uncertainties just mentioned, several translators prefer to use a borrowing, such as Espiritu (Santo) in some Latin American languages. This is sometimes the most acceptable (or the least unacceptable!) solution for one or more reasons. One of these may be that the concept could otherwise be rendered only by a long and unwieldy descriptive phrase; another, that the language community prefers to designate important religious concepts by a borrowing from the prestige language in the area. Yet a borrowing should not be chosen easily, for often it means next to nothing to the monolinguals among the local people, and very little even to those who are bilingual, having a reasonable command of the prestige language.
These and similar considerations may make it preferable to use descriptive phrases for “the Spirit” such as ‘that which comes from God,’ ‘strength of God.’ Such renderings, though newly-coined expressions, or giving only one or two of the main semantic components, may prove to be more meaningful than a borrowed term would have been in the language concerned. For further details on the rendering of spirit, compare A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of Mark on 1.8; TBT 7 (1956):162-163; 8 (1957):146-148; also 17 (1966):32-38 (treating the problems that arise in connection with the choice of personal or nonpersonal class prefixes and concords in Bantu languages).
Test the spirits to see whether they are of God: for possible adjustments see the preceding comment. The clause exhorts the readers to look carefully whether or not a person’s behavior and words show that his spirit is inspired by God’s Spirit and has divine quality.
The combination test … to see renders one Greek verb that refers to examination and evaluation. It is sometimes rendered by words basically meaning ‘to seek/search,’ ‘to measure,’ ‘to taste,’ ‘to try (out),’ ‘to weigh,’ ‘to see the goodness of.’ In one language ‘to test’ can have the bad connotation of ‘to cast a spell on.’ Therefore that translator had to say ‘do not mistake where the spirit comes from.’
To see has to be added in English to make the connection between test and the dependent clause. A similar addition may be necessary in some receptor languages, using ‘to find out,’ ‘to judge/decide,’ ‘so that you may know,’ or something similar. Other languages do not need such a connecting verb or phrase.
Whether introduces an indirect question that may have to be rendered as a direct one; for example, ‘examine the spirits to find out (or to judge), “This spirit, is it of God (or not)?” ’ For “to be (not) of” (here and verses 2-4, 6) see comments on 2.16.
Many false prophets have gone out into the world: this is the reason why testing of the spirits is necessary now. It is also the sign that the last days are near (compare such passages as Mark 13.22 and 1 John 2.18). Some versions place the clause at the beginning of the verse; this helps to indicate that in 4.1 the discourse shifts again to a controversy with the false teachers.
False prophet is used only here in the Letters of John. The word may refer to a man who claims falsely to be a prophet, or to a prophet who prophesies falsely, that is, who says what is not in accordance with what God told him to say. Some translators give a rendering that covers both meanings; for example, ‘speakers pretending to be (literally throwing-themselves-to-be) prophets; their word is empty,’ or ‘deceivers who think they have the spirit of God.’ Such a rendering is good but rather wordy. Several translators prefer to use a shorter term or phrase, even if it expresses only one of the meanings. This is quite acceptable here, since either meaning fits the context. Some renderings of this kind are ‘prophets falsely inspired,’ ‘deceiver-prophets,’ ‘speakers of falsehood,’ ‘empty speakers’ (used in verse 4 as a shortening of the more comprehensive rendering quoted above).
The basic meaning of prophet is not one who foretells the future but one who speaks on behalf of God. Some of the translations used are ‘interpreter for God,’ ‘God’s town crier,’ ‘one who discloses/reveals,’ ‘a word-passer,’ ‘God’s sent-word person,’ ‘one-whom-God-works,’ ‘one who speaks under divine impulse,’ ‘holy spokesman.’ For these and further details see A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of Mark on 1.2; A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of Luke on 1.70.
Have gone out into the world: the perfect tense indicates that they have gone out in the past (namely, to lead people astray), and that the results thereof are being felt up to the time of speaking.
In “to go out into” the reference is to the place they go into rather than to the place they go out from; hence such renderings as ‘many false prophets have spread out (or are going about, or are at large) in this world,’ or ‘this world is full of (many) false prophets.’ For the world see comments on 2.15, meaning (2).
Quoted with permission from Haas, C., de Jonge, M. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on The First Letter of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .