Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadInternational Critical Commentary NT - 1 John 1:1 - 1:99
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
NOTES ON 1 JOHN
————
1-4. Introduction
1. ὃἦ ἀʼἀχς What the writer has to announce about the Word of Life, the revelation of life, is no new discovery. The revelation began with creation. It was continued in the history of the nations and the People, in the work of Prophets, Psalmists, Legislators. It culminated in the earthly life and teaching of Jesus of Nazareth. The mystery, which is as old as creation, was gradually revealed, till it was completely manifested in Jesus the Christ, the Son of God. The words πρ τῦλγυτςζῆ necessitate some such interpretation of the phrase. It cannot refer to the eternal, pre-existent nature of the personal Word, though in the writer’s conception this is no doubt included. The whole message of God’s revelation, as it has been gradually unfolded, is the object of the writer’s ἀγλα The mystery which he takes his part in “revealing” is concerned with the eternal reality underlying the phenomena apparent to sense-perception and needed to explain them. What he has to say is one stage in its unveiling; his words are part of a process of teaching which began when “God said, Let there be light.” Cf. Rothe, p. 18; part of his note may be quoted or paraphrased. “The thought of an original being, which has its object in itself, is indeed the most abstract thought to which human consciousness can reach; but yet it lies close to hand, and no one can dispense with it who examines attentively himself and his surroundings. That which falls under the cognizance of sense-perception shows itself to the careful observer to be untrue. But every intelligent man must feel the desire to find somewhere an existence which has not come into being, but which is from eternity, and to be able to rest on this. This the Apostle has found. He cries triumphantly to his readers that he knows of a Being, transcending all that is transitory, the ground of what is temporal and finite. Such a reality can only be found in so far as it is revealed under material forms and enters into the world of matter. In Christ the writer claims to have found this eternal reality, which transcends the limits of the sensible and material. What he has seen in Jesus and heard from Him is to himself indubitable evidence of the truth of his claim.” This passage, which is really a paraphrase in more modern terms of thought of the Johannine conception of ζή does not, of course, explain by strict grammatical exegesis the meaning of the opening phrases of this Epistle, but it is an admirable expression of ideas which may reasonably be connected with them, and as such it deserves full consideration.
ἀχς Anarthrous. Cf. Joh_1:1, Joh_1:6:64, Joh_1:16:4; Gen_1:1. That which is regarded by us as “beginning.” The anarthrous use of the word makes it denote “character, according to man’s apprehension,” rather than a definite fact or point of time. The parallels in Genesis and the Prologue of the Gospel exclude the possibility of a reference merely to the beginning of the Christian dispensation. For the writer’s use of ἀχ, cf. note on 2:7.
ὃἀηόμν The author justifies his claim to be able to announce “that which was from the beginning” on the fact that a revelation of it has been made under the conditions of time and space, so that it has become intelligible to finite understanding. The perfect has its full force. A revelation has been made in terms which men can understand, and the results are abiding. What the writer and his contemporaries have heard and seen remains with them, so that they can make it known to others who have not themselves had the same privileges.
The “hearing” may perhaps include the whole revelation, of the nature of God and His relation to the world, from the beginning. But if it is not confined to the earthly life of Jesus Christ, that is what the writer has prominently in view.ἑρκμντῖ ὀθλος The revelation has been made through nature and through man. All the human powers of perception are necessary to grasp its fulness, and can be used for that purpose. The τῖ ὀθλοςemphasizes the personal experience of the writer, and those whom he associates with himself by the use of the first person plural. The terms used in this preface can only be interpreted naturally as a claim on the writer’s part to have been an actual eye-witness of the earthly life of Jesus Christ. It is not impossible to suppose that the writer uses them metaphorically of a spiritual vision, the completeness of which can best be described under the metaphors of sense-perception. Such an interpretation, however, is forced and unnatural in the extreme. Clemen’s confession (ZNTW vi. 281, 1905), that he can suggest no really satisfactory explanation of the words α χῖε ἡῶ ἐηάηα on these lines, is significant. Nothing but absolute necessity could justify their reference to “spiritual” perception. If on other grounds it is impossible to suppose that this Epistle, or other writings which cannot easily be separated from it, could have been written by an eye-witness of the life of Christ on earth, we should, of course, be compelled to accept this forced interpretation of the words; unless we admitted that the writer has put forward a false claim. But it is well to recognize that such a course is of the nature of a desperate expedient. Such a claim might naturally be met with the ironical words of Philo (de Decalogo, p. 195), ὦοτς ἃμτ εδςμτ ἤοσς ὡ ἰώ, ὡ ἀοσς ὡ πρκλυηὼ ἅαι, ἀιόεό μιμρύηο, which Windisch (Handbuch zum NT. iv. 2, p. 105) quotes to illustrate the phraseology of this passage. There can be no doubt as to what is the natural interpretation of the writer’s words. These considerations hold good also against Karl’s idea of ecstatic vision (Johanneische Studien, p. 3). The hypothesis that the writer when using the first personal plural identifies himself (?) and his readers with the Christian body, some of whom had actually seen the “Lord,” is open to less objection, but is not really satisfactory. This use of the plural is quite natural in the passage which has sometimes been quoted from Irenaeus (v. 1:1), “per auditum nostrum uocem eius percipientes.” Irenaeus is emphasizing the fact that the Incarnation was the only means of teaching men the truth about God. In the Introduction to Book V. he has reminded his readers that the Church tradition goes back to Christ Himself. And Christ alone could teach men, in that as God He knows the things of God, and as man He can explain them intelligently to His fellow-men. Here the writer is contrasting his position with that of his readers. He will hand on to them what he and his fellows have seen and heard, that they too, though they have not seen, may believe and share his joy. See Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, p. 464; Findlay, Fellowship in the Life Eternal, pp. 87-89.The passages quoted from Tacitus, Agricola, c. 45 (Mox nostrae duxere Heluidium in carcerem manus), and Augustine, Ep. 88, 8 (nostri oculi ab armatis uestris calce et aceto extinguuntur), are not quite parallel. Tacitus, a member of the Senate, but absent from Rome at the time of the incident to which he refers, can naturally, addressing the public in a highly rhetorical passage, identify himself with the disreputable action of the body to which he belongs. Augustine, speaking as a Catholic, and addressing Donatists, can with equal propriety say, “We suffer persecution at your hands.” But here the writer, speaking as a Christian to Christians, is emphasizing what he and others with whom he identifies himself, have to give to the Christians to whom he writes. “What we have seen and heard we tell you, that ye may share our joy.” The “we” are clearly distinguished from the whole body of Christians.
ὃἐεσμθ] The “message” has so far been viewed in its permanent results. It has been “heard” and “seen” so that those who first received it have it as an abiding possession which they can impart to others. Now the facts of its reception are presented in such a way (by the use of the aorist) as to emphasize their character. The different tenses are used with reference to the same object under different aspects. Emphasis is first laid on the results, then on the method. The aorist presents its object as a complete fact, or series of facts regarded as one whole, having a definite character. The witness is not only abiding, it is also satisfactory in kind. It rests on complete and intelligent use of adequate opportunities. There is no reason for restricting the object of the two aorists to the disciples’ experiences after the Resurrection. Such a distinction must have been more clearly marked if the writer intended his readers to grasp it. The special reference of ψλφνto Luk_24:39 (ἴεετςχῖά μυκὶτὺ πδςμυ…ψλφστ μ κὶἴεε or to the incident recorded in Joh_20:26-29, where the word is not used, appears to be very doubtful. It is simpler to suppose that the same object is described in different ways, corresponding to the natural distinction in meaning between the perfect and aorist. But see Westcott, and comp. Ign. Smyr. iii. Cf. also Tert. Adv. Prax. xxv., de An. xvii., de Pat. iii.
ἐεσμθ] If βέενis to “look,” and ὁᾶ to “see,” θᾶθιis to “behold,” intelligently, so as to grasp the meaning and significance of that which comes within our vision. Cf. Mat_6:1; [Mk.] 16:14; Luk_7:24; Joh_1:14, Joh_1:38, Joh_1:4:35, Joh_1:11:45; Act_1:11; Rom_15:24; 1Jn_4:12, 1Jn_4:14. In the LXX the word occurs only eight times, and in the later books; cf. 2Ch_22:6, and especially 2 Mac. 3:36 ἅε ἦ ὑʼὄι τθαέο. The word nearly always suggests careful and deliberate vision which interprets, rightly or wrongly, its object. The witnesses have not only seen and remembered. Their “seeing” was of such a character as to enable them to appreciate rightly the significance of what they saw.
κὶα χῖε ἡῶ ἐηάηα] Cf. Luk_24:39, already quoted, and the note on ἑρκμν The Lord’s command in Luke, and the incident recorded by the writer in his Gospel, illustrate the meaning of the words. But their reference is wider than to any definite events between the Resurrection and the Ascension.ψλφνis to grope or feel after in order to find, like a blind man or one in the dark; hence to handle, touch. The idea of searching sometimes disappears altogether. It may also be used in the sense of “examine closely.” Cf. Polyb. viii. 18. 4 (quoted by L and S.), πσνἐιοα: Gen_27:12, μπτ ψλφσ μ ὁπτρμυ(of Isaac): Deu_28:29, ἔῃψλφνμσμρα: Isa_59:10, ψλφσυι ὡ τφο τῖο: Ps. 113:15, χῖα ἔοσ κὶο ψλφσυι Job_20:10 (A), α δ χῖε ατῦψλφσυι ὀυά. Here it naturally suggests all the evidence available for sense-perception other than hearing and sight. Possibly it emphasizes the reality of that with which they had been brought into contact, in opposition to the Docetism which may have characterized the views of the writer’s opponents. It certainly marks the intimate character of their personal intercourse with the Lord. Their opportunities included all that was necessary to make their witness ἀηιήas well as ἀηή, satisfactory in kind as well as accurate so far as it went. They were competent witnesses who spoke the truth. Cf. Joh_19:35.
πρ τῦλγυτςζῆ] Dr. Westcott’s phrase “the revelation of life” probably gives most accurately the meaning of the words: the whole message which reveals, or which gives life. Compare Joh_6:68, ῥμτ ζῆ αωίυ and Joh_3:34, τ ῥμτ τῦθο. The exact meaning of the genitive is doubtful. As a rule, when (ὁ λγςis followed by a genitive, not of a person, the genitive expresses the contents of the message. Cf. Mat_13:19 (τςβσλίς Act_13:26 (τςστρα τύη), 14:3, 20:32 (τςχρτςατῦ 15:7 (τῦεαγλο); 1Co_1:18 (ὁτῦσαρῦ 2Co_5:19 (τνλγντςκτλαῆ); Eph_1:13 (τςἀηεα); Php_2:16 (λγνζῆ ἐέοτς Col_1:5 (τςἀηεα τῦεαγλο); 1Th_2:13 (λγνἀος 2Ti_2:15 (τςἀηεα); Heb_6:1 (τςἀχςτῦΧιτῦ Rev_1:3 (τὺ λγυ τςποηεα). On the other hand, where (τς ζῆ is added to a noun as a qualifying genitive it generally, though not always, denotes “life-giving,” or some cognate idea. Cf. Joh_5:29 (ἀάτσν 6:35 (ὁἄτς 48, 68 (ῥμτ, cf. 63), 8:12 (τ φς Act_2:28 (ὁος = Psa_16:11), 3:15 (τνἀχγν 5:20 (τ ῥμτ); Rom_5:18 (δκίσν 6:4 (κιόηι Php_2:16 (λγν 4:3 (ββῳ 2Ti_1:1 (ἐαγλα), Jam_1:12 (τνσέαο); 1 P. 3:7 (χρτς Rev_2:7 (τῦξλυ 10 (τνσέαο), 3:5 (τςββο), 11:11 (πεμ), 16:3 (ψχ), 17:8 (τ ββίν 20:12, 15, 21:27, 21:6 (τῦὕαο), 22:1 (ὕαο), 2 (ξλν 14, 19 (τ ξλν 17 (ὕω). But the two meanings are not mutually exclusive. The message which announces life gives life (cf. Joh_5:39).πρ] What the writer has to announce concerns the word of life. He does not claim to handle the whole message. He has something to tell about it. On the bearing of this preparation as the meaning of the whole verse, see the note on ὁἦ ἀʼἀχς
2. For the use of parenthesis to emphasize or explain a specially important word, cf. Joh_19:35. In this parenthesis the emphatic word is ἐαεώη which is repeated at the end of the verse. The writer and his circle could bear their witness about the word of life, because the life had been manifested, to men and under conditions which made it possible for men to apprehend its nature. The reference is in quite general terms. ἡζήis never used to express the being of the (personal) Logos, or pre-existent Christ.
According to Weiss, φνρῦ never denotes the becoming visible of that which was before invisible, but the making clear of what was hitherto unknown (he compares Joh_2:11, Joh_3:21, Joh_7:4, Joh_9:3, Joh_17:6). But the distinction is hard to maintain in view of the Johannine usage of verbs of sight to include the understanding of that which falls under the ocular vision (cf. Joh_3:3). φνρῦ may be used of all processes of making known, whether intellectual or sensible.
ἀαγλοε] It is doubtful whether a distinction can be maintained between ἀαγλεν “to repeat with reference to the source from which the message comes,” and ἀαγλεν “to report with reference to the persons addressed” (ver. 5). See ver. 3, ἀαγλοε κὶὑῖ ἵακὶὑεςκτλ
τνζὴ τναώιν For the double article, cf. 2:25, and ver. 3, ἡκιωί ἡἡεέα Joh_10:11, ὁπιὴ ὁκλς The idea is first put forward generally, and then more particularly defined.
It is strange to find it stated (Weiss, Comm. p. 28) that αώιςis always used in the N.T. in the sense of endless duration, or even that ζὴαώιςdenotes in S. John (as in S. Paul) “our everlasting further life (ewiges weiterleben) after the death of the body” (Karl, p. 6). It would be truer to say that it never has the sense of endless duration. On the other hand, it does not denote what is supra-temporal. It can only mean “belonging to the age” of which the writer is speaking or thinking, and so comes to mean possessed of the characteristics of that age. If the “age to come” is supra-temporal, then αώιςdenotes that the subject which it qualifies has this characteristic.“Spiritual” probably suggests its meaning most clearly in popular language. The words which it is used in the N.T. to qualify are: πρ ζή κλσς κίι, ἁάτμ (Mar_3:29, v.l. κίες σηα, χόο, θό, βρς δξς οκά ὀερς πρκηι, κάο, δξ, ἐπς στρα κία λτωι, πεμ, κηοοί, δαήη βσλί, εαγλο. Of the 71 instances of its use in the N.T., 44 are passages in which it qualifies ζή Its meaning is best considered in the light of this fact. It is noticeable that in the Johannine Gospel and Epistles, where it occurs 23 times, it is never used in any other connection.
ἥι] The life manifested in Christ, to which His personal disciples could bear witness on the strength of what they had seen and heard, is eternal, inasmuch as it is in union with the Father that it attains to its true realization. The distinction between ὅ and ὅτς which disappears altogether in late Greek, can still, as a rule, be traced in the New Testament, where in all probability ὅτςis never a mere substitute for the relative. It either suggests a reason for what has been stated before, as here, or it introduces the designation of a class to which the antecedent belongs. (Cf. Mat_7:26, Mat_13:52.)
πό] Cf. Joh_1:2, ἦ πὸ τνθό, and Dr. Westcott’s note on the differences of meaning between πό and other prepositions denoting relations. Expressed in simpler language, the particular force of πό would seem to be that it suggests a relation realized in active communion and intercourse. Cf. Mar_6:3, οκεσνα ἀεφὶατῦὧεπὸ ἡᾶ; 9:19. The true life of the Son was realized in union and communion with the Father. By means of the Incarnation it was manifested to men.
3. ὃἑρκμνκὶἀηόμν Resumption. The announcement rests on eye- and ear-witness. The difference in order, if it is not purely a matter of rhythm, may perhaps throw more emphasis on the earthly life of the Incarnate Logos, in which what was seen naturally takes precedence of what was heard, as contrasted with the wider description of revelation in ver. 1, where hearing must come before seeing. The treatment of minute differences in this Epistle, and in the Johannine writings generally, is a difficult question. There can be no doubt that very often they are either deliberate, and intended to convey some slight change of meaning, or the outcome of the exact train of thought which has led to the particular expression.κὶὑῖ] To find in these words a proof that the writer is addressing a circle of readers different from those among whom he began his Apostolic work, and therefore a special appropriateness in their use by one who had changed the sphere of his activity from Palestine to Asia Minor, is forced. (Cf. Zahn, Einleitung in das NT. p. 566, “frü an anderen Orten …jetzt im Kreise der Gemeinden, an welche Deu_1 Jo. gerichtet ist”; trans. 3. p. 358.) Such a thought could not have been conveyed to his readers by so obscure a hint. It is always dangerous to read into the words of this Epistle the things which any particular theory of its authorship make it desirable to find there. On the other hand, the words do not “show the readers of this Epistle to be those who are the hearers of all his Apostolic preaching” (Weiss, p. 30). Their more probable significance is suggested by the following κὶὑες What the eye-witnesses have heard and seen they announce to others as well, in order that they too may share the fellowship which Apostles and disciples have so long enjoyed.
κιωίνἔηε The exact phrase is found only in this Epistle in the N.T. The writer is rather fond of the use of ἔενwith a substantive to intensify the meaning of a verb. Cf. his use of it with ἁατα, χεα, πρηίν ἐπδ, ζή, κλσν As contrasted with the simple verb, which merely expresses the fact, it may perhaps suggest the sense “to have and enjoy.” Κιωενis always used of active participation, where the result depends on the co-operation of the receiver as well as on the action of the giver. Cf. Philo, Leg. ad Caium, §4 (quoted by Grimm), τςονκιωί πὸ Ἀόλν τ μδνοκῖνἐιηεκτ; 1Co_10:16, οχ κιωί τῦσμτςτῦΧιτῦἐτν It does not properly denote a merely passive sharing, as μτχ can express, though the words are sometimes used interchangeably; cf. 2Co_6:14, τςγρμτχ δκισν κὶἀοί ἢτςκιωί φτ πὸ σόο; see T. S. Evans in the Speaker’s Comm. on 1Co_10:16.
κὶ…δ] Cf. Joh_6:51, κὶὁἄτςδ: 3Jn_1:12, κὶἡεςδ μρυομν It may be considered doubtful whether “the κίemphasizes, while the δ serves as connecting particle.” The use of κὶ…δ would seem rather to develop and intensify a thought or idea. See Ellicott on 1Ti_3:10. “Fellowship, I say; and remember that the fellowship of which we speak, and which we enjoy, is no less than fellowship with God and His Son.” Comp. Joh_17:11, Joh_17:20-23.μτ τῦπτὸ κτλ Fellowship with God became possible when Christ revealed Him to men as the Father, with whom His children could enter into communication. Such fellowship, i.e. that which is possible between parent and child, is only realized in and through Jesus Christ, the man whom God sent to make Him known. The title Ἰσῦ Χιτςalways emphasizes both ideas, of the historical life and human nature of Jesus of Nazareth, and of the Divine commission of God’s Messiah. And the use of the title “Son” (μτ τῦυο ατῦ emphasizes His capacity to make God known. The writer can conceive of no adequate knowledge of God which can be apprehended by man except in so far as it is revealed in a real human life, by one who is an only be gotten Son of God. Only a Son can reveal the Father. Only an only-begotten Son, who, so to speak, sums up in Himself all the qualities of His Father, which are completely reproduced in one heir, and not distributed among many children, is in a position to make such a revelation complete. The burden of the writer’s message is summed up in the last verse of the Prologue to the Gospel, “God hath no man seen at any time; God onlybegotten (or the only-begotten Son), who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him.”
4. τῦα The reference is most probably to the contents of the Epistle, “already present to the writer’s mind.” There are many instances in which it is a matter of dispute whether the writer, in using οτς ατ, τῦα τῦο ἐ τύῳ ἐ τύο, δὰτῦο etc., intends to refer to what has preceded or what follows. Both usages are found in the Epistle, but the reference forward would seem to be his prevailing custom. Sixteen instances may be noted where the reference is to what follows (preceded by κί 1:4, 2:3, 3:23, 24; without κί 2:6, 3:1, 8, 10, 16, 4:2, 9, 13, 17, 5:4, 2:14) as against seven where the reference to what preceded is at least probable (without κί 2:22, 26, 4:6, 5:6, 13, 20; preceded by κί 4:3). Here the reference is probably to what follows. The τῦαare not identical with the message described in ver. 3, nor are they contrasted with it. They are the part of it, or the things to be said in explanation of it, which it is expedient that the author should communicate in writing. Scriptio valde confirmat (Bengel).
γάοε ἡες Both words are emphatic. The ατπα have always borne their witness by preaching or teaching. Now there is much that the survivors, or survivor, must write down. In this context ἡεςmust mean “we who have seen and heard,” whether the seeing and hearing are to be interpreted literally or metaphorically. And the literal interpretation is undoubtedly the most natural. The word contains no claim to Apostolical authority, unless, indeed, none but Apostles could rightly claim to be witnesses of what has been described in vv. 1-3. And it does not justify the view that at the time of writing many still survived who had seen the Lord. The conditions are satisfied if even one survivor only is speaking in the name of those of whom he is the last representative, especially if he is addressing Christians among whom the later survivors had spent their last years. It points quite naturally to the “Johannine” circle at Ephesus, but it does no more than point. It offers no proof. The plur. γάοε does not occur again in the Johannine Epistles.
ἵα…ᾖππηωέη For the resolved tense, cf. Joh_16:24. And for the sense, cf. Joh_15:11, Joh_17:13, Joh_4:36, Joh_3:29. The writer’s joy is increased the more his readers can realize the fellowship of which he has spoken, and to promote which is the object of his letter.
ἡῶ] It is very difficult to decide between the readings ἡῶ and ὑῶ. The former is supported by better MSS, and the latter may possibly be affected by assimilation to Joh_16:24. On the other hand, ἡεςis almost certainly the true text just before, and the reading ὑῶ offers a pointed contrast, “we who have seen must write, that you who have not seen may enter into full joy.” And it is a contrast which would not appeal to scribes. Perhaps, however, the ἡῶ suits best the thought of the writer. He would not dissociate himself, and other teachers, from the common joy felt by all when his readers attain “fellowship.” In the spiritual harvest, sower and reaper rejoice together.
2. ερκμν pr. οB 3 40: + κιαηομε40 | τνζη] om. K | τνινο] om. boh-cod.
3. αηομν κιερκμνאharl. | κι om. boh-cod.
ααγλοε]pr. κιאkscr am. arm-codd. Thphyl.: κτγελμν 253ff (Greg. 2).
κιυι אA B C P 7. 13. 40. 68. 180 harl. syrsch etp sah. arm. aeth. Did. Aug.] om. κιK L al. pler. cat. vg. arm-codd. cop. syrp txt Dionys. Oec. Aug.
κιυες om. κιsah. syrsch.
κιηκιωι δ] om. κιboh-txt.: om. δ C* P 13. 27. 29. 69. 81. 180 ascr* vg. sah. arm. (uid.) syrp.
ατυ sah.
4. γαοε] scripsimus, am. harl.: γαω (62) arm-codd. boh-codd.
ηεςאA* B P 13 harl.* sah.] υι Acorr al. fere. om. cat. vg. syrntr cop. arm. aeth. Thphyl. Oec.
ηω אB L 31. 39. 40. 42. 57. 76. 78. 95. 98. 99. 100. 101. 105. 114. 177. 190. 1lect 13lect 14lect 3pe Rev_8 scr am. fu. harl. tol. sah. syrsch are Thphylcom Oeccom] υω A C K P al. plu. vgcle demid. cop. syrp arm. aeth. Thphyltxt Oectxt.
ππηωεη + ε ηι C*.
ια ut gaudeatis et vg. (om. gaudeatis et am.).
A. 1:5-2:27. First description of the two signs of fellowship with God, expressed negatively. First refutation of the twofold “lie.” The “ethical” and “christological” theses presented one after the other, without any definition of their mutual relations.
I. I 1:5-2:17. Walking in light the true sign of fellowship with God (ethical thesis). Refutation of the one “lie.”
1. 1:5-2:6. The thesis maintained in two parallel statements
(a) 1:5-10. The nature of God and the consequent relation of man to God
1:5-10. Having stated that his object in writing is to enable his readers to enter into fellowship, and that the mutual fellowship of Christians leads onwards to that higher fellowship with God in Christ on which indeed it is based, the writer proceeds to deduce from the nature of God the conditions under which fellowship with Him is possible. He does so by setting aside three false pleas often urged by those who claim such fellowship, the denial of the bearing of moral conduct on spiritual communion, of the responsibility for sinful action, of the actual fact of having sinned. With regard to the first two he states by way of contrast the provision made by God for overcoming the hindrances which would seem to prevent the possibility of fellowship with God, in the case of those who by their conduct or their confession refuse to shelter themselves behind such false pleas. The verses which follow contain a similar contrast, expanded into a different form in order to meet a difficulty which might be suggested by what has been said in this passage.
5. The nature of God. God is light, and therefore only those whose conduct can be described as “walking in light,” can enjoy fellowship with such a Being.
In form the opening of the Epistle is closely parallel to that of the Gospel. This verse corresponds to Joh_1:19, and it is introduced in exactly the same way (κὶατ ἐτνἡμρυί). There also the idea of “witness” is taken up from the middle verses of the Prologue, just as ἀγλαhere takes up the ἀαγλοε of vv. 2, 3.
κί The connection with what immediately precedes is not obvious. According to Dr. Westcott it must be found in the idea of fellowship. “Fellowship must repose upon mutual knowledge” (p. 14). If we are to have fellowship with God and with the brethren, we must know what God is and what we are. False views on either subject must prove a fatal barrier to true fellowship. But see the preceding note. It would seem to be simpler to find the connection further back in the idea of the “announcement.” He makes his announcement, contained in the letter he finds it necessary to write (ver. 4), with a special purpose which he has now stated. And the burden of the announcement is this, that God is light, and men must walk in light if they would enjoy His fellowship.
ἀγλα The simplest form of the word is chosen, as the writer wishes to describe its twofold aspect as a message from God to those whom he addresses, in the following words. It is an ἀαγλαfrom God Himself, ἣ ἀηόμνἀʼατῦ It is also an ἀαγλαmeant for those to whom he writes (κὶἀαγλοε ὑῖ). The word may also suggest that the message contains a conception of God which men could not have formed for themselves without His help. It is a “revelation and not a discovery,” it is the message which has come from God to be delivered to men.φςἐτν Anarthrous to express quality. God’s nature is best described as “light.” τ φςwould have suggested light in some particular relation, cf. Joh_1:5-9. φςdescribes His nature as He is, the description being true so far as it goes, though not complete. The primary idea suggested by the word in this context is “illumination.” It is of the nature of light that it is and makes visible. God’s nature is such that He must make Himself known, and that knowledge reveals everything else in its true nature. That this thought is present here is suggested by the following section (2:3 ff.). That God can be “known,” and by those to whom the author is writing, is one of the leading ideas on which he lays special stress. But in view of the use of the metaphor of light and darkness in the Bible generally, and especially in S. John, and of the immediate context in this Epistle, it is impossible to exclude the ethical meaning from the signification of the word here. The context shows that this is the idea which he is most anxious to emphasize. The word must suggest the notes of Holiness and Purity as essential to God’s nature. The conditions of fellowship on which he insists are closely akin to the Levitical “Be ye holy, for I am holy, saith the Lord.” The full meaning, however, of what is contained in words is not limited to the sense in which they were probably used and understood by the writer and his first readers. Jesus’ revelation of God as “Father” goes far beyond what was understood of it by the men of His own generation. For the more permanent meaning of the sentence, and the further ideas which it may be regarded as connoting, see Dr. Westcott’s note (p. 16 f.); Findlay, p. 102.
κὶσοί κτλ This is not a mere repetition of the sentence in negative form, in accordance with the writer’s love of double expression by parallel clauses, positive and negative. And it probably does not merely emphasize the “perfect realization in God of the idea of light.” It emphasizes rather the completeness of revelation. God is not the ἄρτςσγ, or βθς of the more developed Gnostic systems, or the “unknowable” God of the Gnostic thought which preceded those systems. Though complete knowledge of God is impossible, He can be truly “known” here and now, under the conditions and limitations of human life. His nature is “light,” which communicates itself to men, made in His image, till they are transformed into His likeness. From the ethical side, the words also emphasize the conditions of fellowship. Walking in darkness must exclude from the fellowship of Him “in whom is no darkness at all.” Conduct is not the matter of indifference that in some of the teaching of the time it was made out to be. With the order of ideas here, λγς ζή φς σοί (vv. 2, 5), comp. the same sequence in the Prologue to the Gospel (1, 2, 4, 5).
κι om. boh-codd.
ετνατ אB C K L P 31. 40. 69. 105. 137 ascr cscr al. fere. 60 syrp txt Thphyl. Oec.] ατ ετνA 13 al. uix. mu. cat. arm. vg. syrsch et p mg.
ηαγλαא A B K L al. fere. 70 Cat. Did. Thphylcomm Oeccomm vg. syrsch arm. aeth.] ηεαγλαC P 13. 31. 40. 69. 70. 73. 137 ascr al. uixmg sah. cop.(?) syrp Thphyltxt Oectxt: א (sic). An obvious assimilation to a commoner word by careless scribes.
α] πρ 264 (233) O46 (154).
κι om. boh-txt.
ααγλοε] ααγλοε18. 40. 69. 98. 100. 137. 180. 57lect ascr.
ε ατ οκετνאA C K L P al. pler. cat. vg. arm. syrp Or. Did. Aug.] οκετνε ατ B 13. 31 aeth. boh. (uid.) Or. Caes.
6-10. The relation of man to God as determined by the fact that God is light.
6. This revelation of God is not made to satisfy speculative curiosity. It bears directly on practical life. If truly apprehended, it puts aside three false pleas often put forward by men to excuse their “love of darkness.”
The first of these pleas is the “indifference of moral conduct to spiritual communion.” Fellowship with God is impossible where men “walk in darkness.” The light transforms those who receive it. Those who continue to practise the works of darkness cannot be in fellowship with the light. To assert the opposite is to state what is contrary to the facts as we know them (ψυόεα Now that the revelation of God as light has been made by Jesus Christ, such language is a deliberate lie. And the actual conduct of those who make such a statement belies the claim they put forward to have fellowship with God. Their actions are not an expression in life of the moral ideal revealed by Jesus Christ. They “do not the truth.”
ἐνεπμν The form of the sentence introduces a not impossible, perhaps a not unlikely, contingency. And the use of the first person plural, where the writer is thinking of his τκί, with whom he is in spiritual fellowship, and with whom he identifies himself as “compassed with infirmity” and not free from the dangers to which he knows them to be exposed, is an indication that the influence of his opponents had made itself felt both in thought and practice among those who were in the main still faithful to the “truth” as he conceived it. Throughout the Epistle he writes under a pressing sense of danger. He is not wasting his weapons on purely hypothetical situations, of the realization of which he felt no serious apprehension.
μτ ατῦ the Father. The expression must have the same reference as the ἐ ατ of the preceding verse.
ἐ τ σόε πρπτμν Cf. 2:11, (ὁμσν ἐ τ σοί πρπτῖ Joh_8:12, πρπτσ ἐ τ σοί: cf. Joh_11:9, Joh_11:10. The metaphor used by the Lord in the Gospel has already become part of the natural religious language of Christian.The use of πρπτῖ of conduct (cf. the Hebrew הך is common in S Paul and S. John. In the Synoptic Gospels it is found only in Mar_7:5, πρπτῦι …κτ τνπρδσν Cf. Act_21:21, τῖ ἔει πρπτῖ. For the LXX usage, cf. Pro_8:20, ἐ ὁοςδκισνςπρπτ: Ecc_11:9, πρπτιἐ ὁοςκρίςσυἄωο: and for the use of “walk” in connection with φς Isa_2:5, δῦεπρυῶε τ φτ κρο.
For the false views combated in this verse we may compare Clem. Al. Str. iii .4. 30, τιῦακὶο ἀὸΠοίο ψυωύω Γωτκὺ σᾶ ατὺ ἀαοεοτςδγαίοσνυοςμνφσιο πώο θο λγνε ατύ, κτχώεο δ τ εγνί κὶῇἐεθρᾳζσνὡ βύοτι βύοτιδ φλδνς and 5:40, ἀιφρςζνδδσοσν and later, πςβο ἀίδνςἐλκῷ Iren. 1. vi. 2, τ πεμτκνθλυι ο ατὶενιἀύαο φοὰ κτδξσα, κνὁοαςσγααέωτιπάει.
σόε] The distinction can hardly be maintained in this Epistle between σόο, “the concrete thing called darkness,” and σοί, “its abstract quality” (cf. 2:11); or, as Dr. Westcott defines it, “darkness absolutely, opposed to light,” and “darkness realized as a state.” The form σόο occurs only here and in Joh_3:19 in the Johannine writings.
ο πιῦε τνἀήεα] Cf. Joh_3:21, ὁδ πιντνἀήεα ἔχτιπὸ τ φς ἵαφνρθ ατῦτ ἔγ ὅιἐ θῷἐτνεραμν, where the thoughts of this verse find expression in a positive form. Compare also Neh_9:33, ὅιλθινἐοηα: and for the opposite expression, Rev_21:27, ὁπινβέυμ κὶψῦο: 22:15, ὁφλνκὶπινψῦο. To “do the truth,” or to “do a lie,” are natural expressions in the Johannine system of thought in which ἀήεαhas a far wider signification than that with which its modern connotation familarizes us. The Johannine usage corresponds with the meaning of the Hebrew את which denotes reliability, faithfulness, and therefore, when it refers to what is spoken, truth. We may compare the phrases עׂהתדומ, Gen_24:49, Gen_24:47:29; Jos_2:14; 2S. 15:20; and הךבמ, 1 K. 2:4, 3:6; 2 K. 20:3; Isa_38:3. The “truth” has no exclusive reference to the sphere of the intellect. It expresses that which is highest, most completely in conformity with the nature and will of God, in any sphere of being. In relation to man it has to do with his whole nature, moral and spiritual as well as intellectual. “Speaking” the truth is only one part of “doing” the truth, and not the most important. To “do the truth” is to give expression to the highest of which he is capable in every sphere of his being. It relates to action, and conduct and feeling, as well as to word and thought.
εν + γρA.
τ σοε] τ σοι Hδ (Ψ “Walking in the light,” i.e. the conscious and sustained endeavour to live a life in conformity with the revelation of God, who is “light,” especially as that revelation has been made finally and completely in Jesus Christ, is the necessary condition of fellowship. Where this condition is fulfilled, fellowship is real. To claim it is no lie. Comp. “The righteous …will live in goodness and righteousness, and will walk in eternal light” (Book of Enoch xcii. 4).
ατςἐτν The contrast is significant. Men “walk” in light, God “is” in it. Findlay, pp. 100-102.
μτ ἀλλν The strict antithesis to ver. 6, “if we claim fellowship with God, while our conduct does not correspond to the claim, we lie,” would naturally be, “if we walk in light we can claim fellowship with God.” This has led to the alteration of ἀλλνin some texts, ατῦor cum Deo being substituted for it. These readings are clearly attempts at simplification. The writer follows his usual custom. Instead of contenting himself with an exact antithesis, he carries the thought a step further. Fellowship among Christians “shows the reality of that larger spiritual life which is life in God” (Wstct.). It is based on fellowship with God, and it is the active realization of that fellowship. As Christians enter into fuller fellowship with each other, the more fully they come to live the life “in God” into which they have been born again. μτ ἀλλνcannot mean “we with God, and God with us” (Aug. Ew. etc.), nor can it mean that we share with each other the Divine indwelling (Karl), though mutual fellowship is the first step in the path which leads to that.
κί And where the endeavour to “walk in light” is carried out (it depends on the exercise of man’s will whether or not the endeavour is made), the removal of sin, which hinders fellowship with God, is possible in consequence of what the Son of God has gained for men by His human life, the power of which has been set free by death so as to become available for all men.τ αμ κτλ As Westcott has pointed out, the significance of “blood” in Jewish thought is most clearly expressed in Lev_17:11. The blood “atones” through the life which is said to be “in” the blood. The power of Christ’s life, freely rendered to God, throughout His life and in His death, and set free by death for wider service than was possible under the limitations of a human life in Palestine at a definite date, is effective for the gradual (κθρζι removal of sin in those who attempt to realize their union with God in Him. The use of κθρζιdetermines the sense to be the removal of sin rather than the cancelling of guilt. As ritual cleanness was the condition of approach to God under the Jewish sacrificial system, so the “blood” of Christ cleans men’s consciences for God’s service and fellowship. See Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, p. 469.
κθρζι In the Synoptists the word is used especially of cleansing from leprosy (see also its use in Mat_23:26, τ ἐτς Luk_11:39, τ ἔωε). In the Fourth Gospel it does not occur, but the adjective κθρςis found in the Discourses of the Upper Room (13:10, 11, 15:3). In Acts it is used in the sense of “pronouncing clean” (5:15, 11:9), and also (15:9) with τςκρίς cf. 2Co_7:1; Eph_5:26; Tit_2:14; Heb_9:14, Heb_9:22, Heb_9:23, Heb_9:10:2; Test. Rub. 4:8. In the LXX it is found as the equivalent of טרand ההin the senses (1) to cleanse, (2) to pronounce clean. The present tense may point to the νψσα, of which even ὁλλυέο has frequent need in his walk through a soiling world (Joh_13:10). “Docet hic locus gratuitam peccatorum veniam non semel tantum nobis dari, sed perpetuo in ecclesia residere” (Calvin).
Ἰσῦτῦυο ατῦ Cf. 4:15, 5:5; Heb_4:14