1:1-4  1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we gave attention to and our hands handled concerning the word that is life [or living word]—2 This life indeed has become visible and we have seen and so we are testifying and announcing to you this eternal life that was with the father and was made visible to us—3 what we have seen and heard we are announcing even to you, so that you also might have partnership with us. Now indeed this partnership of ours is with the father and with his son, Jesus Messiah. 4 And so these things we are writing, so that our [or your] joy might stand fulfilled.

1:1-4  1 Ὃ ἦν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, ὃ ἀκηκόαμεν, ὃ ἑωράκαμεν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν, ὃ ἐθεασάμεθα καὶ αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐψηλάφησαν περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς – 2 καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἐφανερώθη, καὶ ἑωράκαμεν καὶ μαρτυροῦμεν καὶ ἀπαγγέλλομεν ὑμῖν τὴν ζωὴν τὴν αἰώνιον ἥτις ἦν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα καὶ ἐφανερώθη ἡμῖν – 3 ὃ ἑωράκαμεν καὶ ἀκηκόαμεν, ἀπαγγέλλομεν καὶ ὑμῖν, ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς κοινωνίαν ἔχητε μεθ’ ἡμῶν. καὶ ἡ κοινωνία δὲ ἡ ἡμετέρα μετὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 4 καὶ ταῦτα γράφομεν ἡμεῖς, ἵνα ἡ χαρὰ ἡμῶν ᾖ πεπληρωμένη.

Verse 1: The document begins with a series of five headless relative clauses. Culy (HGT I, II, III John, categorizes these as topic or “cleft” constructions, expressing what the writer regards as the most significant idea or topic at the beginning of the syntactical unit. In this case the writer(s) (noted as J) uses a series of relative clauses that define in greater detail (with some repetition) the object of ἀπαγγέλλομεν in v. 3. In that verse ὃ ἑωράκαμεν καὶ ἀκηκόαμεν function as the object, picking up and repeating the content of similarly worded relative clauses used in v. 1. The material in v. 2 would then be parenthetical.

The neuter singular relative pronouns that mark each of these clauses probably refer to the whole cluster of events and declarations associated with Jesus Messiah, that J claims to have observed firsthand. In the first clause it functions as nominative subject, but in clauses 2-5, it is the object of the main verbs in each clause. The imperfect copula verb ἦν in the first clause links the subject with the prepositional phrase ἀπ’ ἀρχὴς, characterizing the subject as something ancient, i.e., “from beginning.” The sense may be somewhat parallel with the formulation in John 1:1 ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος. As readers we are left to speculate as to what “beginning” J might be referencing by such a clause. How does such a temporal expression define the significance of the subject? Why is this the first thing that J specifies about his topic? If John 1:1-2 is commentary on this expression (ἐν ἀρχῇ), then J is making a very strong assertion about the link between the referent (Jesus, his teachings, and actions) and deity. Or perhaps 1 Jn 1 is chronologically later than John 1:1-2 and J is assuming the readers have some knowledge of this Gospel or the ideas it expresses.

Clauses 2-4 of v. 1 have parallel structures, namely a first person plural verb with the relative pronoun functioning as the object of the verb. J does not clarify who the plural subjects are, assuming that his audience knows this. However, the plural subjects emphasize that J is part of a larger group who can verify the truth of what he claims. ἀκηκόαμεν…ἑωράκαμεν are perfect tense forms whose Aktionsart with verbs of perception may express some sense of current status or condition based upon prior completed action. In this case they have had the various sense experiences and they continue in some way to define their current reality. The past experiences give them the current status of witness. J employs a dative of means τοῖς ὁφθαλμοῖς to define ἑωράκαμεν. ἡμῶν, a genitive of possession, affirms their personal involvement in these sensory events.

In the fourth clause J switches to aorist tense forms (ἐθεασάμεθα…ἐψηλάφησαν), employing a compound relative clause construction. Aspectually, the aorist verbs would affirm that these events happened, but no further information is being communicated. Louw and Nida (279 §24.14) state that θεάομαι means “to observe something with continuity and attention, often with the implication that what is observed is something unusual.” This characterization of the action distinguishes it from the previous usage of ὁράω. LSJ (786) defines it as “gaze at, behold, mostly with a sense of wonder,” often in the role of spectator, and this sight generates speculation as to its significance. This verb occurs in John 1:14. The middle voice would indicate the cognitive or volitive involvement of the subjects in this activity. The second clause in this compound relative clause construction switches subjects, employing αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν. This tactile experience emphasizes that what they observed was not a phantom or the actions of some spectre. Homer (Od. 9.416) uses this verb phrase to describe the way the blinded cyclops groped around to try to catch and consume Odysseus and his mates. J once again specifies that the hands belong to those affirming the truth of these events.

The function of the adverbial prepositional phrase περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς raises the more complex question of the relationship between all of the clauses in vv. 1-3. It is possible to read this syntagm as modifying the four previous finite verbs and in that understanding it clarifies in some sense the referent for the repeated relative pronoun. However, if the contents of v. 2 are a parenthetical comment and v. 3 is the intended context for the relative clauses, then περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς could modify ἀπαγγέλλομεν in v. 3. I think the second option is more likely. It is unclear how we should define λόγος. Does it simply mean “message” and point to the content of what J and his peers are announcing to this audience? Or should we read it in the light of λόγος theology expressed in John 1:1, with τῆς ζωῆς functioning as an appositional genitive, i.e., “the Word, who is Life” or as an attributive genitive, i.e., “the living Word”? See the use of ἡ ζωή that follows in v. 2. However, if λόγος means “message,” then τῆς ζωῆς would function as an objective genitive, i.e., “the message about the life.”

Verse 2: If v. 2 is a parenthesis, then καί might be ascensive, giving prominence to ἡ ζωή that follows (“this Life indeed has become visible”). To understand what J means by ἡ ζωή requires us to wait for further definition. Does it mean life as existence, i.e., a reference to a deity who gives life, or does it refer to the physical life of “the Word” or others, or does it mean eternal or transcendent life? The following phrase τὴν ζωὴν τὴν αἰώνιον clarifies this issue. The aorist passive form ἐφανερώθη could have a middle (has become visible) sense, in which case the subject performs this action, or a passive sense (was made visible), in which case another agent is involved. J employs aorist passive forms of this verb to refer to the first (1:2; 3:5, 8) and second advents (2:28; 3:2b) of the Messiah, as well as the eschatological transformation that believers will experience (3:2a).

J continues with three independent, declarative clauses linked by καί and incorporating first person plural verbs, one of which is a perfect tense form and the other two are present tense forms. ἑωράκαμεν repeats the third verb used in v. 1. J affirms that they have seen this “visible Life” and this experience continues to affect them in some way (perfect tense form). This sensory experience with consequent implications then informs their current testimony (μαρτυροῦμεν) being communicated to this audience in this document. καί 3° could have a resultative nuance (“and so”). ἀπαγγέλλομεν describes the act of a messenger bringing news or a report or it can refer to what any speaker or writer communicates. This verb takes a direct (τὴν ζωήν) and indirect object (ὑμῖν). J does not use the verb κηρύσσω. The adjective τὴν αἰώνιον is in the second attributive position and this gives it a bit of prominence. “Eternal life” is not a human attribute and so J employs ζωή in this context to refer to the deity in some respect as the one who is eternal and makes eternal life available.

J affirms this with the content of the adjectival relative clause marked by ἥτις. This form of the relative pronoun ἥτις, in contrast to ἧ, may have the sense “the sort of life that was….” Or it may be a stylistic variation. πρὸς τὸν πατέρα probably signifies “with” someone, in the sense of relational proximity or presence. J assumes his audience knows that πατέρα refers to one of the members of the Trinity. The imperfect verb ἦν indicates a previous existence with “the father.” However, a change has occurred, defined by ἐφανερώθη. If J intends τὸν πατέρα to be the agent for this passive verb, then the sense is “was made visible.” However, this is not a necessary implication. ἡμῖν is probably an indirect object retained with the passive transformation of the verb. The first person plural pronoun is inclusive of J.

Verse 3: After the parenthesis in v. 2, J reconnects with his initial theme expressed in v. 1 by repeating the content of two of the ‘headless’ relative clauses in the form of a compounded relative clause, but in reverse order (ὃ ἕωράκαμεν καὶ ἀκηκόαμεν). This compounded relative clause functions as the direct object of the main verb ἀπαγγέλλομεν, defining the contents of their message. The indirect object ἡμῖν receives emphasis through the ascensive καί that modifies it. The subordinate ἵνα clause of purpose explains why J and his associates have shared this message. J’s use of the explicit pronominal subject ὑμεῖς gives its own emphasis to the subject, that is re-enforced by the ascensive καί. The placement of the direct object, the anarthrous κοινωνίαν, before its verb puts it in the focal point of the clause. The absence of the article reflects that this is the first mention of the concept of κοινωνία in the document. It is arthrous in the next clause. The main verb in the ἵνα clause is the present active subjunctive form ἔχητε (“you might possess”). The adverbial prepositional phrase μεθ’ ἡμῶν (notion of accompaniment) defines with whom the audience might have κοινωνία.

As BDAG[1] (552) indicates, κοινωνία refers to “close, mutual association.” Perhaps our English terms “relationship” or “partnership” come close to its sense. It expresses that some kind of ‘commonality’ links the writers with the audience through the communication of and response to this message. Perhaps it is another way to speak of covenant linkage. J employs it four times in chapter one and then this term and its cognates do not recur. The second part of the verse is an independent nominal clause linked by δέ to what precedes. The particle may mark this clause as an aside or clarification (“now”). The presence of δέ probably indicates that the initial καί is ascensive, giving prominence to ἡ κοινωνία, the subject. The pronominal adjective ἡμετέρα is an alternative to the genitive plural pronoun ἡμῶν. The pronominal adjective puts focus on those who possess this partnership, i.e., “Now indeed this partnership of ours is….” The first person plural pronominal reference probably includes both the writer and the intended audience of believers. Two adverbial prepositional clauses of accompaniment form the predicate of the nominal clause. The repeated preposition distinguishes two divine personalities with whom these people enjoy this partnership, namely τοῦ πατρός and τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ. By naming “the son” here, J clarifies the meaning of the noun “life” that is the subject of the relative clause at the end of v. 2. The appositional genitive Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ removes any ambiguity about who υἱός might reference. J affirms that an appropriate response to the good news creates partnership with the deity, as well as other adherents, forming a new community. J and his associates sense no need to explain this use of familial language to describe the deity.

Verse 4: J moves on to explain the reason for his composition (γράφομεν). The present active tense form draws the audience into the occasion of its writing. He uses a conjunctive καὶ to link this independent declarative clause with previous one in v. 3, indicating a logical sequence in the discourse’s development. He fronts the direct object ταῦτα, putting it in the clause’s focal point. The neuter plural demonstrative pronoun probably references the entire contents of the document. Another nominative pronoun ἡμεῖς makes the subject marked by the verb’s ending explicit and somewhen prominent. Perhaps J wishes to encourage the audience to accept the goodwill that stimulates this message because “we” are writing it. Another subordinate ἵνα clause of purpose expresses their motivation in writing. A similar clause occurs in 2 Jn 12. As in Paul’s letters to the Thessalonians the writers refer to themselves quite consistently with plural pronouns. J places the subject first (ἡ χαρά) in this clause. This is the only use of this noun in 1 Jn. A genitive pronoun ἡμῶν (or perhaps the variant ὑμῶν that also has excellent textual support) is probably subjective. The verb tense form is probably periphrastic (ᾖ πεπληρωμένη). The participle is probably a perfect passive formation, not middle. The imperfect of εἰμί + perfect participle functions as the equivalent for a perfect verb tense. If this is the case, then J and his associates write this document “in order that our/your joy might stand complete.” Again J expects his audience to understand what this notion of joy includes.

[1] Abbreviations are those used in the SBL Handbook of Style (2014).