2:1-6 1 My progeny, these things I am writing to you lest you might sin. And if someone should sin, we have an advocate with the father, Jesus Messiah, the just one. 2 And he himself is the sacrifice that atones for our sins—but not for ours only, but also for the entire world of humanity. 3 And in this way we do know that we have come to know him, if we should be adhering to his commands. 4 The one who says “I have come to know him” and is not adhering to his commands is a liar and in this person the truth does not exist. 5 Now, whoever adheres to his message, genuinely in this person God’s love is brought to completion. In this we do know that we exist in him. 6 The one who says that he is continuing in him has obligation, just as that one walked, also himself to keep walking in the same manner.
2:1-6 1 Τεκνία μου, ταῦτα γράφω ὑμῖν ἵνα μὴ ἁμάρτητε. καὶ ἐάν τις ἁμάρτῃ, παράκλητον ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν δίκαιον· 2 καὶ αὐτὸς ἱλασμός ἐστιν περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, οὐ περὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων δὲ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου.
3 Καὶ ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐγνώκαμεν αὐτόν, ἐὰν τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ τηρῶμεν. 4 ὁ λέγων ὅτι ἔγνωκα αὐτὸν καὶ τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ μὴ τηρῶν ψεύστης ἐστίν, καὶ ἐν τούτῳ ἡ ἀλήθεια οὐκ ἔστιν· 5 ὃς δ’ ἂν τηρῇ αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον, ἀληθῶς ἐν τούτῳ ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ τετελείωται· ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐσμεν. 6 ὁ λέγων ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν ὀφείλει, καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν, καὶ αὐτὸς οὕτως περιπατεῖν.
Verse 1: In my opinion, the content and vocabulary of vv. 1-2 indicate that it should be considered the conclusion to 1:5-10. J then begins a new topic in v. 3. He employs the vocative τεκνία μου in order to emphasize the long-standing relationship he has with the audience. The shift to first person singular language also emotes relational connections. τεκνία is a diminutive form of τέκνον and diminutives denote endearment. He uses it seven times to address the audience and get their attention. τέκνον does not occur in vocative constructions, but tends to occur in the nominal phrase τὰ τέκνα τοῦ θεοῦ. Presumably many, if not all in the audience are J’s spiritual progeny. I choose the term progeny as the translation because ‘children’ miscommunicates the status of the audience in my opinion. Presumably he has had some role in their spiritual experience with Jesus Christ.
Once again J fronts the direct object (ταῦτα) giving it prominence. Presumably the antecedent is the content of 1:5-10. The present active indicative γράφω references the earlier γράφομεν (v. 4). The alternation between first person plural and first person singular forms also occurs in the Thessalonian correspondence. Exactly what it says about the way this document was composed or what it is communicating about the authority of the message remains debated. J’s choice of a present tense form gives a lively sense that he personally and presently is engaged in the writing process. The dative ὑμῖν is the indirect object of γράφω.
The adverbial clause marked by ἵνα μή probably is a negative purpose clause explaining why J is writing this essay for them. However, it might also indicate a clause of fear, i.e., he is writing because he is concerned “lest you should sin.” Alternatively, the subordinate clause communicates an implied prohibition. He employs the aorist active subjunctive ἁμάρτητε, probably expressing a general statement.
J realizes that while the ἵνα clause expresses the ideal outcome of his instruction, the reality is that people in his audience will commit acts of sin. He employs a third class condition (ἐὰν…ἁμάρτῃ), using a contingent expression to reduce the harshness of his observation. He continues with the aorist tense form. The subject is τις, an indefinite pronoun, and this again diffuses the accusation. The apodosis begins with the direct object παράκλητον. The scenario suggests a legal context in which J perceives that Jesus Christ serves as the advocate of believers who sin, thereby mitigating the consequences of their disobedience. The following appositional phrase Ἱησοῦν Χριστὸν δίκαιον identifies who the παράκλητος is. In John’s Gospel this term describes the function of the Holy Spirit (Jn 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7). Grayston (JSNT 13(1981), 67-82) argues that the term describes someone whose status enables him to advise and act as sponsor when a person is making defense before an official and petitioning for a favorable response. It is Jesus’ status as Messiah, δίκαιος and “atoning sacrifice” that makes him a powerful advocate before the Father.
The present active indicative ἔχομεν indicates a present, continuing relationship between believers and this παράκλητος, who resides in heaven. The adverbial prepositional phrase πρὸς τὸν πατέρα probably indicates location in the presence of the Father (as in John 1:1). The proper noun Ἰησοῦς is appositional to παράκλητον. In turn Ἰησοῦν has the title Χριστόν as its own appositional modifier. In my opinion the adjective δίκαιον could modify Ἰησοῦν, but its separation from Ἰησοῦν by the intervening Χριστόν also suggests that it may modify Χριστόν, with the sense “Jesus, the righteous Messiah. The location of Jesus (πρὸς τὸν πατέρα) and these two terms indicate why Jesus has the status to function as παράκλητος for believers who sin. Of course, it is equally possible that δίκαιον qualifies the double expression Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν.
Verse 2: καί marks the addition of another qualification that enables Jesus to function as παράκλητος. J employs the intensive αὐτός to give prominence to the subject. He places the predicate nominative, the anarthrous ἱλασμός, in the focal point of the clause, just before the equative verb ἐστιν that identifies the subject with the predicate nominative (A = B). The noun occurs also in 4:10 and these are its only uses in the NT. The cognate verb ἱλάσκομαι means “to appease” and in Classical Greek the object often is a deity (LSJ, 828). Passive forms express the idea of “to be merciful, compassionate.” ἱλασμός is attested once in a 6-5th cent. BCE source, but then has several attestations in the Septuagint (e.g., Lev 25.9; Num 5:8; Psa 129:4; Ezek 44:27), representing a variety of Hebrew terms. In Lev 25:9 it references “the day of atonement” and in Num 5:8 it describes “the ram of atonement” that a person offers “to make atonement.” Ezek 44:27 refers to the requirement for priests and Levites who are defiled “to offer an atonement” before they minister in the temple. In the context of 1 Jn it probably has some reference to the significance of Jesus’ death as a sacrifice that appeases the deity regarding our sins because Jesus has born the consequences of our human sins. The theological implications of this and cognate terms continue to be debated. It is qualified by the adverbial phrase περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν (as also in 4:10). The plural noun indicates again specific sinful actions.
The compound verb ἐξιλάσκειν and cognate noun ἐξιλασμός occur much more frequently in the Septuagint. In a number of contexts the verb phrase ἐξιλάσκειν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας occurs (e.g., Ex 32:30; Lev 5:10), but usually the prepositional phrase incorporates a personal pronoun. This usage may explain the sense J intends with ἱλασμὸς…περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν. In one Greek inscription dated sometime in the Roman Imperial Period, but roughly contemporary with 1 Jn, we find a similar expression: ἁμαρτίαν ὀφ(ε)ιλέτω Μηνὶ Τυράννῳ, ἣν οὐ μὴ δύνηται ἐξειλάσασθαι, indicating that some wrongful action (ἁμαρτίαν) was committed against the god Men Tyrranos “which he may never be able to appease.” It indicates that such terminology could be used in pagan religious settings that describe attempts to appease gods for human misdeeds of some kind.
The genitive ἡμῶν probably is subjective, referring to the sins we commit. J is quick to point out that such appeasement/propitiation is available to the whole of humankind. δέ occurs about as late in a clause as you find it. Usually it is in second place. It is probably adversative here. The pronominal adjective ἡμέτερος often has an emphatic nuance when used instead of the possessive pronoun. οὐ…μόνον ἀλλὰ καί defines alternatives that are not exclusive, but inclusive (“not only but also”). ὅλος tends to emphasize the entirety of something a bit more than πᾶς. The noun κόσμος here probably refers to the human system that exists under curse because of sin and not the physical planet the universe, even though this human system exists on this planet.
Verse 3: It is possible that we should regard vv. 3-6 as part of the initial section 1:5-2:2. The discourse continues without a break, marked by the coordinating conjunction καί. The themes of truth and lying, as well as reference to “walking” (v. 6), reflect ideas already expressed. However, the repeated use of the verb γινώσκω introduces a new motif used frequently in the next three chapters.
J begins the verse with the apodosis of a third class conditional sentence. The adverbial prepositional phrase ἐν τούτῳ describes the means by which the subjects know something. It probably references the contents of the following protasis marked by ἐάν. It is a common phrase in this document and the writer uses it to emphasize what he is about to communicate. The verbs in the apodosis and the protasis are first person plural forms, referencing the writer and his audience. The imperfective aspect of the present indicative verb γινώσκομεν and its lexical sense imply Aktionsart expressing continuing status or condition. ὅτι marks the content clause of indirect discourse that functions as the main verb’s object describing what they know. The perfect active indicative verb ἐγνώκαμεν indicates a current state of knowing. Perhaps the claims made in 1:1 form the ways in which the subjects have “come to know” the object αὐτόν, the Messiah. This knowing is the product of their direct interaction with the Messiah.
The protasis of the third class condition is marked by ἐάν…τηρῶμεν and expresses a contingent action. This is the first use of this verb in 1 Jn (eight occurrences) and it means “to preserve or guard” something. And in this context the present tense form expresses a process, perhaps with the sense “if we should be preserving/guarding….” In this case it is τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ that the writer and the audience should be preserving in order to justify their claim “to know the Messiah.” In other words, this verb phrase indicates that personal efforts to preserve/guard the Messiah’s instructions/commands become the evidence to support a claim to know him. ἐντολή occurs frequently in the Greek Pentateuch (particularly OG Deut) to refer to Yahweh’s instructions to Israel. This terminology indicates that God assumes that participants in his new covenant will be obedient to the Messiah’s instructions. Consider Matt 28:19-20 where Jesus says that essence of discipleship means τηρεῖν πάντα ὅσα ἐνετειλάμεν ὑμῖν. Is J echoing such gospel terminology? J uses this noun fourteen times in 1 Jn (it also occurs 4x in 2 Jn), but he never employs the cognate verb. J again places the direct object before the verb.
Verse 4: The first clause in this verse is an equative clause in which the subject, a single person described by two substantival, present active participles (ὁ λέγων…καὶ…μὴ τηρῶν) linked by καί, is identified and characterized as ψεύστης (predicate nominative) (see 1:6, 10). The single article used with the two participles indicates that they refer to the same individual who acts this way in a somewhat consistent manner. It is the concurrent participation by such individuals in both actions that constitutes them “liars.”
The subordinate conjunction ὅτι marks the indirect discourse content clause that functions as the object of λέγων. J employs a perfect active indicative verb ἔγνωκα, a tense form that he has just used in v. 3. The antecedent of the object αὐτόν is Jesus Messiah. By placing the two substantival participles at the beginning and end of the phrase, as well as juxtaposing the two objects in between, J creates a chiastic structure. He places the object τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ before its verb τηρῶν. μή is the form of negative normally employed with participles. The predicate ψεύστης comes after the subject and before the equative verb ἐστίν and occupies the focal point of this clause.
The second clause virtually repeats the wording used in the last clause in 1:8. The only difference is the use of ἐν τούτῳ, alluding to the person acting in this fashion (2:4a), placed first in the clause and ἐν ἡμῖν that comes at the end of the clause in 1:8. οὐκ ἐστίν probably means “is not existing.” J marks the subject of this equative clause with the arthrous ἡ ἀλήθεια (as in 1:8).
Verse 5: As in 1:1 J begins this sentence with a “headless” relative clause, perhaps introducing a new phase in this discussion. Left-dislocations of this kind often introduce new content. However, in this context the idea was already expressed in v. 3. So perhaps in this case prominence is given to the positive case being presented, following the negative case in v. 4. δέ is probably adversative given the content that contrasts with the previous verse. ὃς…ἄν expresses a generalized reference to some person. Subjunctive verbs usually occur in such clauses (present active subjunctive τηρῇ). J places the genitive pronoun αὐτοῦ before the noun it modifies (τὸν λόγον), in contrast to the noun phrase in the previous verse (τὰς ἐντολὰς αυτοῦ). Koine Greek positions possessive pronouns in predicative or attributive relationships. A predicative position sometimes expresses the sense “whoever preserves this message of his….” The antecedent of αὐτοῦ is probably Jesus and is probably a subjective genitive.
The main clause begins with the adverb ἀληθῶς, giving it prominence and making a strong affirmation. The phrase ἐν τούτῳ is resumptive, with the demonstrative pronoun referencing the person described in the initial relative clause. ἐν here “denotes the object to which someth. happens or in which someth. shows itself…” (BDAG, 329.8). The subject of the main verb τετελείωται is the phrase ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ. This is the first of eighteen occurrences in 1 Jn. The genitive could be objective genitive (“the love for God”) or more probably is a subjective genitive (“the love God displays”). Or conceivably J meant both elements to be understood. In my opinion, whether we interpret it as an objective or subjective genitive depends upon how we construe the meaning of the verb.
The perfect passive indicative verb τετελαίωται expresses a state or condition in which the subject now exists. The agent responsible for this action is implied. Such consistent regard for Jesus’ instructions demonstrates that such people live in a state of spiritual maturity or some sense of ‘completeness’, or perhaps “has come to full expression,” or even “that has achieved its goal.” Some commentators regard the verb as a middle form, but I think it is difficult to argue this given that the subject is ἀγάπη. J expresses a similar idea in 4:12, 17, 18.
The verse concludes with a complex clause that repeats the initial clause in v. 3 (ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκομεν). Should we regard this as an example of inclusio? ἐν τούτῳ probably is anaphoric in this context. The present active indicative γινώσκομεν expresses imperfective aspect and the Aktionsart with this verb in this context probably expressing a continuing process or characterization. The object is a subordinate content clause of indirect discourse marked by ὅτι. J fronts the predicate ἐν αὐτῷ, whose antecedent is Jesus Messiah. Is the meaning of ἐν similar to Paul’s formula ἐν Χριστῷ? Perhaps this is another way to express the idea of κοινωνία (1:3). The copula verb ἐσμεν indicates a present reality (“we exist in him”).
Verse 6: As in v. 4 J expresses the subject as a substantival, present active participle (ὁ λέγων). He describes this imaginary interlocutor as engaged in activity concurrent with the main verb ὀφείλει. We might translate “the one who declares….” The present active infinitive μένειν forms the content of this declaration and it functions as the object of the participle. This is another syntactical option for representing indirect discourse. The subject of the infinitive is the same as the referent for ὁ λέγων. The infinitive is modified by the adverbial prepositional phrase ἐν αὐτῷ, positioned before the infinitive for prominence. Presumably ἐν αὐτῷ has the same meaning here as it does in the previous verse and refers to Jesus Messiah. Is there a distinction between ἐν αὐτῷ ἐσμεν (v. 5) and ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν (v. 6)? If so, what might it be? The verb in the main clause is the present indicative active form ὀφείλει. It denotes an obligation, the nature of which is described in the accompanying complementary infinitive περιπατεῖν that comes at the end of the entire clause. The Aktionsart of this present tense verb suggests that this is a continuing obligation or duty to choose certain moral/religious values. Should we consider περιπατέω to be a kind of fossilized metaphor that means in essence “to live” or “to act ethically” in a certain manner?
The καθώς…οὕτως co-relative construction occurs frequently in the NT and expresses acomparison (“just as…so/thus…”). In the adverbial, subordinate clause of comparison marked by καθώς, J makes the subject of the verb explicit, using the more remote demonstrative ἐκεῖνος (“that person”). It refers to Jesus, the righteous Messiah (2:1). The adjective δίκαιον, used to qualify Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν in v. 1, may form the frame of reference of this walking activity. The aspect of the aorist indicative active verb περιεπάτησεν is perfective and probably in this context refers generally to Jesus’ ethical behavior (which the writer seems to claim he has observed [1:1]). καί is ascensive giving emphasis to the intensive pronoun αὐτός (“he indeed/also”). αὐτός functions in a resumptive fashion, referencing the subject of ὀφείλει, namely ὁ λέγων.