4:11-16  11 Dear people, if in this way God loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen a deity. If we should love one another, God stays in us and his love stands mature in us. 13 By this we know that we stay in him and he in use, because he has given of his Spirit to us. 14 And we have seen and are testifying that the father sent the son, savior of this world system. 15 Whoever should confess that Jesus is the son of God, God stays in him and he in God. 16 We also have come to know and have confidence in the love which God has in us. God is love and the one who stays in this love, stays in God and God stays in him.

4:11-16  11Ἀγαπητοί, εἰ οὕτως ὁ θεὸς ἠγάπησεν ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἡμεῖς ὀφείλομεν ἀλλέηλους αγαπᾶν. 12θεὸν οὐδεὶς πώποτε τεθέαται, ἐὰν ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους, ὁ θεὸς ἐν ἡμῖν μένει καὶ ἡ ἀγάπη αυτοῦ ἐν ἡμῖν τετελειωμένη ἐστίν. 13 Ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ μένομεν καὶ αυτὸς ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ μένομεν καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν ἡμὶν, ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος αὐτοῦ δέδωκεν ἡμῖν. 14καὶ ἡμεῖς τεθεάμεθα καὶ μαρτυροῦμεν ὅτι ὁ πατὴρ ἀπέσταλκεν τὸν υἱὸν σωτῆρα τοῦ κόσμου. 15ὃς ἐὰν ὁμολογήσῃ ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ θεὸς ἐν αὐτῷ μένει καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν τῷ θεῷ. 16καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐγνώκαμεν καὶ πεπιστεύκαμεν τὴν ἀγάπην ἣν ἔχει ὁ θεὸς ἐν ἡμῖν. Ὁ θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν, καὶ ὁ μένων ἐν τῇ ἀγάπῃ ἐν τῷ θεῷ μένει, καὶ ὁ θεὸς ἐν αὐτῷ μένει.

Verse 11:  After the focused disquisition on love in vv. 7-10, J re-asserts the obligation believers have to love one another because this activity reflects the character of the God in whom they place their confidence. Although not a new topic per se, J marks it with the vocative ἀγαπητοί, as well as with formula of obligation (ὀφείλω + infinitive) and the explicit subject ἡμεῖς modified by the ascensive καί. This is a first class conditional clause (εἰ + indicative) that assumes the reality of what is supposed. He places the adverb of comparison οὕτως first indicating that the quality of God’s love for believers forms the standard that should motivate their love for one another. God’s action in Christ described in vv. 7-10 forms that basis of comparison. The aorist tense form in the protasis indicates a past, completed action in which the object ἡμᾶς has participated. The first person plural pronouns include J plus his Christian audience. Both the protasis and apodosis have same subject-verb-object structure. ὀφείλω regularly takes a complementary infinitive that defines the nature of the obligation. ἀγαπᾶν is a present active infinitive that expresses an imperfective activity or process.

Verse 12:  J has to deal with an objection to his argument, namely how can one know the nature of the deity’s love, if the deity is invisible. How does the deity reveal this reality and its character so that humans might imitate it in their relationships? J offers three modes of revelation. His initial assertion, without any introductory particle, affirms the reality of this objection. The word order of object-subject-adverb-verb places emphasis upon the object θεόν and positions the subject οὐδείς in the focal point of the clause. It is an inclusive statement, employing the negative adjectival pronoun οὐδείς and reinforced by the temporal adverb πώποτε. The perfect middle verb form τεθέαται indicates that this remains the current situation. The middle voice may express the receptivity of the subject in this sensory process (or lack of it in this case). J has indicated in 1:1-2 what in fact the believers have observed and bear witness to.

The second independent clause in this verse is a compound apodosis that completes a condition. This is a third class condition (ἐάν + subjunctive) that expresses a contingency, using the same language that J incorporates into the statement of obligation given in v. 11 (ἀλλήλους ἀγαπᾶν), but reversing the word order (ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους). J previously described the quality of this love in vv. 7-8, 10. The first clause in the apodosis incorporates a present indicative active verb μένει, indicating imperfective activity or process (is staying/remaining). The subject is the arthrous ὁ θεός. Why does J use the anarthrous θεόν in the previous independent clause? Is he expressing some meaningful difference? ἐν ἡμῖν presumably has a locative sense. The second clause in the apodosis, linked by καί, offers a second observation. αὐτοῦ probably is a subjective genitive (“his kind of love”). J repeats the locative phrase ἐν ἡμῖν. He employs a periphrastic construction as the main verb – perfect middle/passive participle τετελειωμένη + present tense form of εἰμί. This is functionally equivalent to a perfect middle/passive tense form. It expresses the current condition of ἀγάπη, namely “it becomes mature/is complete in us” or “stands mature/complete in us.”

Verse 13:  J offers a second piece of evidence that we can know this love and demonstrate it in our relationships. He asserts what ‘we’ can know (γινώσκομεν) about ‘our’ personal experience of this divine love. He introduces this second mode by using the initial prepositional phrase of means ἐν τούτῳ, that will be defined in the second ὅτι (causal) clause. The first use of ὅτι marks a content clause of indirect discourse (“that”). In v. 12 he asserts that “God is staying/remaining in us” and now he reveals how believers can know that this is the case, repeating the same terminology, using clauses that have alternating subjects and that follow a chiastic pattern.

The causal clause (ὅτι 2°) gives the explanation. The deity (implied subject of δέδωκεν) has given “from his Spirit to us.” The perfect verb form δέδωκεν describes the current status or condition – they are in possession of this gift. The adverbial phrase ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος has a partitive sense, indicating that no one person has a monopoly on possessing this gift. Somehow every believer participates, but this never ‘exhausts’ the capacity of the Spirit to resource any believer with God’s love. αὐτοῦ may define relationship, rather than possession or subordination. J employs a first person plural indirect object (ἡμῖν) to indicate that this gift is available to every believer. See the similar statement made in 3:24, using an aorist tense form.

Verse 14:  J offers the third mode by which believers perceive the reality and character of God’s love, namely the sending of the son, savior of the world system. Although humans may not see the deity directly, they have seen someone about whom they can testify. καί perhaps has an additive sense here. J makes the first plural subject explicit, including himself in the action, and positioning it in the focal point of the clause (see 1:1-3 for previous reference to this observation). J employs the perfect middle indicative tense form τεθεάμεθα to express that this ‘seeing’ remains a continuing reality, cannot be changed, and expresses the receptivity of the subject to this sensory experience. Based on this condition, J asserts what presently they are doing, namely “testifying” (μαρτυροῦμεν), using a present active indicative verb form. 

The subordinate conjunction ὅτι marks indirect discourse expressed as a content clause and functioning as the object of τεθεάμεθα καὶ μαρτυροῦμεν. Once again J uses a subject-verb-object word order, giving prominence to the subject ὁ πατήρ. Although humans may not see “this father,” they have seen “this son.” J again employs a perfect active indicative tense form ἀπέσταλκεν. Does the use of the perfect serve to give prominence to the verbal action (as Culy seems to argue if somewhat reluctantly xxiii-xxv, 2-3). However, in my opinion the stative reality of perfect tense forms needs to be considered within the frame of the verb’s lexical sense. In this case the verb “send” in the perfect tense form may indicate that the sending has occurred in history and its implications continue in the present. He remains “the sent one.” Perhaps the appositional phrase σωτῆρα τοῦ κόσμου expresses the changed state that the sending of the son has generated. However, it is possible to read τὸν υἱόν as object and σωτῆρα as complement (“sent the son, a savior of the world”). J uses a similar construction in 4:10 and Acts 7:35 may express another example and BDAG (120-21.1γ) indicates that the second element expresses purpose.

Verse 15:  The capacity to express this ἀγάπη in alignment with God’s command depends upon a relationship with Jesus, the son of God. Without the portion of the Spirit that God provides at conversion, humans do not have the capacity to express the divine quality of ἀγάπη. J uses a left-dislocated general relative clause marked by ὃς ἐάν + subjunctive to introduce the sentence and define the antecedent of the following ἐν αὐτῷ…αὐτός. The aorist subjunctive verb form ὁμολογήσῃ indicates perfective action. The contingent element references the subject, not the verb.

The subordinate conjunction ὅτι signals indirect discourse that incorporates a content clause that serves as object of ὁμολογήσῃ. The ὅτι clause is in equative clause (A = B) in which the subject is equated with the predicate. The person Ἰησοῦς equals ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. This clarifies the reference to τὸν υἱόν in the previous verse. Two independent declarative clauses constitute the main clause, linked by καί. The syntax in the two clauses replicates that employed in ὅτι 1° clause in v. 13b. Note the chiastic arrangement (θεὸς…αὐτῷ…αὐτὸς…θεῷ).

Verse 16:  The first two clauses of v. 16 emphasize that J and his audience are ones who have made the confession described in v. 15. The coordinating conjunction καί 1° continues the sequence of declarations that incorporates two more perfect active indicative verbs (ἐγνώκαμεν καὶ πεπιστεύκαμεν). The stative aspect of the perfect verb forms indicates completed action with continuing implications (they still are in a state of knowing and confidence or have come to have to know and have confidence). J again makes the subject explicit and puts it in the first position (ἡμεῖς). The direct object, probably of both verbs is τὴν ἀγάπην. J defines this ἀγάπη in the relative clause marked by ἣν that is the direct object of ἔχει and whose antecedent is ἀγάπη. Exactly what θεὸς ἔχει…ἐν ἡμῖν means is debated. The essential statement is that “God has love,” using a present active indicative verb. However, the sense of the preposition and the verb remains unclear.

A second set of three declarations follows. The first is an equative clause in which the subject ὁ θεός is identified with or characterized by ἀγάπη. The subject of the second clause is an articulated, substantival, present active participle ὁ μένων. It is modified by the adverbial prepositional phrase ἐν τῇ ἀγάπῃ. The present tense main verb μένει repeats the meaning of the participle, but the prepositional phrase this time includes an animate noun τῷ θεῷ. The action of the participle is concurrent with the action of the main verb. Note the chiastic structure. The third clause expresses the reciprocity involved in the divine-human relationship, using ὁ θεός and μένει as the main verb modified by the adverbial prepositional phrase ἐν αὐτῷ. In all three clauses J positions the subject first and the predicate element immediately before the verb.