3:13-22  13. And so stop being amazed, brothers and sisters, if the world-system hates you. 14 We know that we stand transferred from death into life, because we love the brothers and sisters. The one who does not love stays in death. 15. Everyone who hates his brother or sister is a murderer and you know that no murderer has eternal life staying in him. 16. By this we have come to know love, because that one for us gave up his life, and so we have obligation to give up [our] lives for the brothers and sisters. 17. Now, whoever has worldly means and sees his brother or sister having need and shuts his compassion from him, how is God’s love staying in him? 18. Little offspring, we should not express love with a saying or with the tongue, but with deed and truth, 19. And by this we will know that we are from the truth and in his presence will convince our heart, 10. that if the heart should condemn us, that God is greater than our heart and knows all things. 21. Dear people, if our heart does not condemn, we possess boldness before God 22. And whatever we might ask, we receive from him, because we keep his commands and we do pleasing things in his presence.

3:13-22  13Καὶ μὴ θαυμάζετε, ἀδελφοί, εἰ μισεῖ ὑμᾶς ὁ κόσμος. 14ἡμεῖς οἴδαμεν ὅτι μεταβεβήκαμεν ἐκ τοῦ θανάτου εἰς τὴν ζωήν, ὅτι ἀγαπῶμεν τοὺς ἀδελφούς· ὁ μὴ ἀγαπῶν μένει ἐν τῷ θανάτῳ. 15πᾶς ὁ μισῶν τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ ἀνθρωποκτόνος ἐστίν, καὶ οἴδατε ὅτι πᾶς ἀνθρωποκτόνος οὐκ ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον ἐν αὐτῷ μένουσαν. 16ἐν τούτῳ ἐγνώκαμεν τὴν ἀγάπην, ὅτι ἐκεῖνος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἔθηκεν, καὶ ἡμεῖς ὀφείλομεν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀδελφῶν τὰς ψυχὰς θεῖναι. 17ὃς δ’ ἂν ἔχῃ τὸν βίον τοῦ κόσμου καὶ θεωρῇ τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ χρείαν ἔχοντα καὶ κλείσῃ τὰ σπλάγχνα αὐτοῦ ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ, πῶς ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ μένει ἐν αὐτῷ; 18Τεκνία, μὴ ἀγαπῶμεν λόγῳ μηδὲ τῇ γλώσσῃ, ἀλλ’ ἐν ἔργῳ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ, 19καὶ ἐν τούτῳ γνωσόμεθα ὅτι ἐκ τῆς ἀληθείας ἐσμέν. Καὶ ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ πείσομεν τὴν καρδίαν ἡμῶν, 20ὅτι ἐὰν καταγινώσκῃ ἡμῶν ἡ καρδία, ὅτι μείζων ἐστὶν ὁ θεὸς τῆς καρδίας ἡμῶν καὶ γινώσκει πάντα. 21Ἀγαπητοί, ἐὰν ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν μὴ καταγινώσκῃ, παρρησίαν ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν θεὸν 22καὶ ὃ ἐὰν αἰτῶμεν, λαμβάνομεν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ τηροῦμεν καὶ τὰ ἀρεστὰ ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ ποιοῦμεν.

Verse 13:  J stated in 3:1 that ὁ κόσμος does recognize God’s progeny and he comes back to this theme. However, he acknowledges that ὁ κόσμος is not just passive aggressive in its response but “hates” believers. In 3:1 he uses the imperative ἵδετε (“take note”), but here he employs the prohibition μὴ θαυμάζετε (“stop being amazed”) in the apodosis of this conditional sentence. This is the only use of this verb in this document. Given the contrasting activities that characterize believers and non-believers, J uses καί with a resultative nuance (“and so”) to connect v. 13 with the previous discourse unit. The vocative ἀδελφοί suggests a new discourse unit.

The protasis is marked by εἰ indicating a first class condition that assumes the truth expressed in the protasis. J has used the verb μισέω in 2:9, 11. The pronoun ὑμᾶς reflects the plural subject of the previous imperative, that is defined by the vocative noun ἀδελφοί.

Verse 14:  J marks the subject of the main clause by making it explicit (ἡμεῖς). He shifts back to first person plural forms of address. The first ὅτι clause marks a content clause of indirect discourse that functions as object of οἴδαμεν. The perfect active indicative verb μεταβεβήκαμεν describes a current state or condition that is the consequence of a past, completed action. The verb means to change state/condition or to transfer from one place to another (BDAG, 638). This is the only occurrence of μεταβαίνω in 1 Jn. However, a similar statement with a perfect form of this verb occurs in Jn. 5.24 where it defines a person who hears and puts confidence in Jesus’ words. The prepositional phrases define what condition/place one changes from (ἐκ τοῦ θανάτου) to the new condition/place (εἰς τῆν ζωήν). Perhaps “stands transferred from death into life” might capture J’s thought.

The second subordinate conjunction ὅτι is causal and explains how they know that this change has occurred. Loving fellow-believers is the key. The term ἀδελφοί reflects the relationship between the two individuals referenced in the previous illustration (3:12).

The last clause is an independent clause and J does not supply any particle to indicate its relationship to the previous clauses. The subject is a negative, articulated present participle ὁ μὴ ἀγαπῶν. μή is the usual negative employed with participles. Such a person μένει (“stays”) in the realm of death (ἐν τῷ θανάτῳ. Note the relationship between the present participle and the present indicative verb tense.

Verse 15:  Those who do not love fellow-believers are in fact those who hate them. J employs another inclusive articulated present participle modified by πᾶς to describe this classification of person. It functions as the subject of this equative clause, with the compound noun ἀνθρωποκτόνος “murderer” serving as the predicate. It has some prominence because it is positioned in the clause’s focal point before the verb. This lexeme only occurs in the NT in Jn 8:44 where it defines Satan and then in 1 Jn 3:15. It does have previous usage in Classical Greek sources.

The second clause is an independent, declarative clause connected to the first by καί. J identifies the truth that his audience knows about murderers (οἴδατε). The ὅτι clause is a content clause of indirect discourse and serves as the object of οἴδατε as in v.14. J used first person plural in v. 14, but now he shifts to second person plural. Why does he make this switch? The subject of the ὅτι clause is πᾶς ἀνθρωποκτόνος, an inclusive expression. Κάϊν fits this classification. The verb ἔχει is qualified by the negative adverb οὐκ, reversing the normal sense of the verb. Such people do not have ζωὴν αἰώνιον. The noun has a second qualifier in the form of an attributive present participle μένουσαν. The participle is modified by ἐν αὐτῷ whose antecedent is ἀνθρωποκτόνος. Such people have not experienced the gospel’s transforming power and still exist subject to the power of this world system.

Verse 16:  J continues to discuss the ethic of ἀγάπη. The initial adverbial phrase ἐν τούτῳ functions instrumentally. It references the contents of the epexegetical ὅτι clause that follows the main clause. J employs the perfect tense form ἐγνώκαμεν to emphasize that this has happened in the past but has continuing implications (“we have come to know”) and he includes himself within the subject. Within the ὅτι clause the demonstrative pronoun ἐκεῖνος plainly refers to Jesus, given the content of the clause. He places ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ in the focal point of the clause. The aorist tense form ἔθηκεν describes a completed action. In this context τίθημι has the sense “take off, give up” and the object is τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ (“his own self”). For a similar construction see Jn 10:17-18. ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν identifies the party for whom “that one” gave up or set aside his very self, an act of benefaction.

A second independent clause is linked with the first by καί. The logical connection is one of consequence. J makes the subject ἡμεῖς explicit and inclusive of himself, giving it emphasis. The main verb ὀφείλομεν is a present tense form, indicating that the obligation is current. This verb takes a complementary infinitive that defines the obligation (θεῖναι – aorist active infinitive of τίθημι). J repeats the core elements expressed in the ὅτι clause. The sacrificial service of Jesus for humans should characterize the sacrificial service of his followers for “the brothers and sisters” who receive the benefit ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀδελφῶν. If this degree of self-giving (an expression of the second commandment) is the ‘obligation’ than any other form of service is a given.

Verse 17:  J offers a scenario to illustrate the kind of response to human need that should not characterize Jesus’ followers. He employs a series of general relative clauses signaled by ὅς ἄν (not repeated) + subjunctive tense forms (ἔχῃ…θεωρῇ…κλείσῃ) to construct the scenario. The first two verbs are present subjunctives (has…observes) and the third is an aorist subjunctive (shuts/locks). Each clause places the verb in second position and modifies the verb by a direct object that has a modifying element, forming three parallel constructions. These clauses form the protasis and an interrogative clause forms the apodosis. The entire construction is introduced by δέ that indicates this new topic in the discourse.

The object in the first relative clause is τὸν βίον that means “resources for living” and it is modified by an attributive genitive τοῦ κόσμου (“resources for living supplied by this world”). In the second relative clause the object is τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ — linking this entire clause with the previous discussion – modified by an adverbial present participle χρείαν ἔχοντα. Perhaps the sense is “sees his brother as he has need.” Culy (I, II, III John) parses this as an object (τὸν ἀδελφὸν) construction defined by a complement (χρείαν ἔχοντα). I do not think the participle is adjectival in this context because it lacks the article. See similar constructions with θεωρέω see Mk 5:15; Lk 10:18; Jn 6;19 where the participle also is anarthrous. τὰ σπλάγχνα αὐτοῦ, the object of the third verb κλείσῃ, is linked with the adverbial phrase ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ. τὰ σπλάγχνα refer to internal organs that were thought to be the source of certain feelings, similar to usage of ‘heart’ in English and often then used to express the idea of love, affection (Phil 1:8; Phlm 12).

An interrogative clause marked by the interrogative adverb πῶς (“how?”) forms the main clause. The subject ἡ ἀγάπη occupies the focal point and it is modified by the genitive τοῦ θεοῦ that could function as subjective or objective genitive. ἐν αὐτῷ refers to the relative pronoun ὅς. The main verb μένει is a present tense form.

Verse 18:  Whether v. 18 forms the end of the paragraph as NA 28 suggests or J continues with vv. 19-22 to draw this section of his discussion to a close can be debated. The vocative τεκνία is not a sure indication of a new section. The verse is composed of two independent imperatival clauses, the first negative and the second positive. The verb is only explicit in the first clause. The prohibition is expressed with μή + first person plural present hortatory subjunctive (“do not be loving….”). J includes himself in this instruction. There is no direct object and in the immediately preceding clause the nominal phrase ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ might suggest that God is the implicit object, but ἀδελφός could also qualify. Two instrumental datives modify the verb indicating how such love would be expressed (λόγῳ…τῇ γλώσσῃ). J only articulates γλώσσῃ, probably because it describes a specific thing, namely “the tongue.” How the instrumentality described by the second noun differs in essence from the first is unclear.

The second clause is marked by ἀλλ’ and in this context it does not signal the exclusion of the statement made in the first clause, but probably something that is additional to it. However, the element of contrast is still present. J marks the second set of datives with the preposition ἐν. Perhaps he gives more of a nuance of means by this variation. By not repeating the preposition with each item, J might be indicating that the two nouns operate as hendiadys, i.e., “real actions/deeds.” Sometimes in the Johannine literature ἀληθεία refers to something that is real or genuine and thus the truth.

Verse 19:  I find it strange that NA 28 begins a new paragraph with v. 19, but punctuates the end of v. 18 with a comma. I am not sure what they are signaling by this combination. What creates ambiguity is ἐν τούτῳ, because we do not know whether it is referring back to v. 18 or forward to v. 20-22. In my opinion the use of ἀληθεία in v. 19 probably references its use in v. 18 and suggests that the two belong together in J’s construction. J uses a future verb form γνωσόμεθα indicating that this ‘knowledge’ emerges after some other action, presumably that described in v. 18. The middle voice expresses the idea of the subject’s involvement in the action, either cognitively or in some other manner. The subordinate conjunction ὅτι marks a content clause of indirect discourse that functions as the object of the main verb. The prepositional phrase ἐκ τῆς ἀληθείας indicates the “origin” or “allegiance” of the verb’s subject – a first person plural form. Compare the use of similar constructions in 3:7-10. ἀληθεία probably refers to the gospel as revealed in Jesus but also associated with Yahweh’s revelations in the Jewish scriptures.

The second independent, declarative clause is linked with the first by the conjunction καί. NA 28 uses a period to conclude the first clause and so it does not interpret the second clause as part of the ὅτι clause. Rather the second clause could continue to reflect ἐν τούτῳ, given the use of repeated future verbs. The adverbial prepositional phrase ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ is placed in the focal point of the clause, giving it prominence. The antecedent of αὐτοῦ is probably θεός. If the first future verb anticipates a state of being in the immediate future, the same timeframe probably defines πείσομεν. J, then, probably is not referring to the second coming, but rather life in this age lived in the presence of God. πείθω means to convince someone of something and to act upon this knowledge. This knowledge is expressed in v. 20. In the Greek textual tradition both singular and plural forms of καρδία occur as the object of the verb. “Heart” here refers to the cognitive, decision-making center of a human being.

Verse 20:  Since πείσομεν already has a direct object (τὴν καρδίαν) the ὅτι clause does not function as an object clause. The repeated ὅτι is awkward syntactically. The first ὅτι ἐάν may in fact be ὅ τι ἐάν meaning “whatever/whenever” and modifies the verb πείσομεν adverbially. The second ὅτι would be causal. Alternatively, the first ὅτι might be causal and the second ὅτι may introduce an object clause that modifies an implicit verb such as “we know….” A third option is to consider the ὅτι clauses to be epexegetical, with the second “used resumptively following the protasis” (Culy, 94).

The conditional clause is a third class formation, offering a speculative idea (ἐάν + subjunctive). The possessive pronoun ἡμῶν could function as the object of καταγινώσκῃ, or as a modifier of ἡ καρδία, or it may serve a dual function. Its position between the verb and noun suggests that it qualifies both.

In the second ὅτι clause ὁ θεός is the subject of ἐστίν and μείζων, a comparative form of μέγα, is the predicate, characterizing the subject in some way. τῆς καρδίας is a genitive of comparison, complementing the adjective and separated from it. Both verbs are present active indicative forms indicating current reality. J gains comfort from that reality that the deity “knows everything.

Verse 21:  J offers another incentive for his audience to embrace the second great commandment. He employs the vocative ἀγαπητοί as means to make his instruction more appealing. His instruction is one of the ways in which he is loving them as brothers and sisters in Christ. The sentence is constructed as a third class condition (ἐάν + subjunctive). The wording of the protasis parallels that of the protasis in v. 20a, but this time J places the subject first (ἡ καρδία). Again, the genitive pronoun ἡμῶν could qualify either the preceding noun or following verb, or both. Its position in the focal point of the clause gives it some prominence. The textual apparatus in NA 28 shows that the  position or presence of ἡμῶν is quite uncertain.

In the apodosis the object comes first, giving it some emphasis. For παρρησίαν see 1 Jn 2:28; 4:17; 5:14. In 4:17 believers experience boldness at the return of Christ. Here, the present tense ἔχομεν indicates that they also experience boldness with God in this age, particularly in the matter of prayer (v. 22). πρός + accusative suggests the idea “in the presence of God.”  

Verse 22:  NA 28 does not have any punctuation after v. 21 and so considers vv. 21-22 to be closely linked. καί may have a resultative nuance, if these two sentences are logical connected. The initial general relative clause marked by ὃ ἐάν functions as the object of λαμβάνομεν, the main verb. The inclusion of ἐάν, plus the present subjunctive verb αἰτῶμεν, indicates that the clause refers to anything that the believers might request. By fronting the relative clause, it frames the action of the main verb. λαμβάνομεν is a present indicative active tense form. Are there any limitations to this declaration suggested in the context?

The sentence concludes with a compound clausal ὅτι clause. Both segments of the causal clause show the same word order, namely direct object + reference to God + verb. Confidence in God and support from him arise from “keeping his commands” and “doing the things that please.” For τὰ ἀρεστά see Jesus’ self-declaration in Jn 8.29. Is there any meaningful difference between ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ (v. 19) and ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ in v. 22?