NGRK 511 LIBERTY UNIVERSITY Exegetical Analysis_23-24.pdf

wrote from Ephesus, late in the first century. What is more clear is that John was waging a battle

against heretical ideas that had crept into the church. The first epistle of John is directed to

Chrisitan believers who were beset by false brethren, promoting doctrines contrary to the gospel

message. A significant schism in the church had already occurred (2:19). Examples of the

heretical “teachings” with which John had to contend are the belief that Christ had not come in

the flesh (2:22), and the idea that sin is of little consequence for those who possess a special

knowledge of Christ (2:3-4, 20, 27). Thus, it seems that gnostic and docetic heresies had already

gained a foothold in the churches of Asia Minor. As Paul said decades earlier, “the mystery of

lawlessness is already at work” (2 Thess 2:7), and this is the broad historical context of 1 John.

The passage in question, 3:1-6, alerts the reader to an extraordinary present reality and to an

types of context exist, all potentially important for rightly dividing the word of truth. These

include historical, social, cultural and canonical contexts, as well as others. However, in this

section, are some brief remarks about literary context. Generally, literary context would include

an analysis of genre and sub-genres, and an appreciation of how main ideas and supporting

information is structured. Here, however, I will only discuss the immediate context. By taking

note of that which comes immediately before and after the passage in question, we gain a better

understanding of how the passage fits into the author’s flow of thought.

refutation of Docetism by testifying to “the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made

that was preached from the beginning (2:28). In the last verse of chapter 2, John introduced the

concept of being born of God. Γεγέννηται is a perfect passive indicative verb. Thus, according

extraordinary reality should motivate everyone who names the name of Christ to pursue a life

dedicated to righteousness (2:29). The first two chapters of 1 John may be considered a lead-in

to the passage under consideration. 1 John 3:1-6 forms the emotional peak of the letter,

to live a life of emulation, inspired by bottomless gratitude, while surgically refuting alien ideas

that would undermine the person and work of Christ.

Regarding this clause Jackman has said, “it is meant to take our breath away; to startle and

amaze us so that we are left gasping.”2 Two other figures of speech may be highlighted in verse

3:1. Κόσμος, the “world” is a synecdoche for unbelievers of the world. The author is also using

personification, since the world is said to οὐ γινώσκει (“not know”).

James, Peter, John) use some form of ἁγνίζω (the root of ἁγνίζει). John makes two distinct uses

of ἁγνίζω. In John 11:55, the context is purification achieved through Jewish ritual, with the aim

of being ready to celebrate the Passover. Ritual purification is also the intended meaning in Acts

(21:24, 26; 24:18), where the reference is to Paul undertaking a vow and performing certain rites

Him,” it is clear that the goal of purifying oneself is to be like Christ. Given the non-ritual nature

of the Christian faith, it is certain that 1 John 3:3 is not suggesting purification by ceremonial

purification that John has in mind in 3:3 has to do with the avoidance of sin, especially sinfulness

as a way of life, and the confession of sin, to God, as the means of cleansing. Peter and James

truth (1 Peter 1:22). James emphatically urges his “double-minded” audience to purify their

hearts by submitting to God and resisting the devil (James 4:7-8). The NIDNTTE summarizes

the uses of ἁγνίζω in the LXX, where the context is always cultic ritual.3 In total, then, there

appear to be two broad uses of ἁγνίζω in the New Testament: purification by obedience to

external ritual and purification by obedience from the heart. One thing that both uses have in

common is their reflexive nature; the addressees are always being directed to purify themselves.

Neither type of purification can be applied to someone else, nor undertaken on behalf of another.

3:1 begins, “ ἴδετε ποταπὴν ἀγάπην.” John used the aorist imperative verb, ἴδετε, to insist that

Exegesis, 2nd ed., vol.1 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014).

intended his audience to “see” the Father’s love as a one-time action. Such is indicated by

ποταπὴν, an interrogative indefinite pronoun, that is used, in this case, to refer to something

extended contemplation. “The aorist imperative “see” (ιδετε with the accusative of the object of

consideration) calls on the readers to take a heart-rending look at the amazing love which gave

γάπην) the Father has imparted to them.”4 Therefore, the use of the perfect indicative,

γεγέννηται, in 2:29, followed by the aorist imperative, ἴδετε, in 3:1 provides a sense of hieratic

scale: what the Lord accomplished in a single moment, believers are called to contemplate

indefinitely.

indicative, δέδωκεν, implies that the bestowal is a completed, permanent action; the Father’s love

is not parceled out over time, nor rescinded. Later in the verse, κληθῶμεν (aorist passive

rendered as “for”, “therefore”, “because” or left untranslated. τουτο is an accusative case, neuter,

However, the δια + accusative construction frequently expresses causation or identifies a logical

basis for some asserted claim. “The fundamental idea that finds expression in this prep. [δια ] is

‘through’... but primarily with a causal focus ‘owing to’”. The ESV renders δια τουτο as “the

reason why,” and takes the last part of John’s statement in verse 1, ὅτι οὐκ ἔγνω αὐτόν (“that it

the Christian, the implication of δια τουτο, in 1 John 1:3, is breathtaking: the genuine child of

God is so identified with the Father that the world will not, or perhaps cannot, recognize either,

nor can those of the world distinguish between the two.

Seven of the eight verbs in v2 concern the state of believers, of which John is emphatically sure,

as evidenced by his use of the indicative mood with its declarative force. The other verb,

φανερωθῇ, is aorist passive subjunctive, and refers to Jesus’ appearing the second time. The

aorist subjunctive suggests an event that occurs at a point in time; the definitive moment of

Jesus’s return. Nevertheless, the subjunctive is the mood of potential, not present reality. It is

“not that John had any question as to its certainty, but because the time, from the standpoint of

those cherishing this hope, is entirely unknown. Neither John or his readers, like each generation

of believers since then, could be sure that it would occur during their lifetime. But the condition

uses that Danker et al. identified for καθὼς. Danker specifically classifies καθὼς in verse 2 as a

marker of comparison.6 Believers will see Jesus as He now is; glorified.

knowledge revealed in verse 2. In this case, καὶ introduces a conclusion. Since we will be like

Jesus in the future, we should act now to conform to Him by purifying ourselves. The phrase,

καθὼς ἐκεῖνος ἁγνός ἐστιν comprises an anarthrous, noun-adjective construction expressing a

predicate relation; hence, “he is pure”. Most translations of verse 3 render καθὼς as: “as,” “even

as,” or “just as.” As noted above, Danker et al. identify five broad uses of καθὼς, including as a

marker of comparison (just as), and a marker of extent or degree (as). Translators of v3 seem to

opt for either of these two understandings of καθὼς. However, these two uses of καθὼς seem to

imply a comparison between the purity of Christ and the purity which a person may achieve by

his/her own efforts. But it is unlikely that John is suggesting that a person, in his/her own

strength, may approach the purity of Christ. Thus, another use of καθὼς might be considered,

that is as a marker of cause (since, in so far as).7 In other words, because Christ is pure,

believers have a responsibility to purify themselves to whatever extent possible, but complete

purity will not be achieved until He appears, at which time, “we shall be like Him” (v2).

practicing sin as a lifestyle and lawlessness (that is, the complete refusal to submit to law). The

last clause of verse 4 comprises a subject-predicate nominative construction, ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐστὶν ἡ

have equal priority...word order may be the determining factor” for identifying the subject and

predicate nominative. Also, “the semantic relationship in such instances is that of a convertible

nominative, ἀνομία. Sin is lawlessness and lawlessness is sin. “The statement, “sin is

lawlessness,”... views sin from the divine standpoint... Lawlessness must be understood as

contrariness to law rather than merely as the breaking of a law. Law, in the most absolute sense,

represents God’s character and lawlessness is the antithesis to this.”9 Thus, those who make a

“practice of sinning” reject the authority of law. In this verse, John is not referring to Christians.

Christians sin because of the weakness of the flesh, not because they reject God’s law.

Verse 5 begins with “καὶ οἴδατε” followed by two subordinate clauses that expound on what

John’s audience was charged with knowing. Considering the first subordinate clause (ὅτι ἐκεῖνος

ἐφανερώθη ἵνα τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἄρῃ) modern Christians might tend to emphasize the second portion

of this clause (“in order to take away sins”). But calling to mind that John was refuting those

who asserted that Christ had not come in the flesh (4:2-3), the emphasis should be placed on