1, 2, 3 John
A Handbook on the Greek TextBy Martin M. CulyBaylor University Press
Copyright © 2004 Baylor University Press
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-932792-08-9
Contents
Preface...................................viiList of Abbreviations.....................ixIntroduction..............................xi1 John 1:1-4..............................11 John 1:5-2:2............................101 John 2:3-6..............................241 John 2:7-11.............................311 John 2:12-17............................381 John 2:18-29............................461 John 3:1-6..............................661 John 3:7-12.............................741 John 3:13-18............................821 John 3:19-24............................911 John 4:1-6..............................991 John 4:7-10.............................1061 John 4:11-21............................1091 John 5:1-12.............................1191 John 5:13-21............................1312 John 1-3................................1412 John 4-7................................1432 John 8-11...............................1482 John 12-13..............................1523 John 1-4................................1553 John 5-8................................1603 John 9-12...............................1623 John 13-15..............................167Bibliography..............................169
Chapter One
A HANDBOOK ON THE GREEK TEXT OF 1, 2, 3 JOHN 1 John
1 John 1:1-4
1 (Here is what we announce to you) concerning the word of life: that which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our own eyes, that which we have scrutinized and our own hands have handled. 2 Now, Life was revealed and we have seen it and testify and announce to you the [pi]pternal Life that was with the Father and was revealed to us. 3 Yes, that which we have seen and heard we announce to you also in order that you too might have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4 So then, we are writing these things to you in order that your joy might be complete.
1:1 [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
The Prologue of John's first letter (vv. 1-4) functions as the epistolary counterpart of the Prologue of the Fourth Gospel. As in the Fourth Gospel, the writer of 1 John does not immediately identify Jesus as the topic. The structure here does not imply a lack of stylistic concern on the part of the author (cf. Strecker, 8), nor does it "lapse into grammatical impossibilities" (Houlden, 45). On the contrary, the structure serves as a powerful literary device. In the Fourth Gospel, the fact that "Jesus is not actually named until the end of the Prologue (1:17), he does not come onto the stage until 1:29, and he does not speak until 1:38.... helps build both interest and tension" (Culy 2002, 138). The same is true here. The writer's coyness in not directly naming the incarnate Jesus as the topic draws the reader into his discourse that follows.
In order to untangle the seemingly tortured syntax of the first three verses, the reader must recognize that the writer has used a topic (or "cleft") construction as a literary strategy. The series of appositional relative clauses in verse 1 introduces the topic, though in a referentially oblique manner. In a topic construction, the referent that is in focus is placed at the beginning of the sentence. If the topic has a syntactic relationship to a clause that follows, it is generally placed in the case it would bear in that clause, even though it is typically picked up with a demonstrative pronoun within that clause (see, e.g., [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in Acts 2:22). At times, however, it appears in the nominative case (as a "hanging," or pendent nominative). Here, the relative clauses function as direct objects of the main verb [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], which does not appear until verse 3.
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The neuter relative pronouns introduce a series of "headless" relative clauses (relative clauses with no expressed antecedent: "that which ...") that stand in apposition to each other. The first relative pronoun is the nominative subject of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], while the subsequent ones are accusative direct objects of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ... [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The neuter gender may be explained by the fact that the writer is talking about his and other eyewitnesses' broad experience of the incarnate Jesus (cf. Harris 2003, 49).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Impf ind 3rd sg [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the significance of the verb tense, see below on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Given the thematic and linguistic links to the Fourth Gospel's Prologue, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] could be understood here as a pre-creation "beginning" (so Strecker, 9; cf. Smalley, 7), particularly given the expression [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in verse 2. The later use of the expression [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in 2:13 as a title for Jesus supports this view. The immediate context, however, and the use of the preposition [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] rather than [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] may point to the beginning of Jesus' ministry (see esp. Brown, 155-58). It is probably best to affirm intertextual links between the two passages (see below on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) without positing a referential link between [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (John 1:1).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Prf act ind 1st pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The first person plural verbs in verses 1-4 probably both (1) highlight the writer's status as one of a limited group of eyewitnesses, and (2) bolster the authority of the letter by linking it to that group. There is movement between present, imperfect, aorist, and perfect tenses in verses 1-4. Although verbal aspect is certainly not the sole indicator of prominence, there does appear to be some correlation between a verb's tense and the role or status of the information in this section and the rest of the letter (see also "Tense, Aspect, and Mood" in the Introduction). In verses 1-4, the foundational actions of God, which serve as the basis for what follows, are placed in the aorist tense, or perfective aspect ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:2a; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:2b), which in narrative genre typically helps identify background information (see Porter 1989, 1994). The main hortatory line of thought is carried forward with present tense (imperfective aspect) verbs of communication ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:2; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:2; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:3; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:4). The perfect tense (stative aspect) is used with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] to help highlight the author's status as an eyewitness authority ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:1; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:1; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:2; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:3; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:3). We are then left with two finite aorist verbs ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:1; and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1:1) that must be accounted for ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is "aspectually vague," since the writer only had present and imperfect tenses to choose from; see Porter, 1989). If Porter's analysis holds in epistolary genre, the relative prominence of the events described by these verbs is downgraded, suggesting that they clarify the two verbs that precede and provide supporting information (see further below). Such an analysis recognizes that the author made a conscious choice (he uses perfect forms of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in 4:12, 14; cf. John 1:32) to portray the events using the aorist tense (contra Louw, 101; and Smalley, 7, who argue that the perfects and aorists in v. 1 carry the same semantic value).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Prf act ind 1st pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the significance of the tense and number, see above on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Used with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], the seemingly redundant information emphasizes the eyewitness nature of the writer's testimony (cf. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] below).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Dative of instrument. The expression should be understood as the literal instrument of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] not as an example of synecdoche (see below on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; contra Sherman and Tuggy, 21).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Possessive genitive.
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Aor mid ind 1st pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the significance of the tense and number, see above on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The voice should probably be viewed as a true middle, indicating that the subject is "the center of emphasis, the receiver of sensory perception" (Miller, 429). For more on the voice, see "Deponency" in the Introduction. According to Louw and Nida (24.14), [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] differs from [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (used above) in that it carries the nuance of "continuity and attention, often with the implication that what is observed is something unusual." If the tense analysis above is correct, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is probably not simply being used as a stylistic near synonym of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. It will not do to maintain simply that the writer preferred one verb of seeing when he wrote in the aorist and another one when he used the perfect tense, since he uses [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in the perfect later in the letter (4:12, 14; contra Brown, 162, whose argument follows the earlier work of Tarelli and Freed).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Synecdoche for "we." Synecdoche is a figure of speech in which one term is used in place of another with which it is associated. Unlike metonymy (see 2:2 on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]), synecdoche specifically involves a part-whole relationship. Here, a part of the writer(s), i.e., "our hands," is used to refer to the whole. Used with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], the seemingly redundant information emphasizes the eyewitness nature of the writer's testimony (cf. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] above).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Aor act ind 3rd pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the significance of the tense and number, see above on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Strecker (14, n. 27) notes, "The combination of verbs of seeing with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is striking. This 'touching' is to be found only at this point in the Johannine writings. In Luke 24:39 and Ignatius Smyrn. 2.2, in combination with forms of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], it appears in this concrete, sensory meaning as a proof of the bodily resurrection (cf. John 20:25)."
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The prepositional phrase clarifies what the writer intends to talk about and syntactically anticipates the main verb ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]), which is eventually introduced in verse 3. Given the intertextual links to the Prologue of the Fourth Gospel-the reference to the "beginning" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] versus [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; v. 1; John 1:1); the use of pro;" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] versus [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (v. 2; John 1:1); the use of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] with reference to the [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (v. 1; John 1:14); the connection between the [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (v. 2; John 1:4); and the revelation ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) of the [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in the flesh (v. 2; John 1:14)-a reference to the "(living) Logos" (cf. Burdick, 100-101; Bultmann, 8) here is conceivable, with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] then serving as an attributive genitive. Such a reference, however, is probably ruled out by the fact that (1) it is [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] that is picked up, explained, and personified in the following verse (cf. Harris 2003, 48); (2) [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is used elsewhere in 1 John (1:10; 2:5, 7, 14; 3:18), but not to refer to Jesus (Harris 2003, 52); (3) there are no clear examples of a personified [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] modified by an attributive genitive elsewhere in the NT; and (4) there are no clear contextual markers pointing to personification here.
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Objective genitive (but see above). Genitive modifiers of verbal nouns, i.e., nouns with an implicit event idea, will frequently provide either the "subject" or "object" of the implied event (see also "Syntactic Categories and Labels" in the Introduction). It is highly unlikely that [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] could be taken as a genitive in apposition to [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], and thus a second title for Jesus (contra Burdick, 101). It is only in the following verse that [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is personified through its use with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
1:2 [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The resumptive relative clause that follows (1:3) strongly suggests that verse 2 is parenthetical (contra Francis, 122). As Titrud (247) notes, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is used as a function word to express the general relation of connection or addition, especially accompaniment, participation, combination, contiguity, continuance, simultaneity, and sequence." While the specific semantic relationship between clauses or sentences linked by [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] will vary, clause-initial conjunctive uses of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] generally highlight both thematic continuity and progression of thought, i.e., they "signal that the following clause is still closely related semantically to the preceding one" (Titrud, 251). They thus tend to introduce additional comments regarding a theme or idea that has just been introduced (cf. 1:3b; 2:1b, 2, 17; 3:5, 12, 15, 16, 24; 4:21; 5:6, 14, 17, 20). When [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] introduces a new sentence or paragraph it indicates a close thematic relation to the preceding sentence or paragraph. Although such continuity is usually made clear through the repetition of theme words, in some cases the thematic linkage is made explicit through an anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (3:3), while in a number of cases no lexical linkage is used (1:4, 5; 2:24; 4:3, 14, 16). In this first example of a clause-initial [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], the conjunction introduces a further comment on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (v. 1). At times, sentence-initial kaivs are used with common Johannine expressions. The use of the conjunction in the expression, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2:25; 3:23; 4:3; 5:4, 11, 14; 2 John 6), for example, appears to highlight thematic continuity, whereas the same construction without the conjunction is used with parenthetical or supplementary comments (cf. 2:22; 5:6, 20). The contrast between [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2:3; 3:19, 24) and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2:5; 3:16; 3:19 variant; 4:2; 4:13; 5:2) is less clear. The lack of clarity may relate to the fact that the construction itself always points forward (with the cataphoric demonstrative pronoun). If the above analysis is correct, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] serves as a cataphoric expression that closely links what follows to what precedes.
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Nominative subject of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Personification (a figure of speech in which an abstract idea, or something not human, is treated as though it were a person).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Aor ind 3rd sg [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. In light of the personified subject, the verb could be viewed as either middle or passive voice (see "Deponency" in the Introduction; cf. BDAG, 1048). On the significance of the tense, see v. 1 on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Prf act ind 1st pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the significance of the tense and number of the verb, see v. 1 on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Although there is overlap in the semantics of these two verbs, given the fact that they are conjoined with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], they should not be viewed as a doublet (see 3:18 on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). The first verb probably highlights, once more, the speaker's direct knowledge of the subject matter (cf. LN 33.262), while the second verb points to more generic "informing" or "announcing."
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Pres act ind 1st pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the significance of the tense and number of the verb, see v. 1 on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Pres act ind 1st pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the significance of the tense and number of the verb, see v. 1 on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Dative indirect object of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Accusative direct object of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Given its use with pro;" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], this phrase should be viewed as personification (see above on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Nominative subject of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. When followed by a familial term or human referent, the preposition frequently carries a relational nuance, as here (cf. LN 89.112).
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Aor ind 3rd sg [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the voice, see above on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The repetition of this verb with the specific target of the revelation emphasizes (even more) the reliability of the writer and the teaching he is going to convey.
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Dative indirect object of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
1:3 [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Topic constructions (see 1:1) typically require a resumptive demonstrative pronoun near the main verb. Here, however, in light of the lengthy parenthetical statement in verse 2, the topic is repeated in summary form with a "headless" relative clause (see 1:1), which serves as the direct object of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The reiteration of this material, along with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ... [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (cf. v. 2), makes it clear that the focus is on providing eyewitness testimony. Rhetorically, the language bolsters the reliability of the message that follows. The shift in order of verbs (verse 1 has [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] preceding [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) is probably simply stylistically motivated, perhaps because [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (v. 2) naturally results in [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], while [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] naturally leads to [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Accusative direct object of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Prf act ind 1st pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the significance of the tense and number of the verbs in this verse, see v. 1 on [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Prf act ind 1st pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Pres act ind 1st pl [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Dative indirect object of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Introduces a purpose clause.
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The use of the conjunction with the explicit nominative subject pronoun is emphatic.
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Accusative direct object of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Louw and Nida (34.5) define [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] as "an association involving close mutual relations and involvement." The focus is not simply on enjoying one another's company or social interaction, but rather entering into a relationship of joint participation in the work and life of God (see also Campbell).
(Continues...)
Excerpted from 1, 2, 3 Johnby Martin M. Culy Copyright © 2004 by Baylor University Press. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
