Cambridge Greek Testament Commentary
1 John 1:5
5. ἔστιν αὕτη ([435][436][437]) for αὕτη ἐστίν ([438]). ἀγγελία ([439][440][441]) for ἐπαγγελία ([442]). φῶς ἐστίν. The enclitics ἐστίν, ἐσμέν, ἐστέ, εἰσίν are accented thus when the previous word cannot receive the accent: comp. 1 John 2:5; 1 John 3:3; 1 John 3:8; 1 John 3:23; 1 John 4:2-7; 1 John 4:17; 1 John 5:9; 1 John 5:11; 1 John 5:19; 3 John 1:11. ἐστὶν καὶ … Following the uncial MSS., the best editors add ν ἐφελκυστικόν before consonants and vowels alike: πᾶσι and δυσί being occasional exceptions, and perhaps γιγνώσκουσι (John 10:14). Winer, 44 note.
[435] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.
[436] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.
[437] 5th century. A palimpsest: the original writing has been partially rubbed out and the works of Ephraem the Syrian have been written over it. In the National Library at Paris. Part of the First and Third Epistles; 1 John 1:1 to 1 John 4:2; 3 John 1:3-14. Of the whole N.T. the only Books entirely missing are 2 John and 2 Thessalonians.
[438] 5th century. Brought by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople, from Alexandria, and afterwards presented by him to Charles I. in 1628. In the British Museum. All three Epistles.
[439] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.
[440] 5th century. Brought by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople, from Alexandria, and afterwards presented by him to Charles I. in 1628. In the British Museum. All three Epistles.
[441] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.
[442] 5th century. A palimpsest: the original writing has been partially rubbed out and the works of Ephraem the Syrian have been written over it. In the National Library at Paris. Part of the First and Third Epistles; 1 John 1:1 to 1 John 4:2; 3 John 1:3-14. Of the whole N.T. the only Books entirely missing are 2 John and 2 Thessalonians.
5. καὶ ἔστιν αὕτη ἡ�. And the message which we have heard from Him is this: αὕτη is the predicate, as so often in S. John, and means ‘This is the sum and substance of it, This is what it consists in.’ Usually αὕτη precedes ἐστίν, as in 1 John 3:11; 1 John 3:23; 1 John 5:3; 1 John 5:11; 1 John 5:14; 2 John 1:6; and hence some texts place αὕτη first here. Comp. αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ κρίσις (John 3:19), αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐντολή (John 15:12), αὔτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰών. ζωή (John 17:3). As in the Gospel (John 1:19), the main portion of the writing is connected with the Introduction by a simple καί. It does not introduce an inference, and the ‘And’ of Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Rhemish is rightly restored in R.V. The ‘then’ of A.V. comes, like so many errors, from Geneva, probably under the influence of Beza’s igitur. The connexion of thought, as so often in S. John, is not plain, but seems to be this. He desires that we should have fellowship with God (1 John 1:3): and in order to have this we must know α. what God is (1 John 1:5), and β. what we are consequently bound to be (1 John 1:6-10). Ἀγγελία (frequent in LXX., 2 Samuel 4:4; Proverbs 12:26; Proverbs 25:26; Proverbs 26:16; &c.) occurs nowhere else in N.T. but here and 1 John 3:11; in each case with ἐπαγγελία, as v. l. Ἀγγέλλειν occurs only John 20:18; with v. l. ἀπαγγέλλειν. Neither in his Gospel nor in his Epistles does S. John ever use εὐαγγέλιον, εὐαγγελίζειν, or εὐαγγελί ζεσθαι. The Gospel with him is ὁ λόγος or ἡ�.
Once more we have a striking parallel between Gospel and Epistle. Each opens with the same kind of statement.
καὶ αὕτη ἐστὶν
καὶ ἔστιν αὕτη
ἡ μαρτυρία …
ἡ� …
All these similarities strengthen the belief that the two were written about the same time, and were intended to accompany one another.
ἀπ ̓ αὐτοῦ means from Christ, as the context shews: comp. 1 John 2:12. Christ was the last mentioned (1 John 2:3) and has been the main subject of the Introduction. It was from Christ, and not immediately from the Father, that the Apostles received their mission. Ἀκούειν� is not common in N.T. S. John generally writes ἀκούειν παρά (John 7:51; John 7:51; John 8:26; John 8:38; John 8:40; John 15:15).
ἀναγγέλλομεν ὑμῖν. We announce to you. The amount of difference between ἀπαγγέλλειν (1 John 1:2-3) and ἀναγγέλλειν is not great, yet for the sake of distinction one may be rendered ‘declare’ and the other ‘announce’. The Vulgate renders both by adnuntiare; but ἀναγγ is rather renuntiare. Both have the meanings ‘report, announce, proclaim.’ Both also may have the meaning of making known again to others what has been received elsewhere: yet this is more commonly the force of ἀναγγ. And this is the meaning here. The Apostles hand on to all men what they have received from Christ. It is no invention for their own benefit. It is a message and not a discovery. So also the Spirit reveals to us truths which proceed from the Father and the Son (John 16:13-15): and the Messiah ἀναγγελεῖ ἡμῖν πάντα (John 4:25 based on Deuteronomy 18:18). Of the Evangelists S. John alone uses ἀναγγ. Comp. 2 Corinthians 7:7; 1 Peter 1:2. The ἀπό in ἀπαγγ. is ‘from’ rather than ‘back’: ἀπαγγ. = ἀγγ. ἀπό τινος. Hence, while the destination of the message (ἀνά) is prominent in ἀναγγ., the origin of it (ἀπό) is prominent in ἀπαγγ. The latter word is rare in S. John (only 1 John 1:2-3 and John 4:51), but very frequent in S. Luke’s writings. Although ἀγγέλλειν occurs only once in N.T. (John 20:18), its compounds abound: διαγγέλλειν, ἐπαγγέλλεσθαι, ἐξαγγέλλειν, καταγγέλλειν, παραγγέλλειν, προεπαγγ., προκαταγγ.
ὁ Θεὸς φῶς ἐστίν. God is Light. This is on the whole the main theme of the first great division of the Epistle, as God is Love of the second. This verse stands in much the same relation to the first main division as 1 John 1:1-4 to the whole Epistle.
No one tells us so much about the Nature of God as S. John. The name given to him by the Greek Church, ὁ θεολόγος, ‘the Theologian,’ is amply justified. It is from him that we learn most of the Divinity of the Word and of the meaning of ‘Divine.’ Other writers tell us what God does, and what attributes He possesses; S. John tells us what He is. There are three statements in the Bible which stand alone as revelations of the Nature of God, and they are all in the writings of S. John: ‘God is spirit’ (John 4:24); ‘God is light,’ and ‘God is love’ (1 John 4:8). In all these momentous statements the predicate has no article, either definite or indefinite: πνεῦμα ὁ Θεός: ὁ Θεὸς φῶς ἐστίν: ὁ Θεὸς�. We are not told that God is the Spirit, or the Light, or the Love: nor that He is a Spirit, or a light. Luther is certainly wrong in translating, “dass Gott ein Licht ist.” But ‘God is spirit, is light, is love’: spirit, light, love are His very Nature. They are not mere attributes, like mercy and justice: they are Himself. They are probably the nearest approach to a definition of God that the human mind could frame or comprehend: and in the history of thought and religion they are unique. The more we consider them, the more they satisfy us. The simplest intellect can understand their meaning; the subtlest cannot exhaust it. No philosophy, no religion, not even the Jewish, had risen to the truth that God is light. ‘The Lord shall be to thee an everlasting light’ (Isaiah 60:19-20) is far short of it. But S. John knows it: and lest the great message which he conveys to us in his Gospel, ‘God is spirit,’ should seem somewhat bare and empty in its indefiniteness, he adds this other message in his Epistle, ‘God is light, God is love.’ No figure borrowed from the material world could give the idea of perfection so clearly and fully as light. It suggests ubiquity, brightness, happiness, intelligence, truth, purity, holiness. It suggests excellence without limit and without taint; an excellence whose nature it is to communicate itself and to pervade everything from which it is not of set purpose shut out. ‘Let there be light’ was the first fiat of the Creator; and on it all the rest depends. Light is the condition of beauty, and life, and growth, and activity: and this is as true in the intellectual, moral, and spiritual spheres as in the material universe.
Yet we must not suppose that S. John means this as a mere figure borrowed from the material world, as if sunlight were the reality and the Godhead something like it. Rather, the similarity exists, because light and its properties are reflexions of attributes which are Divine. In Platonic language, God is the ἰδέα or archetype of which light is the noblest earthly expression. Thus Philo says, ὁ Θεὸς φῶς ἐστί, … καὶ οὐ μόνον φῶς�. S. James seems to have a similar thought in calling God ὁ πατὴρ τῶν φώτων (James 1:17): comp. Revelation 22:5.
Of the many beautiful and true ideas which the utterance ‘God is light’ suggests to us, three are specially prominent in this Epistle; intelligence, holiness, and communicativeness. The Christian, anointed with the Holy Spirit, and in communion with God in Christ, possesses (1) knowledge, (2) righteousness, and (3) necessarily communicates to others the truth which he knows and the righteousness which he practises. (1) ‘Ye know Him which is from the beginning’ (1 John 2:13-14); ‘I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it’ (1 John 2:21); ‘Ye need not that any one teach you’ (1 John 2:27); &c. &c. (2) ‘Every one that hath this hope on Him purifieth himself, even as He is pure’ (1 John 3:3); ‘Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin, because His seed abideth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is begotten of God’; &c. &c. (3) ‘We have fellowship one with another’ (1 John 1:7); ‘We love the brethren’ (1 John 3:14); and the whole tone of the Epistle.
καὶ σκοτία οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ οὐδεμία. This is the order of the words in [451], Thebaic, and Memphitic, and it is very forcible: and darkness there is not in Him, no, not any at all. Gnostic systems which taught, that a series of Aeons ending in an evil one could emanate from the Supreme Being, are here condemned by anticipation. Out of Light no darkness can come. This ‘antithetic parallelism’ is a mark of S. John’s style. He frequently emphasizes a statement by following it up with a denial of its opposite. Thus, in the very next verse, ‘We lie and do not the truth’: comp. 1 John 1:8; 1 John 2:4; 1 John 2:10; 1 John 2:27; 1 John 5:12. So also in the Gospel: John 1:3; John 1:20; John 3:15; John 10:5; John 10:18; John 18:20; John 20:27. And in Revelation 2:13; Revelation 3:9. It is one of many instances of the Hebrew cast of S. John’s language. Parallelism is the very form of Hebrew poetry and is frequent in the Psalms (Psalms 89:30-31; Psalms 89:38).
[451] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.
Another point of similarity between the Gospel and the Epistle must here be noticed. In the Prologue to the Gospel we have these four ideas in succession; ὁ λόγος (1 John 1:1-2), ἡ ζωή (1 John 1:4), τὸ φῶς (1 John 1:4-5), ἡ σκοτία (1 John 1:5). The same four follow in the same order here: περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς, ἡ ζωὴ ἐφανερώθη, ὁ Θεὸς φῶς ἐστίν, καὶ σκοτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν οὐδεμία. Has not the sequence of thought in the one case been influenced by the sequence of thought in the other? Such close correspondence between the ideas with which each writing opens cannot be accidental.
The figurative use of σκοτία for moral darkness, i.e. error and sin (peccata, haereses, et odia nominat, says Bede), is very frequent in S. John (John 2:8-9; John 2:11; John 1:5; John 8:12; John 12:35; John 12:46): he only twice uses the form σκότος (1 John 1:6; John 3:9), which (excepting Matthew 10:27; Luke 12:3) is the invariable form elsewhere in N.T. The passages just quoted shew that S. John’s meaning here cannot be, ‘God has now been revealed, and is no longer a God that hideth Himself’ (Isaiah 45:15). The point is not that God can be known, but what kind of God He is. The Apostle is laying the foundation of Christian. Ethics, of which the very first principle is that there is a God who intellectually, morally, and spiritually is light.
“In speaking of ‘light’ and ‘darkness’ it is probable that S. John had before him the Zoroastrian speculations on the two opposing spiritual powers which influenced Christian thought at a very early date” (Westcott).