Cambridge Greek Testament Commentary
1 John 2:28
28. For ὅταν ([535][536]) read ἐάν ([537][538][539][540]), and for ἔχωμεν ([541]1[542][543]) read σχῶμεν ([544]3[545][546][547]). [548] omits καὶ νῦν … ἐν αὐτῷ through homoeoteleuton.
[535] 9th century. All three Epistles.
[536] 9th century. All three Epistles.
[537] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.
[538] 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.
[539] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.
[540] 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.
[541] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.
[542] 9th century. All three Epistles.
[543] 9th century. All three Epistles.
[544] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.
[545] 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.
[546] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.
[547] 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.
[548] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.
28. καὶ νῦν introduces the practical conclusion: see on 2 John 1:5 and comp. John 17:5, where Jesus, ‘having accomplished the work given Him to do’, prays καὶ νῦν δόξασόν με σύ, πάτερ. So also in Acts 3:17; Acts 7:34; Acts 10:5. Haupt thinks that καὶ νῦν introduces the new division of the Epistle, which (almost all agree) begins near this point. The truth seems to be that 1 John 2:28-29 are at once the conclusion of one division and the beginning of another: τεκνία recalls the beginning of this section (1 John 2:18), and no doubt means all S. John’s readers.
ἐὰν φανερωθῇ. If He shall be manifested, as R.V. In inferior authorities the more difficult ἐάν has been softened into ὅταν. ‘If’ seems to imply a doubt as to Christ’s return, and the change to ‘when’ has probably been made to avoid this. But ‘if’ implies no doubt as to the fact, it merely implies indifference as to the time: ‘if He should return in our day’ (see on John 6:62; John 12:32; John 14:3). Be manifested is greatly superior to ‘appear’ (as Augustine’s manifestatus fuerit is superior to the Vulgate’s apparuerit) because (1) φανερωθῇ is passive; (2) φανεροῦν is a favourite word with S. John and should be translated uniformly in order to mark this fact (1 John 1:2; 1 John 2:19; 1 John 3:2; 1 John 3:5; 1 John 3:8; 1 John 4:9; Revelation 3:18; Revelation 15:4; John 1:31; John 3:21, &c. &c.). Beza has conspicuus factus fuerit. As applied to Christ it is used of His being manifested in His Incarnation (1 John 1:2; 1 John 3:5; 1 John 3:8), in His words and works (John 2:11; John 17:6), in His appearances after the Resurrection (John 21:1; John 21:14), in His return to judgment (here and 1 John 3:2). S. John alone uses the word in this last sense, for which other N.T. writers have ‘to be revealed’ (ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι), a verb never used by S. John excepting once (John 12:38) in a quotation from O.T. (Isaiah 53:1), where he is under the influence of the LXX.
Note the correspondence between the clauses: ἐὰν φανερωθῇ = ἑν τῇ παρουσίᾳ αὐτοῦ, and σχῶμεν παρρησίαν = μὴ αἰσχυνθῶμεν� ̓ αὐτοῦ.
σχῶμεν παρρησίαν. The R.V. has we may have boldness. At first sight this looks like one of those small changes which have been somewhat hastily condemned as ‘vexatious, teasing, and irritating.’ The A.V. wavers between ‘boldness’ (1 John 4:17; Acts 4:13; Acts 4:29; Acts 4:31, &c.) and ‘confidence,’ with occasionally ‘boldly’ (Hebrews 4:16) instead of ‘with boldness.’ The R.V. consistently has ‘boldness’ in all these places. Παρρησία means literally ‘freedom in speaking, readiness to say anything, frankness, intrepidity.’ In this Epistle and that to the Hebrews it means especially the fearless trust with which the faithful soul meets God: 1 John 3:21; 1 John 4:17; 1 John 5:14. Comp. 1 Thessalonians 2:19. In σχῶμεν S. John once more breaks the logic of his sentence rather than seem to exempt himself from what he tells others: μένετε, ἵνα σχῶμεν is parallel to ἐάν τις ἁμάρτῃ, ἔχομεν (1 John 2:2).
μὴ αἰσχυνθῶμεν� ̓ αὐτοῦ. The graphic terseness can scarcely be reproduced in English. We see the averted face and shrinking form, which are the results of the shame, clearly indicated in the Greek. ‘Turn with shame from Him’ and ‘Shrink with shame from Him’ have been suggested as renderings. Comp. μὴ φοβηθῆτε ἀπὸ τῶν� (Matthew 10:28), ‘Shrink not away in fear from them.’ ‘Receive shame from Him’ is almost certainly not the meaning, although the Vulgate has confundamur ab eo: ἀπὸ means ‘away from’ not ‘proceeding from.’ Comp. προσέχετε� (Matthew 7:15; Matthew 10:17; Matthew 16:11; Luke 12:1; Luke 20:46) and φυλάσσεσθε� (Luke 12:15) and the LXX. of Isaiah 1:29; Jeremiah 2:36; Jeremiah 12:13; and the speechless confusion of him who had no wedding-garment (Matthew 22:13).
ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ. The word occurs nowhere else in S. John’s writings. In N.T. it is almost a technical term to express Christ’s return to judgment (Matthew 24:3; Matthew 24:27; Matthew 24:37; Matthew 24:39; 1 Corinthians 15:23; 1 Thessalonians 2:19; 1 Thessalonians 3:13; 1 Thessalonians 4:15; 1 Thessalonians 5:23; James 5:7-8; 2 Peter 1:16, &c.). S. John uses it, as he uses ὁ Λόγος and ὁ πονηρός, without explanation, confident that his readers understand it. This is one of many small indications that he writes to well-instructed believers, not to children or the recently converted. The single occurrence of the word here, “where it might easily have been omitted, in exactly the same sense as it bears in all the other groups of apostolic writings, is a signal example of the danger of drawing conclusions from the negative phenomena of the books of N.T. The fact is the more worthy of notice as the subject of eschatology falls into the background in the Gospel and Epistles of S. John. Comp. John 21:22” (Westcott).
S. John’s divisions are seldom made with a broad line across the text (see on 1 John 3:10; 1 John 3:24). The parts dovetail into one another and intermingle in a way that at times looks like confusion. Wherever we may place the dividing line we find similar thoughts on each side of it. Such is the case here. If we place the line between 1 John 2:27-28 we have the idea of abiding in Christ (1 John 2:24; 1 John 2:27-28) on both sides of it. If we place it between 1 John 2:28-29, we have the idea of Divine righteousness and holiness (1 John 1:9; 1 John 2:1; 1 John 2:12; 1 John 2:20; 1 John 2:29) prominent in both divisions. If we make the division coincide with the Chapter s, we have the leading ideas of boldness towards Christ and God (1 John 2:28; 1 John 3:2; 1 John 3:21; 1 John 4:17; 1 John 5:14), of Christ’s return to judgment (1 John 2:28; 1 John 3:2; 1 John 4:17), of doing righteousness (1 John 2:29; 1 John 3:7-10), and of Divine sonship (1 John 2:29; 1 John 3:1-2, &c.), on both sides of the division. It seems quite clear therefore that both these verses (28, 29) belong to both portions of the Epistle, and that 1 John 2:29 at any rate is more closely connected with what follows than with what precedes.
The close connexion between the parts must not lead us to suppose that there is no division here at all. The transition is gentle and gradual, but when it is over we find ourselves on new ground. The antithesis between light and darkness is replaced by that between love and hate. The opposition between the world and God becomes the opposition between the world and God’s children. The idea of having fellowship with God is transformed into that of being sons of God. Walking in the light is spoken of as doing righteousness. And not only do previous thoughts, if they reappear, assume a new form, but new thoughts also are introduced: the Second Advent, the boldness of the faithful Christian, the filial relation between believers and God. Although there may be uncertainty as to where the new division should begin, there is none as to the fact of there being one.