1 John 3:1

1. After κληθῶμεν insert καὶ ἐσμέν with [582][583][584][585][586], Justin Martyr and Versions against [587][588]. [589][590][591] have ὑμᾶς for ἡμᾶς.

[582] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.
[583] 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.
[584] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.
[585] 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.

[586] 9th century. A palimpsest. All three Epistles excepting 1 John 3:19 to 1 John 5:1. There is a facsimile of a portion in Hammond’s Outlines of Textual Criticism showing the late leaning uncial letters of the 9th century (Acts 4:10-15), with cursives of the 13th (Hebrews 7:17-25) written over them.

[587] 9th century. All three Epistles.
[588] 9th century. All three Epistles.
[589] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.
[590] 9th century. All three Epistles.
[591] 9th century. All three Epistles.

1. ποταπήν. The same word occurs Matthew 8:27; Mark 13:1; Luke 1:29; Luke 7:39; 2 Peter 3:11 : it always implies astonishment, and generally admiration. The radical signification is ‘of what country,’ the Latin cujas; which, however, is never used as its equivalent in the Vulgate, because in N.T. the word has entirely lost the notion of place. It has become qualis rather than cujas: ‘what amazing love’. In LXX. the word does not occur.

ἀγάπην. This is the key-word of this whole division of the Epistle (1 John 2:29 to 1 John 5:12), in which it occurs 16 times as a substantive, 25 as a verb, and 5 times in the verbal adjective ἀγαπητοί. Here it is represented almost as something concrete, a gift which could be actually seen. S. John does not use his favourite interjection (ἴδε ὁ�. Θεοῦ, ἴδε ὁ ἄνθρωπος, κ.τ.λ.), but the plural of the imperative, ἴδετε. Ἀγάπην δίδοναι occurs nowhere else in N.T.

ἡμῖν ὁ πατήρ. The words are in emphatic proximity: on us sinners the Father hath bestowed this boon. Quid majus quam Deus? quae propior necessitudo quam filialis? (Bengel.) Comp. ἔσομαι αὐτῷ Θεός, καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται μοι υἱός (Revelation 21:7). Ὁ Πατήρ rather than ὁ Θεός because of what follows. [691] reads ὑμῖν for ἡμῖν and has some support in inferior authorities, but it can hardly be right. The confusion between ὑμ. and ἡμ. is easily made and is very frequent even in the best MSS.

[691] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.

ἵνα τ. Θεοῦ κληθ. S. John’s characteristic construction, as in 1 John 1:9. “The final particle has its full force” (Westcott). This was the purpose of His love, its tendency and direction. Winer, 575. Comp. 1 John 3:11; 1 John 3:23; 1 John 4:21; John 13:34; John 15:12; John 15:17. Καλεῖσθαι “is especially used of titles of honour, which indicate the possession of a certain dignity: see Matthew 5:9; Luke 1:76; 1 John 3:1” (Winer, 769). With R.V. we must render τέκνα Θεοῦ children of God, not with A.V. and earlier Versions, ‘the sons of God’. There is no article; and we must not confuse S. Paul’s υἱοὶ Θεοῦ with S. John’s τέκνα Θεοῦ. Both Apostles tell us that the fundamental relation of Christians to God is a filial one: but while S. Paul gives us the legal side (adoption), S. John gives us the natural side (generation). To us the latter is the closer relationship of the two. But we must remember that in the Roman Law, under which S. Paul lived, adoption was considered as absolutely equivalent to actual parentage. In this ‘unique apostrophe’ in the centre of the Epistle two of its central leading ideas meet, Divine love and Divine sonship; a love which has as its end and aim that men should be called children of God. Note that Θεοῦ, as Θεόν in 1 John 4:12, has no article. This shews that it is the idea of Divinity that is prominent rather than the relation to ourselves. The meaning is that we are children of One who is not human but Divine, rather that we are related to One who is our God. See on 1 John 4:12.

After ‘children of God’ we must insert on overwhelming authority ([692][693][694][695] and Versions), and we are: God has allowed us to be called children, and we are children. The simus of the Vulgate and S. Augustine and the ‘and be’ of the Rhemish are probably wrong. Tyndale, Beza, and the Genevan omit. The present indicative after ἵνα is not impossible (John 17:3; 1 Corinthians 4:6; Galatians 4:17 : Winer, 362): but would S. John have put κληθῶμεν in the subjunctive and ἐσμέν in the indicative, if both were dependent upon ἵνα? With καὶ ἐσμέν here comp. καὶ ἔσται in 2 John 1:2. It is in this passage with the true reading that we have something like proof that Justin Martyr knew this Epistle. In the Dial. c. Try. (CXXIII.) he has καὶ Θεοῦ τέκνα�.

[692] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.
[693] 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.
[694] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.
[695] 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.

διὰ τοῦτο. For this cause, as R.V., reserving ‘therefore’ as the rendering of οὖν, a particle which is very frequent in the narrative portions of the Gospel, but which does not occur anywhere in this Epistle. In 1 John 2:24 and 1 John 4:19 οὖν is a false reading. Tyndale, Cranmer, the Genevan and the Rhemish all have ‘for this cause’: the A.V., as not unfrequently, has altered for the worse. It may be doubted whether the R.V. has not here altered the punctuation for the worse, in putting a full stop at ‘we are.’ Διὰ τοῦτο in S. John does not merely anticipate the ὅτι which follows; it refers to what precedes. ‘We are children of God; and for this cause the world knows us not: because the world knew Him not.’ The third sentence explains how the second sentence follows from the first. In logical phraseology we might say that the conclusion is placed between the two premises. Comp. John 5:16; John 5:18; John 7:22; John 8:47; John 10:17; John 12:18; John 12:27; John 12:39. For ‘the world’ see on 1 John 2:2. S. Augustine compares the attitude of the world towards God to that of sick men in delirium who would do violence to their physician. After the experiences of the persecutions under Nero and Domitian this statement of the Apostle would come home with full force to his readers. The persecution under Domitian was possibly just beginning at the very time that this First Epistle was written. Comp. John 15:19. All spiritual forces are unintelligible and offensive to ‘the world.’ For οὐκ ἔγνω see on 1 John 4:8.