This passage occurs in the Narrative Lectionary Summer readings (most recently 2014). It also occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary Easter (Year B) readings.
Separate note: I had so much commentary, I divided this up into two posts: 1 John 1:1-4 and this post.
Summary: This verse has a great verse (1 John 1:9) within some much more difficult verses about blood and sacrifice. One could try to unpack the atonement theories of 1 John based on OT metaphors. I think an easier and more helpful way is to think less about how the cross/blood/death actually accomplish this end and more what they actually accomplish. I say this not simply because this is easier, but because I think 1 John is a study, not in the mechanics of justification, but in what forgiveness in Jesus offers us: light, fellowship, and love. These are juxtaposted, not with hell and wrath, but with darkness, isolation and fear, something that the people in my congregation experience all the time.
κοινωνια ("fellowship", 1.6) This word has an intense meaning in the New Testament. It ranges from
- sharings of money (2 Cor 9:13; Romans 15:26; Hebrews 13:16)
- sharings of a common spirit (2 Cor 13:13 original Trinitarian formula; Philippians 2:1)
- sharings of Christ and his suffering (Philippians 3:10; 1 Cor 10:16)
It is a reminder that fellowship is not a diluted term in this passage or anywhere in the New Testament. A look at the related noun κοινωνος (partner) reveals something similar.
αιμα ("blood"; think "hema" like "hematology"; 1.7) The blood cleanses us from sin. This is a tough one to wrap our minds around because we think of blood as very "dirty", certain not sterile and definitely not cleansing. Is there a way to recover this ancient way of thinking of blood?
ινα ("so that", 1:9) I remember back in Seminary one of my professors made a very, very big deal about how to translate this word. The basic argument in this verse is that ινα cannot be translated, "with the result" and must be translated, "for the purpose of." I do not think that argument is instructive here because there isn't a difference in God's purposes and God's results when it comes to forgiveness of the sinner.
In verses 2:1-2, Jesus is called three titles:
δικαινος ("righteous one", 2.1) This is simply a good title for Jesus. The question is, what does Jesus righteousness mean for you and for me?
παρακλετος ("advocate", 2.1) How Jesus and the Spirit are both called "advocates" are tough. Interestingly, in the Gospel of John, when Jesus promises the advocate, John 14:16, he promises ANOTHER advocate, suggesting that he already was an advocate for us.
In the Gospel of John, the advocate seems more like a prayer partner, counseling us through sufferings. In this case, the idea almost seems more legalistic, like one who is defending us before God's judgment. Interestingly though, God's wrath is never mentioned in 1 John. Judgment exists, but there isn't necessary a hell. Simply darkness, isolation and fear. Jesus seems to be reconciling us, in spite of our sins, back to the Father, back to light, back to fellowship and back to love.
ιλασμος ("atonement", 2:2) Discussing the entire meaning of atonement is well, well beyond the meaning of this passage here. But I want to point out that this word here is the one connected to Leviticus, Romans. Furthermore, as BDAG says about this word, "The unique feature relative to Gr-Rom usage is the initiative taken by God to effect removal of impediments to a relationship with God's self." ιλαστηριον definition.
This digs into the Greek (and occasionally the Hebrew) of the NT lessons of the Revised Common and Narrative Lectionary.
About the Site
▼
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Wednesday, July 9, 2014
1 John 1:1-4
This passage is part of the 1 John 1:1-2:2 readings found in the Narrative Lectionary Summer readings
(most recently 2014). It also occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary
Easter (Year B) readings. I had so much commentary, I divided this up into two posts: 1 John 1:5-2:2 and this post.
Summary: I realize its not entirely the purpose of 1 John 1, but the events in my congregation are really making me ask myself, in light of this passage: What is of fundamental importance that I want to pass it along to my children? What creates community in our family? What creates joy in me and my wife to pass this along to our children? What is the word of Life I want them to know?
Key words/concepts
ακουω, οραω, θεαομαι, ψηλαφαω (1 John 1:1) The verb 'to hear' (ακουω) and 'to understand/see' (οραω) are both in the perfect, while 'to see' (θεαομαι) and 'to touch' (ψηλαφαω) are in the aorist. Again, an aorist tense suggests a one time event; a perfect tense has the connotation of a past action that creates an on-going and present status. John (or the writer from the Johannine community), by using these tenses, suggests that although the original congregation can no longer touch or see Jesus because of his ascension, but the reality of hearing and understanding the word of God remains. This perhaps is not simply true of the original congregation, but us as well. We leave Sunday having seen and even touched Jesus in the bread and wine, but as we head out, we still are in the state of hearing and understanding.
ειμι ("to be", 1.2) In both 1.1 and 1.2, the verb 'eimi' (to be) is used in the imperfect tense. In Greek, there really is no aorist tense of 'eimi,' the 'to be' verb. (which if you stop and think, makes a lot of sense). In both cases, the verb is translated with the English aorist form of the to be verb: "was." What is probably a more helpful translation is not the static "was" but an imperfect "was being" or "was and continues to be" or "has been" In short, the English "was" makes it sound like the event of the Word being with the Father or the Word being from the beginning is over; the imperfect tense in the Greek suggests that that the Word continues to be with the Father and continues to be from the beginning.
απαγγελλω, μαρτυρεω, εχω, γραφω (1.3-1.4) The only verbs so far in the present tense are απαγγελλω (to proclaim), μαρτυρεω (to witness), and εχω (have + fellowship), and γραφω (to write), all of our actions.
εφανερωθη (1.2) The only God verb so far is "appear" (phanero-oo); always in the aorist.
λογος του ζωης (word of life, 1.1). I was surprised to find that there was only one other place in the Bible where we find this phrase, Word of Life: Philippians 2:16. 1 Peter 1:23 has a similar phrase, "living word of God" but truly "Word of Life" is only found twice. Ponder what that means if anything.
Summary: I realize its not entirely the purpose of 1 John 1, but the events in my congregation are really making me ask myself, in light of this passage: What is of fundamental importance that I want to pass it along to my children? What creates community in our family? What creates joy in me and my wife to pass this along to our children? What is the word of Life I want them to know?
Key words/concepts
ακουω, οραω, θεαομαι, ψηλαφαω (1 John 1:1) The verb 'to hear' (ακουω) and 'to understand/see' (οραω) are both in the perfect, while 'to see' (θεαομαι) and 'to touch' (ψηλαφαω) are in the aorist. Again, an aorist tense suggests a one time event; a perfect tense has the connotation of a past action that creates an on-going and present status. John (or the writer from the Johannine community), by using these tenses, suggests that although the original congregation can no longer touch or see Jesus because of his ascension, but the reality of hearing and understanding the word of God remains. This perhaps is not simply true of the original congregation, but us as well. We leave Sunday having seen and even touched Jesus in the bread and wine, but as we head out, we still are in the state of hearing and understanding.
ειμι ("to be", 1.2) In both 1.1 and 1.2, the verb 'eimi' (to be) is used in the imperfect tense. In Greek, there really is no aorist tense of 'eimi,' the 'to be' verb. (which if you stop and think, makes a lot of sense). In both cases, the verb is translated with the English aorist form of the to be verb: "was." What is probably a more helpful translation is not the static "was" but an imperfect "was being" or "was and continues to be" or "has been" In short, the English "was" makes it sound like the event of the Word being with the Father or the Word being from the beginning is over; the imperfect tense in the Greek suggests that that the Word continues to be with the Father and continues to be from the beginning.
απαγγελλω, μαρτυρεω, εχω, γραφω (1.3-1.4) The only verbs so far in the present tense are απαγγελλω (to proclaim), μαρτυρεω (to witness), and εχω (have + fellowship), and γραφω (to write), all of our actions.
εφανερωθη (1.2) The only God verb so far is "appear" (phanero-oo); always in the aorist.
λογος του ζωης (word of life, 1.1). I was surprised to find that there was only one other place in the Bible where we find this phrase, Word of Life: Philippians 2:16. 1 Peter 1:23 has a similar phrase, "living word of God" but truly "Word of Life" is only found twice. Ponder what that means if anything.