For Beloved see comments on 2.7.
(a) We are … now; (b) it does not yet appear what we shall be, (c) but we know that …: this sentence has a major break between (a) and (b) and a minor break between (b) and (c). Greek New Testament and Nestle, Good News Translation, and many other versions differ from Revised Standard Version in that they have a minor break after (a) and a major break after (b). This seems to be more probable because of the parallel contrasts “now – not yet” and “are – shall be.”
It does not yet appear what we shall be: the pronoun it anticipates what we shall be. Accordingly a possible restructuring of the sentence is “what we shall be has not yet been disclosed” (New English Bible). In the Greek the main verb is in the third person singular of the aorist indicative. Shifting from an impersonal to a personal construction one may say ‘we (or people) do not yet see clearly what we (or they) shall be.’ For “to appear” one may also say ‘to be revealed,’ ‘to become visible,’ ‘to be seen,’ ‘to be clear.’
What we shall be: the interrogative pronoun what asks about identity or quality. The clause has also been rendered ‘what we will be like,’ ‘what kind of persons we shall be.’
But we know, or ‘but we are sure’: although the Greek has no connective, the sentence is clearly adversative; hence but.
When he appears we shall be like him: except for the grammatical mood the Greek form for he appears is the same as the one in the preceding sentence. Here, of course, it is understood as referring to a future appearance. As rendered by Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, and several other versions, this sentence means “When Christ appears we shall be like Christ.” The reference is to similarity, not to identity. For “to appear” (also in verses 5, 8) see comments on 2.28.
Semantically this interpretation makes good sense, and the idea that Christians will be like Christ is supported by other New Testament passages (see Rom 8.29; Phil 3.21; and compare Col 3.4). Grammatically, however, there are two serious objections against it. First, it supposes that of two Greek forms of the verb, which are identical except for the mood, the first refers to a situation and the second to a person, without any overt marking of such a shift of subject. Second, it assumes that John, when referring to Christ here and in verse 3, felt the need to specify this reference only at the last occurrence (see comment on “he” in “he is pure,” 1 John 3.3). Both suppositions, though possible, are improbable.
There are therefore several other versions (such as New English Bible, Zürcher Bibel, Bible de Jérusalem, Luther 1956 [Luther 1984]) which follow another interpretation, taking the second verb form also as an impersonal third person, referring to the future situation of we. Thus verse 2b may be rendered ‘when it appears, we shall be like him’ or, more explicitly, ‘when it actually does appear (or when we actually do see that), we shall be like him.’
This interpretation differs from the other one in two points: (1) The clause does not speak of the appearance of Christ but of we. Yet it may still contain an implicit reference to Christ’s appearance, since it is only then that we will become what we really are. (2) The pronoun in like him and “as he is” stands for “God,” not for “Christ.”
According to some commentators John cannot have intended to say that Christians will become like God, and it must be admitted that this idea is not clearly found in the New Testament. Therefore it is difficult to choose between the two interpretations, but for the grammatical reasons mentioned the present authors are inclined to reject the first and to favor the second one.
For we shall see him as he is gives the reason why we know that “we shall be like him.” The Greek conjunction may also be taken as indicating the cause of “we shall be like him”; hence, ‘because (or as the result of the fact that) we shall see….’ Or one may interpret it as introducing a further explanation which mentions another aspect of what precedes; hence, ‘yes, we shall see….’ Of these three interpretations the first seems to be unlikely and the third the most likely one, though the second is not to be excluded entirely.
Him … he refers is to Christ (compare John 17.24) or to God (compare Matt 5.8; 1 Cor 13.12; Rev 22.4). The latter is in line with the interpretation preferred above.
The phrase as he is has been added to show that what they will see is not an illusion or unreal but is true to the essential character of the one seen. It has been rendered, for example, ‘as he really is,’ ‘in his true being (or nature),’ ‘what he-looks-like in-person (literally his life),’ ‘the very God completely,’ ‘his person (literally his totality), just as he (is) God’; or again ‘face-to-face,’ a rendering that calls to mind 1 Cor 13.12.
Quoted with permission from Haas, C., de Jonge, M. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on The First Letter of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .