Whenever our hearts condemn us: the Greek hoti ean is probably to be read ho ti ean, meaning “in whatever matter our hearts condemn us,” “in matters where our heart condemns us” (compare New English Bible, footnote), or, somewhat freer, “whenever (or every time that) our heart condemns us.” The pronoun is in the accusative case, here having the force of a so-called accusative of reference. Accordingly, ho ti ean means “whereinsoever,” or “in whatever matter,” “in regard to anything in which” (Translators’ Translation). Such renderings are accurate, but sound rather clumsy. That may be the reason why Revised Standard Version, Moffatt, and others have shifted to “whenever,” or “even if” which is “a legitimate and necessary paraphrase for a construction which cannot be translated directly,” as Dodd has characterized it (page 88, nt. 1). Taken thus the sentence means to say that before God man’s heart may be at ease, although it condemns him for many things, or many times. This is contrary to man’s expectation. Man would expect that in God’s presence his sins will be even more condemnable and unforgivable. Why this is not so is explained in the next sentence.
Our hearts condemn us: the Greek has the first person plural pronoun only once. It may be taken with the verb, “the heart condemns us,” or with the noun, “our heart condemns.” But since in the former case “the heart” implies our hearts, and in the latter case us is clearly to be understood with the verb, both constructions result in the same meaning.
Condemn: the verb is basically a legal term which is often rendered by expressions like ‘to judge against,’ ‘to declare guilty,’ ‘to name for punishment,’ ‘to cause to find sin,’ ‘to make-sinner,’ ‘to put bad beside.’ Such renderings can often be used also in the metaphorical sense in which the verb is used here. Where this is impossible one may have to describe the contents of this clause otherwise; for example, ‘our inner being says we are bad.’ One version has ‘we are not one-hearted,’ using the negative opposite of its rendering of “we reassure our hearts.”
For God is greater than our hearts: the word for renders Greek hoti “that/because.” The clause gives the reason why “we” may reassure our hearts in God’s presence. It is because God is greater, in the sense of being more merciful, than our conscience dares to suppose. Thus interpreted the clause is meant as a consolation for those who are bowed down by the consciousness of their sins.
Another interpretation given of this clause is that it intends to say that God condemns our sins more severely than we do ourselves. This is less likely, since it is in line neither with the general trend of the Letter (compare for example, 1.8-10; 2.1-2, 12-14; 4.18) nor with the present verse.
It may be difficult to translate the clause as it stands, because it does not make clear which elements in God and in the hearts of men are compared. If one must be more specific, it is probably best to add a reference to knowledge, as in ‘God’s knowledge is greater than the knowledge of our hearts,’ ‘God knows more than our hearts (ever can) know.’ The next clause explains why this is the case; God knows everything.
Greater than: languages may lack comparative forms of the adjective (as Greek and English have) but express the concept of comparison otherwise. Some do so by using a verb meaning ‘to surpass’; for example, ‘God surpasses our hearts in greatness,’ ‘God’s greatness surpasses the greatness of our hearts.’ Others use two contrasting clauses such as ‘God is (really) great; our hearts are not great (or are small)’; or first mention the two things to be compared, then ascribe the quality to one of them; for example, ‘God and our hearts, God is (really/only) great’; or merely state the difference, as in, ‘God is great, not the same as our hearts.’ For these and some further details, compare A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of Mark on 1.7.
In this interpretation of verses 19-20, several exegetical decisions are implied. Two other interpretations representing different decisions should be briefly mentioned here. They are possible also but, in the opinion of the present authors, less probable than the interpretation given above.
(1) “By this (pointing forward, to the second “that” clause) we shall know that we are of the truth and shall reassure our hearts before him, (verse 20a) that (hoti), (even) if (ean) our heart condemns us, (verse 20b) God is greater…” (compare New English Bible, Nieuwe Vertaling). Against this solution there are two objections: (a) The hoti in verse 20b is not explicitly rendered. This is done on the supposition that the same Greek conjunction occurs in verse 20a and is simply resumed in verse 20b. This, though not impossible, is not probable because it does not fit with John’s usage elsewhere in this Letter (compare 3.2; 5.14). (b) To take “by this” as pointing forward means that there is no expression that serves as transition from verse 18 to verse 19. This would result in a rather abrupt beginning of the new paragraph (verses 19-20), which is against the author’s usual style. (2) “By this (pointing back) we shall know that we are of the truth and shall reassure…. (Verse 20) For (hoti), if (ean) our heart condemns us, we know that (hoti) God is greater…” (compare Good News Translation). This rendering makes good sense, but only by adding a second “we know.” It is difficult to find an argument for this addition in the structure of the Greek sentence.
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 .