If has factual force here; compare 4.11. The clause can therefore also be rendered ‘We receive the testimony of men, but…’

We receive, that is, ‘we accept (as true),’ or more emphatically, ‘we never doubt.’ The pronoun has inclusive force here and in verse 11.

The testimony of men, or “the witness that men give” (Good News Translation), ‘what human witnesses say,’ ‘what men declare to be true.’ For testimony, here in the passive sense of “what is said by a witness,” compare “to testify” in 1.2.

The testimony of God is greater, or ‘the witness that God gives (or what God declares to be true) is greater,’ namely, ‘than that of men,’ which may have to be added. In this context greater often has to be rendered by ‘more important,’ ‘more worthy of acceptance,’ ‘more enforcing of belief.’

The second half of verse 9 explains why God’s testimony is to be called greater. Accordingly for has explanatory force; hence, for example, ‘this, namely, is the testimony…’

This is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son: just as in verses 11 and 14, this points forward; the explanatory clause is that he has borne witness to his Son. This clause does not state the contents of God’s testimony but refers to its divine origin; it is God himself, who has borne witness to his Son. As such the value of this testimony surpasses that of all and any other testimonies about Jesus.

To bring out this meaning the sentence may have to be adjusted; for example, ‘that testimony is characterized by (or is valuable because of) the fact that God himself has borne witness to his Son’; or, changing the clause order, ‘it is God himself who has borne witness to his Son; that is how his testimony is,’ or simply ‘this witness God himself has given about his Son.’

The testimony of God parallels the testimony of men. Adjustments or restructurings in the one should also be used in the other, as far as idiom permits.

He has borne witness to his Son, or ‘he has given testimony (or has declared the truth) about his Son,’ ‘he has declared who his Son really is.’ For “to bear witness” compare again comments on “to testify” in 1.2; for his Son see comments on 1.3.

The verb “to bear witness” is in the perfect tense in the Greek, in contrast to the present tense of the participle of the same verb used in verses 7 and 8a (= verses 6c and 7 in Greek New Testament and others). This is to show that the reference in the present verse is to something in the past, namely, in the time of Jesus’ earthly ministry, which still influences the present; compare John 5.31-47, especially verse 37.

The interpretation of verse 9 given above is represented in several versions, among which are Revised Standard Version, Goodspeed, Nieuwe Vertaling, Zürcher Bibel. Many other versions follow an interpretation which differs from it mainly in two points:

(1) The pronoun this is taken as pointing back and referring to the testimony of the three witnesses (verse 7). This is less probable, however, because in the same construction in verses 11 and 14 it clearly points forward. Moreover, the difference in tense (perfect tense here, present tense in verse 7) is against a close association with the testimony of the three witnesses.

(2) The second clause of verse 9b is taken as a relative clause going with testimony of God. This agrees with a variant reading of the Greek text, but, textually speaking, that reading is decidedly inferior to the reading given in Greek New Testament and preferred above.

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 .