Verses 14-15 serve to assure the reader that God hears (that is, listens and gives heed to) the believers whenever they ask him anything according to his will, and that his hearing them implies his granting them whatever they ask of him in such a way.

This points forward to the that clause. The latter indicates why the Christians have confidence in God. The verse may have to be restructured; for example, ‘the confidence which we have in him is based on the fact that he hears us whenever we ask him anything…,’ ‘this is the reason why we confide in him: whenever we ask him anything … he hears us’; or, changing the clause order, ‘it is a fact that he hears us whenever we ask him anything…; that is why we confide in him.’

The confidence which we have in him: see comments on 2.28 and 3.21. Here and in verses 15, 18-20 the pronoun we has inclusive force. The pronoun him refers to God.

If, or ‘whenever,’ is “expectational” here; see comments on 1.6.

We ask anything, namely, from God: the reference probably is to something that God is asked to do rather than to an object he is requested to grant. For “to ask” in the sense of “to pray,” see comments on 3.22.

According to his will refers to the circumstances under which the proposition holds true. A person may only be sure that his prayer will be heard when he knows and obeys God’s will just as Christ did. Thus his praying means becoming of one mind with God, uniting his will with God’s will and allowing his desires to be redirected according to God’s mind. Some renderings used are ‘ready to do what he wants,’ ‘while our hearts are the same with (that is, we are of the same mind as) God.’ For will see comments on 2.17.

He hears us, or ‘he listens to us,’ ‘he gives attention to us (or to our words),’ ‘he takes-in what we-ask,’ ‘he concerns himself about us.’ In one language the idiomatic expression is ‘he grabs our words.’ The term implies a response. Therefore some renderings used here cover two concepts; for example, ‘to listen’ and ‘to answer,’ or ‘to understand’ and ‘to obey.’

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 .

VERSE 2. This verse gives fuller explanation about “the life.” The Greek uses the connective kai “and.” This may be rendered here ‘for,’ ‘indeed,’ ‘yes,’ ‘this, of a truth,’ but in some cases it is better left untranslated; for example, where the use of a parenthesis in itself already suggests that the verse functions as an explanation. To strengthen the coherence of the discourse, one may add a back-pointing element, as in ‘this life,’ ‘the life just mentioned.’

The life was made manifest, or ‘was revealed,’ ‘was brought to the open,’ ‘was to be seen,’ ‘became visible,’ ‘showed itself.’ The tense used in the Greek is the aorist, indicating that the reference is to an event in the past, namely Jesus’ appearance in history. To bring this out, one language uses ‘to come’ with a suffix indicating that this happened for the first time and that he had never before been seen by the speaker.

† Was made manifest (in this verse and 4.9) renders the passive form of a Greek verb “to reveal,” “to show.” The same Greek form is often used in connection with Jesus, especially so in the Johannine writings. Then it refers to his appearing among men during his earthly life (here, and 3.5, 8), or to the appearances after his resurrection (John 21.14), or to the final manifestation at his second coming (1 John 2.28; perhaps also 3.2). In most of these occurrences Revised Standard Version and Good News Bible use “to appear,” but in John 21.14 they have “was revealed” and “showed himself.”

We saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life: in this rendering it refers back to “life,” which is thus taken as the goal of the two first verbs. It is possible, even preferable, however, to understand “the eternal life” as the goal of all three verbs, for example, ‘we saw, and testify to, and proclaim the eternal life,’ or ‘we saw the eternal life, and testify to it, and proclaim it.’

Semantically speaking, however, this difference of construction is not very important in the context, because the eternal life is only a more expressive repetition of “the life,” and both are virtually interchangeable in the Johannine writings. Hence a construction like that of Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, or of Translators’ Translation of the Johannine Epistles (Translators’ Translation) (“we have seen it, we bear witness to it, we declare it to you, that eternal life”), is quite acceptable also. The same is true of an alternative solution that transposes the phrase “the eternal life” to verse 2c (which see).

In the Greek the first verb is in the perfect tense, again referring to the past, but the next two verbs are in the present tense. This sequence serves to express that what happened before has its results now. Therefore and before the second verb is better rendered “so” (Good News Translation) or, subordinating the rest of the sentence, ‘so that (now).’

The last verb (we … proclaim) is identical with the main verb of the sentence (in verse 3a). This stylistic feature serves to strengthen the connection between the parenthesis and the sentence as a whole.

† The verb testify is basically a legal term for telling in court what one has seen and heard. The phrase here means to tell publicly what life really is, as witnesses who know the life revealed by Jesus, “the Word of life,” in the deeds they saw him perform and the words they heard him speak. The use of this verb implies that they spoke about these words and deeds because they were well aware of their real meaning, and believed in Jesus. For this interaction of hearing and seeing with testifying, and with faith see also 4.14-16; John 1.32, 34; 19.35, and compare 3.11, 32. Where a specific term for “to testify” or “to bear witness” does not exist, a descriptive rendering of the phrase may be given; for example, ‘tell just how it is,’ ‘tell what one has heard and seen,’ ‘tell what one has experienced.’

The verb testify (occurring also in 4.14; 3 John 3, 6, 12) stands for a Greek verb which is also rendered “to bear witness” (5.9) and “to bear testimony” (5.10). The present participle of the same Greek verb, functioning as an agent noun, has as its equivalent in English the noun “witness” (5.7-8). And the related verbal noun, referring to the act of testifying, or the words spoken when testifying, occurs in Revised Standard Version as “testimony” (5.9 and following; 3 John 12).

Proclaim renders a Greek verb that has the meaning “to report” or “to tell,” rather than “to proclaim.” It has an important semantic component in common with “to testify,” namely that of reporting. Accordingly, the two verbs are in some cases better combined into one; for example, ‘we report to you what we heard and saw.’ If a verb referring to communication by mouth would be confusing in the context of a letter, one may use a verb for “to write” (as the text itself has in verse 4).

† The eternal life (also in 2.25; 3.15; 5.11, 13, 20), or, shifting from noun to verb, ‘what causes people to live eternally’: The qualification eternal (Greek aiōnios) is added in order to make explicit that this life is something of a different order, namely, the order of the coming aeon or age (Greek aiōn), and accordingly has a quality which is superior to anything in the present age. This life of the coming age, revealed in the person of Jesus Christ, is attainable in the present age for all who believe in him.

One of the superior qualities of this life is that sin, illness, and death no longer exist. Consequently the Greek term for eternal has also the semantic component of unending duration, but this, though important, is a secondary component. To express the primary component one can often best use such terms as ‘true,’ ‘real,’ ‘full.’ Thus one Papuan language has ‘fullness/hugeness of life,’ the term ‘fullness/hugeness’ being used in the language as a qualification of things divine.

However, several versions, probably even the majority, follow the reverse method when translating the term in question. They use a rendering which only secondarily means superior quality but primarily refers to long or endless duration, such as, ‘everlasting,’ ‘for ever,’ ‘continuous,’ ‘all times,’ ‘year and year,’ ‘without end.’ This is done on the assumption that such a term also possesses the meaning of superior quality, or has acquired it by usage. Before introducing such a rendering translators should carefully investigate whether this assumption holds true for the receptor language concerned.

Which was with the Father and was made manifest to us. The first part of this relative clause closely parallels verse 1a; both refer to what is outside the human sphere of space and time. The second part repeats verse 2a and serves to bring the parenthesis to a close. These stylistic features are intended to strengthen the inner structure of the long sentence. At the same time verse 2c forms a climax, which is often best brought out when the phrase “the eternal life” is transposed from verse 2b to verse 2c; compare, for example, ‘we have seen it, we bear witness to it, and proclaim it to you: the eternal life, which was with the Father, appeared to us.’

Was with indicates that the life and the Father ‘belonged together’ (as one language has it, using a reciprocal derivation of ‘yoke/cross-beam’). Another way to express the same concept is found in such renderings of the clause as ‘life was near the Father.’ Sometimes the function of “to be” is performed by such verbs as ‘to live,’ ‘to dwell,’ or ‘to sit’ (the third being used in one language when the subject is a person, as against ‘to lie’ when it is a thing).

† The Father (here and in 1.3; 2.1, 13 (14 in the Greek New Testament), 15-16, 22-24; 3.1; 4.14; 2 John 3-4, 9) refers to God, the heavenly Father of Jesus and men. This reference may have to be made explicit; for example, ‘Father God,’ ‘the Father above.’ Often the noun may best be treated as a proper name, for example, by adding a name qualifier.

If the receptor language word for father must show to whom the person is father, one has the choice between ‘his father,’ that is, the father of Jesus Christ, or ‘our (inclusive) father.’ The latter is preferable provided it does not obscure the fact that God is men’s Father because he is Jesus’ Father. But it may create a problem in languages that differentiate according to social status. In such languages the translator may hesitate between considerations of reverence, requiring the use of honorifics when referring to the deity, and considerations of modesty, making obligatory the avoidance of honorifics with reference to what is the speaker’s own, such as his possessions, body, or family. In this conflict considerations of reverence seem, as a rule, to predominate, resulting in the use of honorific term for ‘father,’ even in phrases which refer to the speaker’s father. This is acceptable because the word is used metaphorically.

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 .

In verses 24-25 John shifts from proposition to exhortation. Addressing his followers directly he entreats them to keep to what they have always been taught, namely, that Jesus is the Christ, and not to believe the false teachings he has denounced in the preceding verses. This shift is clearly marked in the Greek by the use of the second person plural in initial position. Therefore several versions rightly prefer to introduce the first sentence of the verse by something like ‘As for you,’ or ‘You, however.’

Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you: the aorist form of you heard in the Greek indicates that the action has been completed and is regarded as a whole, irrespective of its duration.

For from the beginning see comments on 1 John 2.7; for “to abide in” see comments on verse 14, and compare discussion below.

It is in some cases preferable to shift to a more personal wording such as ‘I beg you to stick to what you heard…’ (compare Phillips) or, with an imperative, “be sure, then, to keep in your hearts the message you heard…” (Good News Translation). But this may spoil the play on words with “abide in you” and “abide in him” (see comments on 24b).

The next sentence refers to a situation in which the demand expressed in the preceding clause has been fulfilled. It repeats that clause, but now as a condition and, in the Greek, with a change in word order. This gives the verse a solemn ring and serves to emphasize the statement.

This stylistic feature should be preserved in translation. Preferably verse 24b should repeat, completely or with only slight variations, the wording of verse 24a; for example, ‘Let what you heard … be and remain in you. If what you heard … is and remains in you,’ or ‘Have in your heart what you heard…. If you have completely put in your heart what you heard….’

Complete or slightly varied repetition, however, does not have this function of solemn emphasis in all languages. Where it does not, one may have to use a different wording, at the same time trying to express the function in another way. This may result, for example, in a rendering of verse 24b like ‘if you really have done so and remain doing so.’ To reduce verse 24b to a simple ‘if you do,’ or even ‘then,’ ‘in-that-case,’ is not advisable.

Then you will abide in the Son and in the Father: according to this clause it is only by way of the word of the gospel as it is preached by the eyewitnesses (compare 1.1-3) that one can come to the Son, just as it is only through the Son that one can come to the Father. This is probably the reason why the Son is mentioned before the Father here, not after him as in verse 22.

Then you, or ‘you too,’ ‘you similarly,’ ‘you for your part.’ In the Greek the pronoun is given emphasis by a preceding kai “and.”

The verb “to abide” is used here in the context of other agents and objects than noted before. The construction in this clause belongs to a group (a), as mentioned in verse 6, the construction in the two preceding clauses to (d). The repetition of the verb serves, however, to stress the close connection between the abiding of the gospel in man and man’s abiding in the Son and the Father, or stated otherwise, between man’s keeping to the gospel and his keeping fellowship with God in Christ.

It is again preferable to preserve this stylistic trait completely or at least partly. For the latter compare, for example, ‘if what you heard … remains effective in you, then you will remain one with the Son…,’ ‘keep what you heard, then you will keep living with the Son…’; also New English Bible‘s “you must therefore keep in your hearts that which you heard…; if what you heard then still dwells in you, you will yourselves dwell in the Son….” In some cases, however, receptor language idioms will require renderings of the verb that are wholly different, such as ‘remain in – be together with,’ ‘preserve – remain forever with,’ ‘keep in your hearts – live in union with.’

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 .

The first clause of this verse is the negative counterpart of verse 2b. It refers to the false teachers and contrasts their spirit to that of the true believers. This contrast serves to reinforce the preceding statement.

And is preferably “but,” because it introduces a contrasting statement.

Does not confess Jesus: the name Jesus characterizes its bearer as a person. Therefore “to confess Jesus” means to declare publicly one’s belief in the man Jesus. As such it says virtually the same as “to confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh,” but in a more concise form.

The clause is difficult to render because of its terseness. Many versions give an expanded rendering such as ‘does not openly declare to believe that Jesus has come as a man.’ Others introduce an element that points to verse 2a; for example, “does not thus acknowledge Jesus” (New English Bible) or, with further shifts, “denies this about Jesus” (Good News Translation).

The Greek construction used here has been a problem not only for translators but also for copyists of the original text. This is proved by the variant readings (see Greek New Testament). Some of these have an expanded construction that is comparable to the expanded renderings discussed in the preceding entry. Others, instead of “does not confess,” have a verb form that means either “looses,” “separates” (namely, Jesus from Christ), or “destroys,” “does away with.” This reading is presented by several old Latin manuscripts that serve as witnesses to the text, and by a marginal note in one Greek manuscript dating from the tenth century. It is not to be preferred to the reading found in all older Greek manuscripts.

Not to confess Jesus is a decisive characteristic of the false teachers. Further characteristics are given in the next sentence of this verse, which must be interpreted against the background of 2.18.

Of which you heard that it was coming: this relative clause is often rendered better as a new sentence, with further adjustments where necessary; for example, ‘You have been informed that it would be coming,’ ‘You have heard people say, “It is coming.” ’

In the Greek the relative pronoun is in the neuter gender, which shows that the antecedent is not the antichrist (as in 2.18) but his spirit, which is neuter in the Greek. Several versions, however, render the clause in such a way that it qualifies antichrist. Where this shift is idiomatically preferable, it is acceptable, since the spirit of a person can often stand for that person himself.

You heard; the verb is in the perfect tense, not in the aorist as in 2.7 and other verses. This tense is used here to indicate that what they have heard (or have been told) once is still in their mind.

Was coming: John reminds his readers of a warning that was given in the past before there was any antichrist; hence “would come” (Good News Translation). The next clause emphasizes that at the time John was writing, the spirit of antichrist had already come.

Now it is in the world already: the verb has here the force of “to be present,” “to be acting.” For the world compare comments on 2.15, meaning (2). The word indicates the sphere in which the spirit of antichrist is working.

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 .

We have seen and testify that … or “we have seen and tell others that…” (Good News Translation). The sentence structure may have to be changed; for example, ‘we have seen that…, and testify to it.’ The first verb is in the perfect tense, showing that the seeing was an experience in the past that continues to affect the present; the second verb is in the present tense, expressing continuation.

“To see” repeats the verb found in verse 12. This serves to bring out that, though man cannot see God directly, face-to-face, he can see him indirectly in the face of Jesus, who is the historic revelation of God’s character. For “to testify” see comments on 1.2.

The Father has sent his Son (literally “the Son”) as the Savior of the world (or “to be the Savior of the world,” Good News Translation, or simply ‘to save the world’) resembles verse 9b. For the Father see comments on 1.2.

Savior, or ‘one who saves,’ is often a form indicating professional or habitual activity. In the ancient world the corresponding Greek word was a title of gods, and also of deserving and important men who thus were given divine honor. In the Greek version of the Old Testament, it is used of God, and in some cases of a human savior or deliverer (see Judges 3.9, 15). The noun has the basic meaning ‘one who preserves (or delivers) from harm,’ such as danger, illness, death. Figuratively used it can indicate one who preserves or delivers from eternal death and its causes, or, more positively stated, one who grants eternal life and the ensuing blessedness.

Renderings of the verb used in the present context may literally mean ‘to rescue,’ ‘to release from danger,’ ‘to renew,’ ‘to cause-to-escape,’ ‘to cause-to-get-better’ (physically and otherwise), ‘to cause-well-being,’ ‘to cause to live,’ ‘to give supernatural-life,’ ‘to bring across,’ and others. Compare also A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of Mark on 10.26.

For the world see comments on 2.15, meaning (3). One may have to indicate that the reference is to persons; for example, ‘all who live in this world’; or one may have to show that the speaker and hearers are included; for example, ‘us (inclusive), people on the earth.’

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 .

The proposition stated in verse 3 starts from the conviction that a man’s visible behavior and his invisible relation to God are so closely parallel that one can draw conclusions from the one concerning the other. Accordingly, from the fact that a man keeps God’s commandments, one can infer that he knows God; the former is the proof of the latter.

And does not have connective or transitional force here but serves to emphasize the subsequent by this. In several languages it is better left untranslated.

The prepositional phrase by this…, if … points forward to the dependent clause and is explained by it. The construction is chosen for reasons of emphasis. It serves to focus attention on the keeping of the commandments.

It is often preferable in translation to change the sentence structure. Using a more common sentence type one may say ‘if we keep God’s commands, then we can be sure that we know him’ (compare Good News Translation), or somewhat more expressively, “it is only when we obey God’s laws that we can be quite sure that we really know him” (Phillips). Other possibly useful restructurings are ‘if we keep God’s commands, we have the proof that we know him’ or “here is the test by which we can make sure that we know him: do we keep his commands?” (New English Bible).

Constructions with by this (or “in this,” in 4.9, 17, rendering the same Greek phrase) in the main clause pointing forward to an explanatory dependent clause occur a few times in the Gospel of John and are rather common in the present Letter. The dependent clause may be introduced by if, as is the case here and in John 13.35. This seems to indicate that the statement is to be viewed as a reference to assumed fact. A similar case, but using the conjunction “when/as often as” (Greek hotan) occurs in 5.2 (if there the alternative interpretation is followed). Elsewhere in this Letter the clause is introduced by “that” (3.16; 4.9-10, 13, 17), the statement being viewed as a reference to actual fact. In some cases no connective is used (4.2; also, probably, 3.10), but then again the clause seems to refer to fact.

The clause by this we may be sure serves to call attention to the subsequent statement of an important Christian truth, either in general or specifically applying to the situation of the readers of this Letter. The same or similar expressions, pointing to subsequent statements of the same kind, are found in 3.19, 24; 4.2, 13. In 2.5 and 5.2 it is not certain whether the expression points forward or backward; see the verses in question.

To be sure (or “to know”) refers to being aware of truth, or to discerning between what is true and what is not true (in one language expressed negatively, ‘not mistaking-the-one-for-the other’). Often “to be sure by” is better rendered ‘to be made sure by,’ ‘to be shown by.’ With a further shift this may lead here to a rendering like ‘this makes us sure,’ ‘this shows us,’ ‘this proves to us.’

We know him: in this and the next verse him may theoretically refer either to God or to Christ. The former is preferable because it is unlikely that this pronoun would have another reference that the possessive pronoun has in “his (that is, God’s) commandments”; see below. But one should bear in mind that for John there is no sharp distinction between God and Christ in contexts like this; to know or obey the one means to know or obey the other.

† The verb “to know” means in this passage “to have become (or to be) intimately acquainted with,” namely, with a person’s intentions and character. To bring this out some versions have here ‘to know how God is,’ ‘to know God, what he is like.’ The expression implies fellowship and communion with God. But for John, knowing God does not mean a mystic union with God, detaching oneself from earthly things, as it probably meant for his opponents. It has ethical implications of obedience towards God’s commandments (compare also 4.7-8). What he says here about the knowledge of God should be viewed in the light of such eschatological Old Testament passages as Jer 31.31-34. Other references to the Christians’ knowledge of God occur in 2.4, 13-14; 3.1, 6; 4.6-8; 5.20.

We keep his commandments, an expression that is characteristic of the Johannine writings. By keeping God’s commandments one shows one’s love for him (1 John 5.3), abides in him (3.24), and can be confident that he will hear one’s prayer (3.22). Conversely, one who does not keep God’s commandments is a stranger to the truth of God (2.4). The phrase is virtually synonymous with the expression “to keep his word” (compare verse 5).

† “To keep” may in this context be rendered by ‘to observe,’ ‘to obey,’ ‘to listen to.’ Some verbs used basically mean ‘to guard,’ ‘to complete/fulfill,’ ‘to hold-in-remembrance,’ ‘to confirm/agree,’ ‘to do-according-to.’ Other occurrences of the verb in this meaning are in 2.5; 3.22, 24; 5.3, and compare comments on “disobeys” in 2.4.

† With perhaps one exception (compare 3.23) the noun commandments is always used in John’s Letters to refer to what God orders, or tells, people to do; hence the possessive pronoun in the present verse should be interpreted as referring to God, not to Christ. The plural (2.3-4; 3.22, 24; 5.2-3; 2 John 6) is used to indicate that the reference is to deeds which give concrete form to the one, great commandment of love (in the singular, see 2.7-8; 3.23; 4.21; 2 John 5-6, and compare “word” in 1 John 2.5). The noun sometimes has been rendered by ‘rule,’ ‘what has been laid down,’ ‘what one should follow,’ ‘what one is-caused-to-follow.’

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 .

This verse draws the conclusion from verse 5: since Christ and sin have nothing in common, fellowship with Christ cannot go together with sin. The verse may be introduced by some word or phrase meaning “consequently.”

No one who abides in him sins, or ‘every one who abides in him (or in Christ) does not sin,’ ‘if a person abides in him/Christ, he does not sin.’ The present tense of “to abide” in this and of “to sin” in the next clause characterizes the sentence as stating a general truth. For “to abide in” and “to sin,” see comments on 2.6 and 1.10, respectively.

No one who sins has either seen him or known him states the opposite of verse 6a: a person who sins proves by that very fact that Christ is a stranger to him, whom he has never seen or known.

Because of the reverse parallel structure of this and the preceding clause, one might expect here “abides in him,” echoing the first part of 6a. The reason why John preferred to employ the verbs “to see” and “to know” instead was probably to refute the false teachers, who used to boast of having the true vision and knowledge of Christ. This boast must be false, John points out, since they are persons who sin (according to 1.8). The perfect tense of has … seen … or known is to show that the present situation is viewed as the result of previous events.

Seen him is used here metaphorically. It refers to seeing with the eye of faith, realizing that Christ is the revelation of God (John 14.7, 9). Sometimes the corresponding verb does not allow this figurative use. Then one has to use another verb of perception; for example, ‘to understand,’ ‘to find,’ or ‘to know-by-face’ (in one American Indian language).

Known him: for the verb see comments on 2.3, where, however, the object is not Christ but God. The American Indian language just quoted uses here a verb meaning ‘to know-by-mind.’

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 .

For introduces the reason why God’s commandments are not burdensome. A comma at the end of verse 3 (compare Greek New Testament) is usually preferable to a period (as in Revised Standard Version).

Whatever is born of God is in the Greek literally “the-thing-that is-begotten out of God”; see comments on 2.29. The neuter form has theoretically a somewhat wider range of reference than the preceding masculine form, literally “the-one-who is-begotten out of him” (see comments on “the child” in 1 John 5.1). Since, however, the reference clearly is to persons, most versions do not bring out the difference, having renderings such as ‘whoever is born of God,’ “every child of God” (Good News Translation).

Overcomes the world: the present tense expresses continuation. The clause serves to say that, in the continuing struggle with evil, the Christian continually is given strength to overcome it. For the verb “to overcome,” or ‘to conquer/defeat,’ see comments on 2.13; for the world in verses 4-5, see comments on 2.15, meaning (5).

This is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith: this points forward to our faith. Accordingly the sentence is sometimes clearer if given another structure; for example, ‘our faith is the victory that overcomes the world,’ “this is how we win the victory over the world: with our faith” (Good News Translation).

The phrase the victory that overcomes renders a Greek construction of a verbal noun combined with a related participle of the aorist, “the conquest that conquers,” or “the overcoming/defeating that overcomes/defeats.” Such a double reference to the same concept can usually not be preserved in translation; hence renderings like ‘the victory over,’ ‘that which conquers,’ ‘the force to defeat.’

The aorist tense may have been used to characterize the sentence as a simple statement of fact, irrespective of the time element; hence the present tense found in Revised Standard Version, and corresponding verb forms in several other versions. Taken thus verse 4b gives a further specification of verse 4a. Or the aorist may refer to the relative past. Taken thus verse 4b serves to indicate that the Christian is able to overcome the world because the world has been overcome already. Thus interpreted the clause intends to say that our faith gives us a share in a victory that already has been won, namely, the victory of Jesus Christ. In the opinion of the present authors, this is the slightly more probable interpretation. It may lead to renderings like ‘it is our faith that has overcome the world,’ or ‘what (is the) force (that) has overcome the world? Our faith.’

Our faith: the noun can refer to faith as behavior, that is, the act of believing, or to the facts believed (compare verses 1 and 5, where the emphasis is on the latter aspect). Accordingly a shift to a verbal construction may result in ‘that we believe’ or, where an object is obligatory, ‘that we believe in (or trust) Jesus,’ following the former interpretation; or it may result in ‘what (or the things) we believe,’ following the latter interpretation. Both senses of the phrase may have been in John’s mind, but if a translator is compelled to choose between the two, he should follow the second interpretation. This may lead to something like ‘the force which has overcome the world is that we believe this’ (namely, that Jesus is the Christ).

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 .