They are of the world: the pronoun, referring again to the false prophets, is emphatic and contrasts with the pronoun in “you are of God” in verse 4a.

Therefore, or ‘because of this fact,’ namely, that the false prophets are of the world.

What they say is of the world, in the Greek literally “out of the world they-speak”: structurally this clause parallels “you out of God you-are” (verse 4a) and “they out of the world they-are” (verse 5a). Semantically it further develops the latter clause by stating one of the main characteristics of those who “are of the world.”

Revised Standard Version‘s slightly adjusted rendering has the advantage of preserving the parallelism. The same may be true of such renderings as ‘they speak as the world speaks,’ ‘what they say has the quality of the world,’ ‘their teaching belongs to the world.’ But sometimes receptor language idiom requires renderings that neglect the parallelism or bring it out less fully; for example, ‘they speak the language of the world,’ ‘they talk about worldly things,’ ‘they talk about nothing but the world.’

The world listens to them: the verb may require a personal subject; for example, ‘the people of this world,’ ‘the friends (or party) of this world.’

The verb listens has the sense ‘to give attention to’; it signifies intentional, attentive hearing and may imply that the agent agrees to, or obeys, what is said, as is the case here. The rendering to be used here and in verse 6 is often a form of ‘to hear’ (as it is in the Greek). In some languages the verb does not take the speaking person as direct object but his words; hence ‘to listen to what they say.’

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 .

If: the corresponding Greek conjunction followed by the subjunctive of the aorist may have conditional meaning, “in the case that,” or temporal meaning, “when,” “at the moment that.” Both interpretations are acceptable in this context.

Sees his brother committing … sin: the verb “to see” with the direct personal object and following participle refers to seeing the person in a certain action or state of being. The clause may have to be restructured; for example, ‘sees his brother who (or while he) is committing … sin.’ For brother see comments on 2.9.

Committing what is not a mortal sin is in the Greek literally “sinning a sin not to death.” Some other ways to render this construction are ‘committing a sin that is not to death,’ ‘doing a sin, but not a sin to death,’ ‘sinning, but not sinning to death.’ For “sin” and “to sin” see comments on 1.7 and 10.

A mortal sin, or ‘a sin that is deadly (or causes-to-die, or leads to death, or causes-to-come death).’ The reference is to sins that cut off the sinner from the life given him in Christ, and so cause him to fall into spiritual death. The sin John had in view may have been hate and lovelessness; compare “whoever does not love is still in death” (3.14, Good News Bible); or it may have been denial of Christ; compare “whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life” (5.12, Good News Bible).

The reference to death must be taken metaphorically here. In rendering the phrase it may be better to shift from metaphor to simile; for example, ‘sin which makes them with their head-hearts like dead people’; or it may be better to explain the metaphorical use; for example, ‘sin that will end in spiritual death,’ ‘sin that cuts (him) off from (eternal) life’; or again to use another metaphor, as in ‘for good taking the evil road.’

In some receptor languages ‘mortal sin’ is a well-known expression in the ethical terminology of the Church, but to use the word in this sense in John’s Letter would be an anachronism. Then one may have to coin a new phrase; for example, ‘sin that tends towards death’ (in one Philippine language, where ‘mortal sin’ would have legalistic overtones).

He will ask, that is, ‘he will ask/pray for him’: this clause is referring to a prayer of intercession. For this concept a specific term may exist (as in Arabic, for example), or a specific phrase such as ‘to plead as go-between,’ ‘to speak up on behalf of.’

And introduces what the result of this prayer will be.

God will give him life is in the Greek literally “he-will-give him life.” Revised Standard Version, New English Bible, Good News Translation, and others take the agent to be God, since only God can dispense eternal life. It is also possible, however, to take the one who asks as the subject. Then the clause is a case of indirect agency, for the one who asks is not able to give life himself but causes another, namely God, to do so. A comparable thought is expressed in James 5.20.

Both interpretations are acceptable, but the second one is, perhaps, slightly more attractive because of what one commentator has called “the continuity of the construction.” It is brought out in such a rendering as “he will pray for him and obtain life for him” (Translators’ Translation, compare also Moffatt, Goodspeed, Bible de Jérusalem). In some cases an exegetically neutral rendering may be possible; for example, ‘he should pray for him; that will give him life,’ ‘he should pray, and thus his brother will be caused to live (or will receive life).’

For those whose sin is not mortal: although this phrase is in the plural, it is in apposition to “him.” This construction allows John to generalize the preceding proposition and at the same time emphasize the qualification. It is often better to render the phrase as a new clause or sentence; for example, “—that is, when men are not guilty of deadly sin” (New English Bible), or ‘This applies to (or I mean) all those whose sin is not mortal.’

There is sin which is mortal: the restrictive qualification “what is not a mortal sin” (verse 16a) implied already the existence of mortal sin. This is here stated explicitly by the author.

Now, however, the question arises as to what a Christian must do when he sees a brother committing a mortal sin. John’s answer, careful but resolute, is given in what follows:

I do not say that one is to pray for that: according to the Greek word order, the phrase for that (literally “concerning that”) is to be taken with “to say” rather than with to pray, but this makes no important difference for the meaning of the sentence. So the translator is free to follow the construction that best fits the receptor language.

In for that the pronoun may have to be specified; for example, ‘concerning that (or such a) sin,’ ‘about mortal sin.’ If a verbal construction is preferable, one may say ‘about a person who is sinning in this way.’

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 states positively what the preceding clause expresses in a negative way.

Whoever keeps, or ‘whenever a person keeps.’ The Greek construction (a relative pronoun with the Greek particle an or ean and the following verb in the subjunctive) occurs also in 3.17, 22; 4.15; 5.15; 3 John 5. It serves to express generally occurring circumstances. When the verb in the main clause is in the present tense, or has the force of a present tense, this indicates that the reference is to repeated action, regardless of the time factor.

For his word, that is, ‘God’s word,’ see comments on 1.10.

In him truly love for God is perfected: the phrase in him … is perfected means ‘manifest in him,’ or ‘shown/exemplified by him.’ Truly, or ‘really,’ ‘in truth/reality,’ here means ‘not in words only but in deeds also.’ The word qualifies the verb; hence ‘is truly/really perfected,’ ‘reaches true/real perfection.’

In the Greek the phrase love for God is a genitive construction, “love of God.” This construction may mean (a) that God is the agent, “God loves,” (b) that God is the goal, “to love God,” or (c) a qualification, “to have love of a divine kind,” “to love like one whom God has taught to love.” Interpretation (a) is most likely in 4.9, (b) in 2.15 (“love for the Father”) and 5.3, and (a), or perhaps (c), in 4.12.

In the present verse, and in 3.17, all three relationships seem to be possible. Consequently a rendering that covers three, or at least two, of the possible meanings is preferable; here, for example, ‘in him it becomes manifest that God truly fills his whole heart with love’; or ‘this one has in his innermost his love coming from God,’ in which the last words may either mean “the love God has inspired in him” or “God’s love for him” (one American Indian language). If the translator is compelled to choose, however, possibility (a) seems to be slightly more likely here because of the parallel with “the truth (of God) is not in him” (verse 4).

The versions investigated vary in their renderings; compare love for God in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, following (b), “divine love” in New English Bible, following (c), whereas (a) is represented by ‘God’s love has come to perfection’ in Bijbel in Gewone Taal, and ‘God loves him completely’ in a Philippine language. If the noun love has to be rendered by a verb, the clause may become, for example, ‘such a person shows that God loves him truly and perfectly,’ following (a); or ‘he really loves perfectly, like one whom God has taught to love (man),’ following (c).

† Love (Greek agapē): In classical Greek the related verb has the meaning “to like,” then, “to like one person more than another,” “to prefer.” The Septuagint uses it to render a Hebrew verb referring to an act of the will rather than to an emotion. The word is distinct from, but in the same semantic field as, Greek eros “passionate love,” “desire,” and Greek philia “friendship,” “affection.” For other occurrences, see 3.1, 16; 4.7-10, 12, 16f; 2 John 3, 6; 3 John 6.

As for the problems involved in the translation of love, it has been pointed out that forms of love are frequently divided into two major categories: (1) those based upon established inter-personal relationships, such as, (a) family ties, (b) mutual friendship, and (c) sexual attraction; and (2) the profound appreciation which persons may have for one another on different social levels.

As to terms of category (1a), the love of parents for children and children for parents may constitute the basis for identifying the love of God for men and of men for God. Yet, there are sometimes connotations of such expressions which make it difficult to use them freely.

Expressions of category (1b) can of course be widely used in the Scriptures for “brotherly love,” but they may not be applicable to God’s love for man nor to man’s love for God.

If a term primarily identifies sexual attraction (1c), it can as a rule not be made applicable to the types of nonsexual love spoken of in the Bible.

In category (2) the concern the person of the upper level may have for an individual of lower rank may be roughly equivalent to “compassion.” It may be employed as a basic term to express the love of God for men in some languages. In others one may likewise use a phrase, ‘God wants good for us.’ Terms showing the affection and loyalty of the follower for his leader, on the other hand, may properly express the love of men for God.

Of course, in some languages various types of love may be indicated with perfect clarity by special terms, but in many instances more natural forms of expression may consist of idiomatic phrases, some of which employ a term for an organ of the body, but all of which describe the emotion as a special kind of activity; for example, ‘to put someone in one’s heart,’ ‘to hurt in one’s heart,’ ‘to die for a person,’ ‘to have one’s heart burn,’ ‘to think much about,’ ‘that which holds two together,’ ‘to have one’s heart go away with.’ In some instances love is described as a particular quality; for example, ‘his inside is sweet with someone,’ ‘to be heavy on the inside,’ ‘to appear good to the eye.’

† Is perfected: the Greek uses a form of the perfect tense which, however, has the force of a present and brings out that the state of perfection reached is in focus. The verb occurs also in 4.12 and 17-18, the related adjective in 4.18.

In the active form the verb means “to bring to completion,” “to cause to reach its goal (or its accomplishment),” in the sense of the overcoming of an imperfect state of things by one that is perfect. Here it is used in the passive form and means “to reach perfection,” “to come to its full measure (or growth),” “to be all-sufficient,” which in one language is expressed vividly by ‘to be round/globular,’ in another negatively, ‘to lack nothing.’

By this we may be sure that we are in him, that is, in God. This clause draws the conclusion from the two preceding clauses of verse 5. In wording it resembles verse 3.

Here by this may point forward, as in verse 3. It is taken thus by Greek New Testament, Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, New English Bible and others, which read a colon at the end of verse 5. Or it may point back to “whoever keeps his word.” This interpretation (followed by Nestle, Zürcher Bibel, Bible de Jérusalem, Nieuwe Vertaling, Bijbel in Gewone Taal, and others) seems more probable when verse 5b is viewed as forming the conclusion of verses 3-5, as done in this Handbook. The reference may have to be specified, or the force of the preposition may have to be expressed by a causative construction; for example, ‘our keeping his word (or our obedience) is what causes us to be sure….’

For “to be in” see 1.8. Since the expression is in the same semantic domain as “to abide in,” its use here points towards the thought that will be discussed in the next paragraph.

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, in the Greek without conjunction, may require an adversative connective such as “But.”

He who commits sin is of the devil is the direct opposite of verse 7b: whereas the man who does right lives according to the ways of God, sinners live according to the ways of the devil, God’s adversary.

For is of the devil in the sense of ‘originates from, and has the quality of, the devil,’ compare “is of the Father” in 2.16. Other renderings found here are ‘is ruled by the devil,’ ‘his heart is possessed by the devil,’ ‘is Satan’s man,’ “is a child of the devil” (New English Bible, and others).

† The devil (here and verse 10) renders Greek ho diabolos, basically “the slanderer,” or “the defamer.” The word functions as the proper name of the supreme ruler of the forces of evil. Translators have dealt with this term in various ways. Many of them (1) use a transliteration; or (2) borrow a form from the dominant language in the area, for example Arabic iblis in Muslim countries (itself derived from the Greek word); or (3) adopt an indigenous name or designation for a closely corresponding evil being (which may literally mean ‘the malicious deity,’ ‘the avaricious one’); or (4) coin a descriptive phrase such as ‘ruler of demons,’ ‘supreme/great evil spirit.’ In a few cases they translate the basic meaning of the Greek word, or they transliterate its Hebrew-Aramaic equivalent “Satan.”

Has sinned from the beginning: the Greek verb is in the present tense, indicating habitual action, ‘the devil was sinning when the world began (compare comments on from the beginning in 1.1a) and has continued to do so ever since.’ His power is as old as the history of mankind. This very fact necessitated the appearance of Christ, who came to break the devil’s power, as John goes on to point out next.

The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil or, more literally, “for this the Son of God appeared, in order that he should destroy….” “For this” points forward to and is complemented by “in order that.”

Some versions, simplifying this construction, translate the sentence by ‘the Son … appeared to (or in order that he should) destroy….’ It seems probable, however, that John chose the heavier construction to call attention to the final clause, and to emphasize the contrast between the devil’s activity and the Son of God’s purpose. To bring this out one may have to use other means; for example, transposing the final clause to the beginning of the sentence, ‘(and) it is (exactly) to destroy … that the Son of God appeared’ (Bible de Jérusalem).

† The Son of God (occurring also in 4.15; 5.5, 10, 13, 20) is preferably to be rendered literally, since in the Bible Jesus Christ is spoken of as the Son of God in exactly the same terms as used for parent-child relationships. However, a literal rendering is not always possible. Thus in one language ‘Son of God’ is the name the members of the tribe apply to themselves, and in another it means ‘lucky person.’ Hence specifications like ‘the only Son of God,’ ‘truly the Son of God’ may be needed.

To destroy is sometimes rendered ‘to undo,’ ‘to do away with,’ ‘to cause to be lost for sure,’ ‘to put/make an end to,’ ‘to wipe out.’

The works of the devil, or ‘all that the devil is doing’: this refers both to the Devil’s own sinful deeds, and to his instigating others to sin.

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 .

After his digression about faith and confession, the author arranges his thoughts to return to his main theme. This verse has therefore the character of a summary of verses 14-15, which in their turn take up verses 9-10.

Greek New Testament, Nestle, and several versions take verse 16b as the beginning of a new paragraph. In the opinion of the present authors, this is not advisable because the repetition of the emphatic formula he … abides in God, and God abides in him (compare verses 13, 15) seems rather to mark the end of the present paragraph. Accordingly the verse is treated as a whole in these notes.

So connects the verse rather loosely with what precedes. It has here the force of “thus we may say that.”

We know and believe the love God has for us: the verbs are both in the perfect tense in the Greek. This gives them the force of “we have come to know and believe and still know and believe.” The second verb reinforces the first.

We … believe the love: the construction of this verb with a direct object is rather uncommon in the Greek. In the Johannine writings it occurs only here and in “Do you believe this” in John 11.26.

The verb believe has already been discussed in the comment on 3.23, which see. It is used here to bring out that we are convinced of the truth of what we came to know, namely, God’s love for us; hence such renderings as “to have put one’s trust in” (Translators’ Translation), ‘to be absolutely/truly sure of,’ ‘to rest the weight of one’s heart on,’ ‘never to doubt.’ In some cases the reinforcing function of “to believe” is expressed otherwise and in another part of the sentence, as in ‘we know, “God truly loves us.” ’

The love God has for us, or ‘that God is loving us’: the verb form has is in the present tense, expressing duration. As to for us (literally “in us”) see comments on “among us” in 1 John 4.9.

For God is love see comments on 1 John 4.8 The statement is repeated here to remind the reader that the source of all love is God; whether we love God or our brothers, it is God’s love that is at work in us.

For he who abides in love, or ‘he who is-and-remains in love,’ ‘he who loves and goes on loving,’ see comments on 2.10. If one has to indicate explicitly who is loved, one may add ‘God and his brother(s).’

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 serves to show why love for the world and love for God cannot go together.

All that is in the world takes up “the things in the world” (verse 15) but emphasizes it by adding all. The three following phrases are given not as an exhaustive enumeration but by way of characteristic examples of “all that is in the world.”

The lust of the flesh, or ‘what the flesh lusts after (or desires, or is hungry for)’: this expression includes sexual desires and sensuality, but its reference is not restricted to this (as is shown, for example, by Gal 5.16-24).

The Greek term translated as lust may have the meaning of “longing.” In cases like the present one and verse 17, however, it is used in an unfavorable sense, ‘sinful longing,’ ‘to desire what is unlawful’.

Flesh is, again, a term with various shades of meaning. The principal ones are: (1) the soft substance of which the body is composed (as in Luke 24.39); (2) body (as in Heb 9.10); (3) man, compare “all flesh” in the sense of “all men” (as in Luke 3.6); (4) the physical, corporeal nature and existence of man, with all restrictions inherent in the fact that he and his emotions are “only human” (as in 1 John 4.2; 2 John 7); and (5) human nature and existence, ruled by sin and bearing the consequences of sin (as in Rom 8.5 and in the present verse).

As with world the use of one rendering in all contexts would be the ideal solution. This has actually been tried in several older and some modern versions. Such consistency, however, is often in conflict with the demands of meaningful translation.

On the other hand, one should not differentiate and specify more than is needed to be meaningful and idiomatic. Renderings of (4) and (5), for instance, can often be built on the same expression; for example, ‘the self,’ ‘human/physical nature,’ ‘what is-human (literally is-like-man-on-earth).’ To such renderings one may have to add a qualification in passages where the negative connotation of (5) is not clear from the context; for example, “the sinful self” (Good News Translation), ‘man’s evil nature.’

In the present verse the above-mentioned considerations may result in renderings like ‘the (bad) desires of man’s nature,’ ‘what man’s sinful heart is longing for,’ ‘what men, sinners as they are, desire.’

The lust of the eyes, or ‘what the eyes lust after’: by adding this phrase John emphasizes that man’s desires are aroused chiefly by what he sees, an idea often expressed in the Old and the New Testament. If a shift from noun to verb is required, another subject may have to be used, as in ‘what people want when they see it,’ “what people see and want” (Good News Translation), ‘that from which one cannot keep one’s eyes.’

The pride of life: the second noun, life, may be the goal of the act of being proud (compare “everything … that people are so proud of,” Good News Translation), or its agent, ‘the pride which life gives.’ The latter agrees with the interpretation of the two preceding phrases. With a further shift it leads to a rendering like ‘life which causes people to boast.’

The term used here for pride refers primarily to the behavior of a conceited and pretentious hypocrite who glorifies himself; hence renderings such as ‘bragging,’ ‘boasting.’ For these related concepts languages often possess idiomatic phrases; for example, ‘saying, “Look at me,” ’ ‘thinking oneself high (or big),’ ‘lifting oneself up,’ ‘making oneself a chief,’ ‘declaring “I outrank others,” ’ ‘answering haughtily.’

Life renders the Greek term bios (compare 1.1). The word is used here in the sense of what one needs to sustain life; hence, ‘property,’ ‘possessions,’ ‘riches.’

Is not of the Father but is of the world: the Greek preposition rendered “(out) of” indicates origin, here probably quality as it is determined by origin. Accordingly the sentence may be rendered ‘springs from the world, not from the Father,’ ‘does not have the quality of the Father but (has the quality) of the world,’ ‘has nothing to do with the Father but (has) everything (to do) with the world.’ “To be of the Father” is to be compared also with “to be born of him” (that is, of God) in verse 29.

† For other occurrences of “to be of” in John’s Letters, see 2.16b; 3.8, 12, 19; 4.1-2, 4, 6a, 7; 5.19; 3 John 11. Its negative counterpart is found in 2.16a, 19, 21; 3.10; 4.3, 6b. The subject of the verb usually is personal, but in a few cases impersonal, namely, “all that” in 2.16, “lie” in 2.21, “love” in 4.7. The object of the prepositional phrase is also personal, with a few exceptions, “the world” in 2.16 and 4.5, “the truth” in 2.21 and 3.19.

The meaning of the construction is always basically the same as the one it has here. The way that meaning has to be rendered may have to be different where features in the context, especially the classes of the participants, are different. For some such renderings see comments below on 2.19, 21; 3.8; 4.7.

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 Greek New Testament the paragraph begins with [kai], a reading of doubtful authority. In the majority of translations this word is not represented, and rightly so.

By this is best taken as pointing backward (as in 4.6 and, according to one interpretation, in 2.5). Then the line of thought is: by the fact that we love in deed and in truth, we know that we are of the truth. To bring this out clearly Good News Translation has “this, then, is how we will know.”

We shall know is not in the present tense, as in verse 16, but in the future tense. This serves here to express that the knowledge depends upon the fulfillment of the condition laid down in verse 18. Consequently the future tense expresses what can or may happen rather than what will happen; hence ‘we can/may know.’

We are of the truth: some acceptable renderings are ‘we belong to God, who is true,’ ‘we have the quality of truth (or of the true One),’ compare comments on 2.16 and 21.

And (shall) reassure our hearts: the clause is dependent on by this and as such is parallel to we shall know that …. To make this clear one may have to say something like ‘and (by this also we) can/may reassure our hearts.’ The plural of hearts is required by English usage because the subject is in the plural. It has distributive force, for which some other languages prefer a singular form (as does the Greek).

In “to reassure one’s heart,” the Greek verb can mean “to convince,” “to persuade,” “to win over,” but also (in Matt 28.14, for example) “to conciliate,” “to pacify,” “to satisfy,” “to set at ease or rest.” The last mentioned meaning fits the context here.

The syntactic structure of the phrase may have to be changed; for example, ‘the heart feels sure (or rests).’ Some equivalent idioms are ‘to be one-hearted (that is, at peace),’ ‘to be happy (of) heart,’ ‘the heart can breathe’ (that is, is relieved, as of a big problem).

Heart (in this and the next two verses) represents a Greek word that refers to the bodily heart, the seat of physical life, then, by extension, to the heart as the center and source of the whole inner life. In some receptor languages the corresponding term may literally mean ‘liver,’ ‘gall,’ or another part of the body; see comments on heart in verse 17. Since the word also stands for the self as a responsible person, the present phrase may also be rendered ‘to reassure oneself (or one’s conscience)’ (compare Phillips and Goodspeed).

Before him, or ‘in his/God’s sight,’ ‘when (we stand) in God’s presence’: the phrase is used in a metaphorical sense.

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 is he who came…, Jesus Christ: the demonstrative pronoun this, taking up “Jesus” in the last clause of verse 5, points forward to Jesus Christ at the end of verse 6a. This name has strong emphasis. To bring this out the word order may have to be changed; for example, “it was he, Jesus Christ himself, who came…” (Goodspeed).

Who came by water and blood. The verb is in the aorist, showing that the reference is to a specific event in history. That event had to do with water, standing for Jesus’ baptism, and blood, standing for his death. These two are mentioned as the two most characteristic events of his life on earth.

The Greek preposition translated by (literally “through”) has locative sense but also denotes attendant circumstances. Accordingly the phrase can be taken quite literally as a reference to Jesus’ passing through water at his baptism, and through blood at his death. But a secondary meaning may also be relevant: Jesus comes with the water and the blood by which his followers are to be cleansed and redeemed.

By water and blood: most versions investigated give a literal rendering. Some add a reference to baptism and death; for example, ‘he was baptized with water … he spilled out his blood, he died.’ To add such references is acceptable, but to substitute them for “water and blood” is not advisable.

Not with the water only but with the water and the blood: these words are added to stress that Jesus’ death is as important as his baptism. They seem to be meant as a refutation of opinions held by the false teachers. For those opinions compare the Introduction, pages 3 and following.

With: the preposition used in the Greek (literally “in”) again refers to attendant circumstances. The use of the article serves to show that water and blood refer back to what has been said in the first part of verse 6.

Some commentators take this last phrase of verse 6 as a reference to the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. This seems less probable for two reasons: (1) Verse 6b clearly serves to emphasize and clarify verse 6a. Consequently in both parts of the verse the two nouns should be taken in the same sense, namely, as references to events in Jesus’ life. (2) A sacramental interpretation of the present passage assumes that the false teachers had dissenting opinions on the Lord’s Supper, but nothing in the Letter supports this assumption.

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 .