What Is the Point? | 1 John 1:1–4

The first post in this series can be found here.

In our increasingly divisive age, we need something to cling to. We need something more foundational than the most recent, only partially-informed, news article or social media post. We long for hope, we long for peace, we long for joy. We long to live in unity.

Are these foolish desires? Are we too far gone to ever experience this in reality?

No! But in order to experience these things, we must reframe our thinking.

But is this requirement really a surprise? It should not be. I mean, look: Before Jesus came to earth, no one had ever heard of a blind man being healed (cf. John 9:32). No one had ever heard of a virgin giving birth to a baby. There was no proof of God walking amongst humanity, despite the Ancient Greeks’ sexually charged tales. But Christians have successfully reframed our thinking in order to fit these realities into our worldview.

Likewise, if we are ever to experience a better world with more love, more partnership, more selflessness, then we will need to reframe what it means to be a Christian.¹ And when we do so, we will be filled with joy. This is John’s² message as he puts pen to paper and starts writing 1 John.

Let’s look at it together!

1 John 1:1–4

1¹What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we looked at and our hands touched, concerning the word of life—²the life was manifested, and we have seen³ and are testifying by announcing to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us—³what we have seen and have heard we are announcing also⁴ to you in order that you also might continuously have fellowship with us. Our fellowship, indeed,⁵ is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. ⁴We are writing these things to you⁶ in order that our⁷ joy might be made to overflow.

The footnotes above discuss textual variants. The bold numbers are verse numbers.

Jump menu

Exposition and Application
Saint Augustine Assessment
Gospel Plea
Great Commandment Plea
Reflection Questions

Exegetical details

The passage is one sentence in Greek.⁸ In the paragraphs that follow, we will try to make sense of it—one clause at a time.

1. What was from the beginning (Ὃ ἦν ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς). The book starts grammatically ambiguous. The first word forces the reader/listener to ask, “What was?” And it takes a whole verse for this question to be answered. The first word is neuter,⁹ which necessarily differentiates the focus of this prologue from the prologue of John’s gospel: Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος (John 1:1). So while the subject of John 1:1 is the λόγος itself, in 1 John 1:1, the use of the neuter refers “to a verbal idea or to the whole sentence.”¹⁰ Therefore, if we want to know what ὃ refers to, we have to pay close attention to the whole sentence (1:1–4).

What we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we looked at and our hands touched (ὃ ἀκηκόαμεν ὃ ἑωράκαμεν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν ὃ ἐθεασάμεθα καὶ αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐψηλάφησαν). These clauses do not answer the question raised in the first clause. Rather, they draw attention to the fact that the same thing ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς was experienced in time by John. The fact that this ὃ was heard tells us that whatever the antecedent of the neuter pronouns, it is something physical that communicates, that could be seen, that could be contemplated,¹¹ and that could be physically touched. It was no ethereal reality. John says, “We fully experienced this in our time.”

Two further features demand specific attention before moving on. First, is the reference to ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς supposed to be interpreted with ἐν ἀρχῇ in John 1:1? Second, why does John refer to “we”? Much scholarly ink has been spilt on both of these questions.

When it comes to ἀρχή here and in John 1, we must pay attention to the preposition that precedes it in each text. In John 1:1, the preposition is ἐν, which highlights the realm in which its object exists. In 1 John 1:1, the preposition is ἀπό, which highlights the place from which its object moved. In 1 John, the word is always prefixed with ἀπό (1:1; 2:7, 13, 14, 24 [2x]; 3:8, 11), so Lieu is probably correct to note, “It would seem that ‘the beginning’ takes them back to the origins of their faith experience.”¹² The faith experience is only possible because the pre-existent one became incarnate.

Why does John speak in the first-person plural? Raymond Brown understands this as a reference to the Johannine community,¹³ but this need not be the case. John could be referring to himself amongst other apostolic eyewitnesses of Jesus,¹⁴ or he could be using an authorial plural.¹⁵ If the former, then it reiterates the unity of the Christian movement; if the latter, then it makes sense of the singular references to the author throughout the rest of 1 John, and reiterates the purpose of these verses (see on 1:4). Ultimately, there is not much difference between the two options. Lieu helpfully comments, “It creates a sense of corporate unity and of continuity reaching beyond the present situation and players; as the readers acknowledge the claims that “we” make they will also find themselves invited to make common cause and identify themselves with that ‘we’.”¹⁶ Ultimately, it is a rhetorical tool.

Concerning the word of life (περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς). This clause finally identifies the “what” of the previous clauses. What was from the beginning? What did John hear, see, contemplate, and touch? It was τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς. However, the genitive construction can imply several different nuances: “the word about life,” “the word that is life,” “the life-giving word.”¹⁷ The “word” could refer to a message, but if it refers to a message, how could John see it or touch it? For this reason, it is best to understand “word of life” as a reference to Jesus, although the text is likely intentionally vague. John is simultaneously speaking about the message (λόγος) and the subject of the message himself (λόγος; cf. Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ in 1:3). Strecker writes, “The relative ὅ that appears four times in v. 1, despite its neuter form and despite the fact that it is paraphrased with the περί– expression in v. 1b, in truth refers to nothing other than the Christ-event to which the author testifies.”¹⁸

2. The life was manifested (καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἐφανερώθη). The object of the prior verse here becomes the subject. Whereas in 1:1 the suspense was building until the final identification of ὃ as τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς, this verse takes that suspense and reiterates all of it. Lieu echoes many commentators when she refers to verse 2 as “a new thought … one that grammatically is unrelated to verse 1.”¹⁹ It is possible to excise verse 2 and make grammatical sense of 1:1, 3–4, but doing so would remove the heart from this text.

This clause explains that verse 1 exists as it does because the point of verse 1 (τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς) was manifested.²⁰ The verb is passive, pointing beyond itself to those who witnessed it: the subjects of the next clause. The fact that John does not write “The Word was manifested” indicates that John is highlighting more than the message;²¹ John is referring explicitly to the incarnation, the full humanity of Jesus (cf. 4:2).²²

And we have seen and are testifying (καὶ ἑωράκαμεν καὶ μαρτυροῦμεν). This clause explains that John is part of a group that saw Jesus and was forever changed as a result of that experience.²³ This permanent change is seen in the present tense verb μαρτυροῦμεν, which is further explained in the following clause.

By announcing to you (καὶ ἀπαγγέλλομεν ὑμῖν). This understands the initial καὶ with an explanatory nuance.²⁴ While many scholars try to draw a distinction between μαρτυρέω and ἀπαγγέλλω,²⁵ I prefer to emphasize the semantic overlap by understanding ἀπαγγέλλω as a direct result of μαρτυρέω. Smalley identifies the three verbs in 1:2 as “experience, attestation, and evangelism,”²⁶ but a witness is only as good as their verbal testimony; if a witness keeps silent, no one will ever recognize them as a witness. This is why John testifies to his readers/hearers by announcing.

The eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us (τὴν ζωὴν τὴν αἰώνιον ἥτις ἦν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα καὶ ἐφανερώθη ἡμῖν). This clause begins with the direct object of John’s announcement. He announces τὴν ζωὴν τὴν αἰώνιον. This takes the life we have already encountered in the text and modifies it: “eternal life.” This life existed before it was manifested. Brown explains, “Duration (everlasting, or even without beginning) is not the primary issue; it is a life from another eon (aiōn, whence aiōnios) or sphere. Indeed, it is the life of God Himself; and since only the Son has come down from that sphere and from God, he is the only one who can communicate that life.”²⁷

Grammatically, this clause is saying the same as the initial clause of 1:2, only revealing three additional details: 1) eternal, 2) was with the Father, and 3) manifested to John (amongst others). This means that John announces the same thing that was manifested to him: eternal life. But since it was something he saw (and per 1:1, touched and heard as well) this must be a reference to Jesus’ incarnation. At the very least, Jesus is the implied subject of the passive verb ἐφανερώθη: “manifested to us [by Jesus].” But the distinction between Jesus and eternal life should not be pressed too far. As Jobes writes, “Some take the phrase ‘the eternal life’ (τὴν ζωὴν τὴν αἰώνιον) to refer to the eternal life that became available to believers through Christ, but it is more likely primarily a statement that the Life that became incarnate had preexisted eternally ‘with the Father.’”²⁸

3. What we have seen and have heard we are announcing also to you (ὃ ἑωράκαμεν καὶ ἀκηκόαμεν, ἀπαγγέλλομεν καὶ ὑμῖν). This clause picks back up the relative clauses from 1:1 and finally provides the main verb of the sentence that is 1:1–4. ἀπαγγέλλομεν. We announce!

In order that you also might continuously have fellowship with us (ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς κοινωνίαν ἔχητε μεθʼ ἡμῶν). This clause declares the purpose of John’s announcement. The purpose here is that “you all” (second-person plural pronoun) might continuously have fellowship with John (and those with him).²⁹ The subject pronoun is emphatic, a reality in only six places in 1 John (1:3; 2:20, 24 [2x], 27; 4:4); second-person plural verbs occur thirty-three times throughout the book. The emphatic uses seem to imply certainty of belonging already in fellowship with John, and 4:4 explicitly connects the emphatic pronoun subject with their identity as “little children.” However, 3:7 implies the possibility of “little children” being deceived, and 3:18 refers to little children as part of the “us.” So there is no guarantee that ὑμεῖς necessarily excludes nonbelievers and members of the “they” in 2:19. John’s goal is Jesus’ goal in John 17:21–23. As Brown writes,

The equivalent of koinōnia in [John’s Gospel] is the reference to being “one” in 17:11, 21, 22, 23 … both expressions, the epistolary “communion” (koinōnia) and the Gospel’s “one” (hen), may be attempts to render into Greek a notion like the Hebrew yaḥad, “oneness, unity, community,” which is the self-designation of the Qumran Community that produced the Dead Sea Scrolls.³⁰

Our fellowship, indeed, is with the Father and with his Son (καὶ ἡ κοινωνία δὲ ἡ ἡμετέρα μετὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ). This clause tightens the knot connecting the purpose of 1 John with Jesus’ prayer in John 17. If John’s fellowship is with the Father and the Son, and if John 17:21 says, “In order that all of them might be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I am in you, in order that they also mightbe in us,” then John’s purpose in 1 John is to promote the fulfillment of Jesus’ prayer. This naturally includes evangelistic, restorative, and exhortative aspects. There is something here for everybody—regardless of their current relationship with Jesus.

Strecker describes this fellowship.

The fellowship expected by the community, and which it is to bring about, bridges the undeniable differences between God and humanity as well as those between one human being and another. Hence it is not merely a matter of a community in “faith,” but of a way of life that brings together faith and action in a single, harmonious whole. The relationship of believers to God as well as their relationship with their fellow human beings is founded on the incarnational event.³¹

This is a horizontal (“with us”) and vertical (“with the Father and with his Son”) fellowship. John wants his readers to have both; it is not enough to only have one.

Jesus Christ (Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ). This is the identity of “his Son.” It is also the first time John has mentioned Jesus by name in the letter. Smalley writes, “With the mention of Jesus, the thought which was initiated in v 1 and developed in v 2 reaches its conclusion.”³²

4. We are writing these things to you in order that our joy might be made to overflow (καὶ ταῦτα γράφομεν ἡμεῖς ἵνα ἡ χαρὰ ἡμῶν ᾖ πεπληρωμένη). This final clause reiterates the goal John stated in 1:3. The purpose of the whole book³³ is to foster fellowship that results in the fruit of joy. John specifies “our joy,” because he hopes that his readers will identify with him and thus be part of the “our” that experiences joy. The verb πεπληρωμένη is passive because this is a fruit of the Spirit—not something believers can control.³⁴ God will give this joy as Christians walk in true fellowship with God and man. Brown explains:

“Joy,” like “peace” (see 14:27; 20:21) designates an eschatological benefit received on becoming a believer and entering the Johannine Community. The fulfillment of joy, then, would be the growth and flowering of the gift received earlier—a growth achieved through living in koinōnia with God, Christ, and other Johannine believers.³⁵

Return to menu

Exposition and Application

Jesus Christ. The Son of God. The Word of Life. His coming to earth changed everything, and whether you mark dates AD or CE, the split from BC or BCE still refers to when Jesus stepped into history.

A few people were blessed enough to witness his life. What might it have been like? To see Jesus walking the sands of the Middle East? To see Jesus healing people? To see him casting out demons? To see him affirming the value of those society saw as worthless?

Our author, John, was among those who witnessed the life of Jesus. John heard him speak, saw him interact with people, contemplated his teachings and his actions, and physically touched him as well. John experienced real life fellowship with Jesus. John was the disciple Jesus loved. Imagine being hugged by the God of the universe. John got to experience this.

But John’s churches were facing a problem. Many thought that Jesus was only divine; others thought that he was only human.³⁶ It had caused a schism throughout John’s churches: People left to start their own gatherings that were “more orthodox” than those they had left. Because of this, John wrote to set the record straight.

He explained that Jesus was from the beginning, with the Father. He explained that he—John—had personally, physically interacted with Jesus. Not only was Jesus preexistent as God, but Jesus stepped into time and space as man and changed everything.

But this change is not limited to the first century. John’s words are still applicable to us today. Just as he wrote to his churches to continue in fellowship with him (and by extension God the Father and God the Son), those he wrote to passed the same message along until here I am passing this same message to you (cf. 2 Timothy 2:2). Have fellowship with me! My fellowship is with God and Christ and a long line of faithful Christians, including many who are alive today!

You must also announce this fantastic news so that even more people can enter into this fellowship. All are welcome. There is no limit to the number of people who should fellowship with God. So get out there and announce the good news!

But it is not enough to just tell the good news. You must be part of a community that is in fellowship with God, testifying by deed that the fellowship God creates is a worthwhile, beautiful, joy-filled fellowship. There is no place for dour, tight-fisted, hypocrites in this fellowship. If those words describe you—as they have described me at various times—then the fellowship, both with God and man, should urge you to make a change. But that is a message for next time.

Return to menu

Return to menu

Gospel Plea

The gospel message here is simple. Jesus is alive. He longs for fellowship with you. He does not ask you to be perfect before you can enjoy his presence. He does not guilt you with future punishment in order to convince you to enjoy him. He simply says, “I am here. I am eternal life. Join in fellowship with me.”

Will you?

It is as simple as saying a prayer. And praying is no more complicated than speaking with a friend. Believe he is there and speak to him. This is the first step toward fellowship with Jesus.

Return to menu

Great Commandment Plea

The goal of 1 John is visible, horizontal unity with fellow Christians. The book certainly defines orthodoxy and Christian love, drawing borders between true and false belief, but as we move through this wonderful book we must be careful that we do not put up more walls than John puts up. We cannot define orthodoxy and love more narrowly than John defines them. (At this point [as of 1:1–4] orthodoxy must be understood as the belief that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man.)

The Great Commandment plea here is simple. Commit to love! Commit to unity! Commit to allowing God to stretch your understanding of what it means to be a Christian! Christians have existed for 2,000 years and your particular brand of Christianity might be less than 200 years old. Open yourself to learning from other Christians and seeing those different from you as just as worthy of the title Christian as you are. Commit to fellowship!

Return to menu

Reflection Questions

• What are the implications of “our fellowship [being] with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ”? Who is included in “our”? Make a list.
• Who did you leave out of your list? Why?
• Who do you need to announce eternal life to? Who are you reluctant to announce it to? Why?
• Why do you think John says nothing about the punishment for failing to join in this fellowship?
• What does fellowship “with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ” look like in your life? How does the local church play a role in this fellowship?

Return to menu

---

Thanks for reading!

In this with you!

• Threads
• Bluesky
• X
• Facebook

---

Notes and References

1. Amongst other things (the various topics I write about on this blog). However, I wholeheartedly believe that religion is, and must be, foundational to the rest. ↩︎
2. In the published commentary, I will include a discussion in the Introduction that discusses the scholarly debate about the identity of the author of this book. For ease of communication, I will refer to John as the author, even though a case can be made that he did not actually pen this letter. ↩︎
3. I ignore the insertion of ὃ before ἑωράκαμεν. A scribe likely inserted it later to unite all of the sensory verbs in 1:1–3 in subordination to “word of life” (1:1) or “announcing” (1:3), though in this case it fails to account for the fact that verse 2 is a parenthetical comment that stands alone (see Yarbrough, 1–3 John, 44). ↩︎
4. I retain καὶ as original. As Yarbrough notes, there is no sensible reason for a scribe to have added it later (1–3 John, 44). ↩︎
5. I retain δὲ. As Westcott notes, “The δὲ serves as the conjunction, while καὶ emphasizes the words to which it is attached.” He notes John 6:51; 8:16, 17; and 15:27 as having parallel constructions (see Brooke Foss Westcott, The Epistles of St John: The Greek Text with Notes [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1966], 12). ↩︎
6. I read as υμιν instead of ἡμεῖς. Yarbrough notes that in the other nine occurrences of ἡμεῖς in 1 John, this would be the only time it follows the verb, so it is more consistent with John’s style to read it as a second-person pronoun (1–3 John, 44; for the alternative argument, see Strecker, The Johannine Letters, 20). Now granted, Yarbrough’s argument does not matter if one sees this prologue originating with a different author than the body of the letter. ↩︎
7. I read as ἡμῶν instead of υμων, though admittedly it does not change much; neither Westcott (Epistles, 13) nor Yarbrough (1–3 John, 45) take a side. However, given the purpose of the epistle as drawing people into united fellowship, the goal is for all of us to be filled with joy together: You should become one of us; this results in making our joy together (yours is necessarily included) complete. ↩︎
8. Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 43. ↩︎
9. Bultmann says the Ὃ in this clause is nominative, whereas the following are accusative (The Johannine Epistles, 7; see also Culy, I, II, III John, 2). Given the fact that nominative and accusative cases look identical, an argument could be made that all of these are dependent on the final clause of this verse. ↩︎
10. A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 4th ed. (New York: Hodder & Stoughton, 1923), 714. ↩︎
11. Yarbrough, 1–3 John, 37. ↩︎
12. Lieu, I, II, III John, 38. ↩︎
13. Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John: Translated, with Introduction, Notes, and Commentary, AB (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 175. ↩︎
14. See Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 50–51; Yarbrough, 1–3 John, 33. ↩︎
15. Strecker, The Johannine Letters, 11. ↩︎
16. Lieu, I, II, III John, 39. ↩︎
17. For a discussion of all the possibilities, see Brown, The Epistles of John, 165–166. He concludes that it ultimately does not matter: “If the one case can express all three ideas, the author may never have thought out precisely what he meant by using the genitive. For instance, if logos means ‘message,’ the message that concerns life (objective genitive) may for that very reason be life-giving (qualitative genitive).” ↩︎
18. Strecker, The Johannine Letters, 10. In a footnote in this quotation, he explains, “One would expect the accusative τὸν λόγον τῆς ζωῆς as an explication of the relative pronoun. That the author chose this other construction reveals that the ‘word of life’ is the focal point that will define what follows.” ↩︎
19. Lieu, I, II, III John, 41. ↩︎
20. This verb is aorist, and despite the common misunderstanding that aorists always describe one-time actions (see discussion in David L. Mathewson and Elodie Ballantine Emig, Intermediate Greek Grammar: Syntax for Students of the New Testament [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016], 123), this one, referring to the incarnation, is rightly understood this way. ↩︎
21. See discussion in Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 51. ↩︎
22. Yarbrough, 1–3 John, 34–35. This is especially the case when we note that Augustine understands λόγος as a reference to the preexistent Christ on the basis of ἀρχῆς at the beginning of 1:1 (Homilies 1.1, p. 21). ↩︎
23. The perfect tense should not be defaulted to the idea of a past action with present results (see Mathewson and Emig, Intermediate Greek Grammar, 133), but here—given the aorist prior and the present following—this understanding makes good sense of the text. ↩︎
24. See Mathewson and Emig, Intermediate Greek Grammar, 261; Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 673; Heinrich von Siebenthal, Ancient Greek Grammar for the Study of the New Testament (Oxford: Peter Lang, 2019), 432. None of them mention the possibility of the word “by,” but all mention “namely,” which implies “by” between verbs. ↩︎
25. Louw and Nida lump both verbs in the broad category of “Communication,” but ἀπαγγέλλω is labelled “Inform/Announce,” whereas μαρτυρέω is labelled “Witness/Testify” (see Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains [New York: United Bible Societies, 1996], 410, 417). Culy follows their categories when he writes, “Although there is overlap in the semantics of these two verbs … The first verb probably highlights, once more, the speaker’s direct knowledge of the subject matter … while the second verb points to more generic ‘informing’ or ‘announcing’” (I, II, III John, 6). ↩︎
26. Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, 9. ↩︎
27. Brown, The Epistles of John, 168. ↩︎
28. Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 53. ↩︎
29. This is an “iterative present” (Wallace, Greek Grammar, 520–521); see Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, 11–12. This type of present need not say anything specific about the starting time of the verbal action. It could be “in order that you might [start and then] continually have fellowship” or “in order that you might [return and] continually have fellowship” or simply “in order that you might continually have fellowship.” The subjunctive mood of the verb following ἵνα highlights “purpose,” with some level of uncertainty as to the result (see Wallace, Greek Grammar, 472). ↩︎
30. Brown, The Epistles of John, 170. ↩︎
31. Strecker, The Johannine Letters, 20. ↩︎
32. Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, 13. ↩︎
33. Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 56: “The demonstrative pronoun “these things” (ταῦτα) most likely refers to the letter as a whole.” ↩︎
34. The Spirit is rarely mentioned in 1 John (3:24; 4:2, 13; 5:6, 8). See Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, 13: “The fact that the third person of the Trinity is not mentioned at this point is perhaps characteristic of the restrained reference to the Spirit in 1 John.” ↩︎
35. Brown, The Epistles of John, 173–174. ↩︎
36. Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, 13. ↩︎
37. Augustine, Homilies 1.1, p. 21. ↩︎
38. Augustine, Homilies 1.2, pp. 21–22. ↩︎
39. Tilley, The Bible in Christian North Africa, 53–76; see also Ramsey, ed., “Footnote 2,” in Homilies, 21. ↩︎
40. Tilley, The Bible in Christian North Africa, 76. ↩︎