1 John 5:3

body { font-family: ‘Times New Roman’, serif; line-height: 1.6; max-width: 800px; margin: auto; padding: 20px; }
h1, h2, h3 { color: #333; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }
blockquote { border-left: 5px solid #ccc; margin: 1.5em 10px; padding: 0.5em 10px; font-style: italic; background-color: #f9f9f9; }
ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 20px; }
li { margin-bottom: 5px; }

An Exegetical Examination of 1 John 5:3: Grammatical and Rhetorical Considerations

This exegetical study of An Exegetical Examination of 1 John 5:3: Grammatical and Rhetorical Considerations is based on a b-greek discussion from May 30, 2006. The initial query sought clarification on three primary points within 1 John 5:3: the correct interpretation of the ἵνα clause, the referent of the demonstrative pronoun αὕτη, and any potential nuanced meaning of the copulative verb ἔστιν beyond a simple “is.”

The main exegetical issue underlying these questions revolves around the precise grammatical function and rhetorical force of the sentence structure in 1 John 5:3. Specifically, it concerns whether the ἵνα clause expresses purpose, result, or an epexegetical/substantive definition, and how αὕτη functions as an anaphoric or cataphoric referent. Furthermore, the discussion touches upon the semantic contribution of ἔστιν in a definitional context and, crucially, the syntactic relationship of the concluding clause, καὶ αἱ ἐντολαὶ αὐτοῦ βαρεῖαι οὐκ εἰσίν, to the preceding statement. Understanding these elements is vital for accurately discerning the author’s theological assertion regarding the nature of divine love and its manifestation in obedience.

αὕτη γὰρ ἔστιν ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ τηρῶμεν καὶ αἱ ἐντολαὶ αὐτοῦ βαρεῖαι οὐκ εἰσίν. (Nestle 1904)

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The SBLGNT (2010) reads `αὕτη γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ τηρῶμεν, καὶ αἱ ἐντολαὶ αὐτοῦ βαρεῖαι οὐκ εἰσίν.`.
• The primary differences are orthographic and punctuational: SBLGNT uses `ἐστιν` (acute accent) where Nestle 1904 uses `ἔστιν` (grave accent in a non-final position), and SBLGNT includes a comma before the conjunction `καὶ`. These are not substantive textual variants.

Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)

An examination of the textual apparatus in NA28 for 1 John 5:3 reveals no significant textual variants affecting the meaning of the verse. The Greek text remains remarkably stable across major manuscripts.

Lexically, several terms warrant attention:

• ἀγάπη (agapē): According to BDAG, this term refers to “the love of God,” which can encompass God’s love for humanity or humanity’s love for God. In this context, given the following clause about keeping commandments, it strongly suggests our love for God. KITTEL (TDNT) highlights ἀγάπη as a distinct, often self-sacrificial love, particularly in Christian thought, contrasting it with other Greek terms for love and emphasizing its ethical implications.
• ἐντολάς (entolas): BDAG defines this as “a command, precept, instruction,” specifically referring to divine commandments. KITTEL contextualizes it within the Old Testament tradition of divine instruction, underscoring its authoritative and binding nature.
• τηρῶμεν (tērōmen): This verb, in the subjunctive mood, means “to keep, observe, obey” (commands) or “to guard, watch over” (BDAG). KITTEL suggests that keeping God’s commands implies not merely intellectual assent but active, continuous obedience.
• βαρεῖαι (bareiai): This adjective means “heavy, weighty,” and metaphorically “burdensome, oppressive, difficult” (BDAG). The negation “οὐκ εἰσίν” thus asserts the non-burdensome nature of these commands, offering a significant theological affirmation.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The grammatical structure of 1 John 5:3 presents interpretative challenges, particularly regarding the ἵνα clause and the referent of αὕτη, as highlighted in the discussion.

The demonstrative pronoun αὕτη (this) functions cataphorically, pointing forward to the clause that defines its meaning. This is a common Hellenistic Greek construction, where “this” anticipates what follows, rather than referring to something previously mentioned (anaphoric). Thus, αὕτη sets up the definition of “the love of God.”

The ἵνα clause (ἵνα τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ τηρῶμεν) is central to the exegetical debate. While in Classical Greek, ἵνα with the subjunctive typically denotes purpose (“in order that”), Hellenistic Koine Greek, as noted in the original discussion citing Moulton & Milligan, expanded its usage. It can also function to express result, define content (epexegetical/substantive), or simply state a fact. In this context, a strict purpose interpretation (“in order that we may keep”) is less likely. Instead, the clause functions substantively, defining the content or nature of “the love of God.” It describes *what* the love of God *is*, rather than a goal *for which* the love exists. This interpretive shift is supported by parallel constructions in Johannine literature, such as John 17:3 (`αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή, ἵνα γινώσκωσι σε τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεὸν…`), which defines the content of eternal life, not its purpose.

The copulative verb ἔστιν (“is”) serves to link “the love of God” with its definition. While it primarily functions as a linking verb without additional inherent “nuance,” its use in this explicit definitional statement emphasizes an identity or essential connection. The author asserts that divine love *is* (identical to, characterized by) the keeping of God’s commandments.

Finally, the clause καὶ αἱ ἐντολαὶ αὐτοῦ βαρεῖαι οὐκ εἰσίν (“and his commandments are not burdensome”) syntactically follows the definition of love. The conjunction καί likely introduces an explanatory or corroborative statement, providing a characteristic or consequence directly linked to the preceding assertion. It clarifies that this obedience, which constitutes love, is not oppressive. This clause functions as an integral part of the same theological thought unit, rather than initiating a new, disconnected idea. It reinforces the nature of God’s commands within the framework of divine love, implying that genuine love transforms perceived burdens into joyful obedience.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

Based on the grammatical and rhetorical analysis, 1 John 5:3 defines the essence of divine love through the act of obedience to God’s commandments, simultaneously affirming that these commandments, when embraced in this love, are not burdensome. The `ἵνα` clause functions epexegetically, clarifying the content of `αὕτη`, which refers cataphorically to the clause itself. The final independent clause serves as an explanatory characteristic or consequence of this defined love.

Here are three suggested translations, reflecting different emphases:

1. For this is what the love of God is: that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome.

   This translation emphasizes the definitional aspect of love through obedience and treats the second clause as an additional, closely related characteristic of these commandments.

2. For the love of God means observing his commandments, and his commandments are not oppressive.

   This rendition uses a gerund to highlight the active manifestation inherent in divine love and maintains a direct connection between love, obedience, and the non-burdensome nature of the commandments.

3. For to love God is to keep his commandments, for his commandments are not difficult.

   This translation focuses on the equivalence between loving God and obeying Him, using a more idiomatic expression, while the second clause offers a direct explanation or assurance regarding the character of these commands when observed in love.