03 - 1Jn 1:3
Ὃ ἑωράκαμεν καὶ ἀκηκόαμεν, ἀπαγγέλλομεν ὑμῖν, ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς κοινωνίαν ἔχητε μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν, καὶ ἡ κοινωνία δὲ ἡ ἡμετέρα μετὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.
Thus the object of the Epistle has evolved itself to our apprehension in a series of more and more definite ideas. Nevertheless, the question as to the substance of his annunciation is not to St. John the most important. This is obvious when we consider that he introduces the more exact specification of it as ζωὴ [“life”], and indeed ζωὴαἰώνιος [“eternal life”], only in a parenthesis. That cannot possibly be the most momentous thing in the view of an author which he inserts in a parenthetical manner. It is clear also when we consider that in the third verse the object is reintroduced in the first more general expressions: ὃἑωράκαμενκαὶἀκηκόαμεν [“which we have seen and heard”]. This very circumstance points to the conclusion that the emphasis in the context before us does not rest upon the object of the annunciation, but upon the assured knowledge of that object. Even in the parenthesis of the second verse, the idea, for the sake of which generally it is interpolated, is that of the ἐφανερώθη [“he was made manifest”]. We have in the first two verses a double series of ideas and a double tendency; one series specifies the object about which it treats, the other the assurance concerning the nature of that object. But that the latter series is the most important for the present aim of the apostle, is shown by the very commencement of 1Jn 1:3, which, recapitulating all that went before, selects an expression which defines the object altogether in its generality, while it defines the certitude of experience concerning it in the most pregnant way. If it had run τὴν ζωὴνἀπαγγέλλομεν [“we proclaim the life”], this latter element would, conversely, have receded instead. That the order of the words is not the same as in 1Jn 1:1 (here ἑωράκαμεν [“we have seen”] before ἀκηκόαμεν [“we have heard”]) cannot be regarded as a designed gradation, the less so as we certainly have such a gradation in 1Jn 1:1, and there the ἀκούειν [“to hear”] is the first verb. The present order is rather to be explained from the circumstance that the ὁρᾶν [“to see”] of the former verb is still lingering in the apostle’s ear, and therefore presented itself first. But that only ὁρᾶν [“to see”] and ἀκούειν [“to hear”], and not also θεᾶσθαι [“to look upon”] and ψηλαφᾶν [“to touch”], are repeated, is to be accounted for on the ground that for an epanalepsis or resumption, which should be as short as possible, and yet as comprehensive as possible, the most general expressions are the most pertinent.
After the substance and trustworthiness of his document are satisfied, the writer lays down further the aim of it. We may interpret this in two ways: either the apostle purposes to establish a fellowship between himself and the readers, or between God and the readers. In the former case the κοινωνία μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν [“fellowship with us”], would be translated as covimunio inter nos et vos; in the latter as cadem quae jam nobis (mihi) est communio sc.eum Deo. The decision depends upon two expressions: the μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν [“with us”] and then the καὶ [“and”] before ὑμεῖς [“you”]. We decide for the former of the two explanations: the apostle says primarily that he would establish a fellowship between himself and the readers, not that he would introduce them into that fellowship which he had with God. To be more particular, it is, in the first place, not true, as some have maintained, that κοινωνία [“fellowship”] is in the New Testament employed only of communion with God: the passage Act 2:42 sufficiently refutes that idea. Secondly, it is highly forced to take the μετά in the same sentence, connected with the same substantive twice in close succession used, in two different senses: the first time (κοινωνία μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν [“fellowship with us”]) to indicate the same common fellowship, as it were, eadem communio quam nos inter nos hahemus; the second time (ἡκοινωνίαἡ ἡμετέρα μετὰτοῦπατρὸς [“our fellowship is with the father”]) to indicate the subject with whom I have fellowship. And, finally, how in all the world can the expression κοινωνία μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν [“fellowship with us”] then define the same thing as ἡαὐτὴκοινωνίαἦνκαὶ ἡμεῖςἔχομεν [“the same fellowship which also we have with you”]? For all these reasons it is plain that the purpose of the apostle is, in the first place, to establish a communion between himself and his readers. And this makes the reference of the καί [“and,” “also”] as before ἡμεῖς [“you”] clear; on this supposition it cannot mean to say that the readers also, like the apostles, should have fellowship with God, but that the readers of this Epistle should, like other Christians, enter into fellowship with the apostles. And thus, once more, we have the elements of decision as to the right reading: the reading ἀπαγγέλλομεν καὶ ὑμῖν [“we proclaim to you also”], which on external grounds is to be preferred, yields an altogether appropriate sense on this interpretation. The first καὶ [“and,” “also”] after ἀπαγγέλλομεν [“we proglaim”] emphasizes the community of the announcement which is made to the readers as to others before them, and the second καί [“and,” “also”] before ὑμεῖς [“you”] the community and equality of the blessing which should be the fruit of this announcement. That this bond between apostles and churches was not only a high benefit to the churches, but that it was found such on the side of the apostles also, we have a Pauline testimony in Rom 1:11-12; and the stress laid upon this is in precise harmony with the drift of our Epistle, which aims always at the awakening of ἀγάπη [“love”], or the sentiment of fellowship. It may be thought surprising that St. John here speaks as if this community or fellowship was yet to be constituted, the readers being obviously Christians already, and therefore such a link between them and the apostles already established. To this it might be replied that the readers were as yet unknown to the apostle, and that of necessity the fellowship between them would become much deeper if they entered into personal association, even though it were only through the medium of a written communication. But apart from the historical grounds of this hypothesis, there is a deeper reason to be sought. It is quite customary with St. John, on the one hand, to consider his readers as perfected and in possession of all the blessings of salvation, while yet, on the other hand, he regards them as altogether in the beginnings of development; as when he expressly writes his Gospel to Christian men, and yet avows the creation of faith in them as his aim (Joh 20:20). In order to understand the second part of the verse, it is of primary importance to assign the force of ἡμετέρα [“our/your”]. Till now, the first person has been always appropriated to the apostles. If we would accept it so here, the meaning would be: “the fellowship which we the apostles have is a fellowship with the Father and the Son.” Then this sentence would be a simple declaration, and by no means dependent on ἵνα [“in order that”], for the abiding fact of the fellowship between God and the apostles is altogether independent of the Epistle that follows. This interpretation can be held fast, however, only so long as we explain the preceding words, κοινωνίανμεθ᾽ ἡμῶν [“fellowship with us”], as “the same fellowship with us,” that is, the same which we have; but this explanation we have proved untenable. But if we translate these words, “that ye may enter into fellowship with us the apostles,” it is impossible that the following ἡκοινωνίαἡ ἡμετέρα [“our/your fellowship”] can be referred again to the apostles: “and indeed we the apostles have fellowship with God.” The essential main idea, that the readers also should have fellowship with God, is on this interpretation simply not expressed. Thus we are led to understand the ἡμετέρα [“our/your”] otherwise, that is, in such a way as to make it combine the ἡμεῖςκαὶ ὑμεῖς [“us and you”], the apostles and the readers. The writer presupposes that the aim prescribed in the preceding clause with ἵνα [“in order that”] is accomplished, the fellowship with his readers which he desired is established, and is regarded in the expression ἡκοινωνίαἡ ἡμετέρα [“our/your fellowship”] as perfect. The manner and the meaning of this fellowship are now more clearly defined, that it is at the same time a fellowship with God. “The fellowship which each one of us must have with God I would show, but at the same time thereby also most closely bind us all together in one.” Thus we shall make the second clause depend on the ἵνα [“in order that”], especially as the grammatical impossibility of supplying the conjunctive ᾖ [“which”] is certainly not proved. And thus the junction of the latter part by καί [“and”] has justice done to it. This can enter only when a new thought is introduced (καί [“and”]), which, however, at the same time stands in something like antithesis to the preceding (δέ [“but”]. So it is here; the subject was of brotherly fellowship, and now the new thought distinguished from the former is added. " But this fellowship should at the same time and essentially be a fellowship with God.”