Download discussion questions:  1 John 5:2-21

One part of the passage generated considerable discussion, but somehow I neglected to mention it in the first draft of the blog entry.  I went back to add a few sentences to cover that part of our discussion, but I realized that the topic deserved more attention.

“We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him.” (1 John 5:18, ESV).  The seemingly simple question came up in our group:  “Who is ‘he’ who was born of God?”  Some translations (e.g., NASB, RSV) use an upper-case letter (“…but He who was born of God…”) to indicate that the pronoun refers to Jesus.  Others use an upper-case letter and translate the participle (ho gennētheis, ὁ γεννηθεὶς) more literally as “the One who was born …” (NIV), or “the One who was begotten …” (Amplified Bible, Classic Edition).

However, many other versions (e.g., ESV, Mounce Reverse-Interlinear, New RSV) avoid upper-case letters for pronouns referring to divine Persons.  In those translations the context or other grammatical clues are needed to determine who (or Who) is intended by the pronoun.  In translations that use the upper-case letters, the translators have made that decision (right or wrong) for the reader.

In most instances, I prefer the use of upper-case letters in spite of the current standard.  My reasoning follows that of C. S. Lewis who faced the same decision:  “in a language where pronouns are so easily confused as they are in English, it seems foolish to reject such an aid to clarity” (Introduction to George MacDonald – An Anthology).  The clarity provided by the upper-case is helpful, but in some cases (as with 1 John 5:18), the clarity may be too helpful.  The original text did not distinguish pronouns with upper case letters, so translators have to make a decision.  In most cases the decision is obvious:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. (ESV)

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. (NASB)

In other cases the antecedent of the pronoun is not as obvious.  The question often will arise when members of a Bible study are using different translations.  One of the benefits of using different translations is just that kind of question to force us back to looking at the text.  That is what happened in our discussion of 1 John 5:2-21.  Some felt strongly that the “he” who protects another person is Christ.  Others (including myself) thought the “he” could be other Christians, specifically those praying for a brother (v. 16).  That brief part of our discussion did not resolve the issue.  This addendum to the original article is an attempt continue that interpretive effort.

In addition to the two suggestions we discussed (Christ protects him or the praying believer protects him), I discovered a third reading that we did not discuss.  Some translations (KJV, Geneva Bible, Young’s Literal Translation) treat the phrase as reflexive, “he [the believer] keeps himself.”  (There is only one letter difference between auton, αὐτόν, “him” and eauton, ἑαυτὸν, “himself.”  The difference could have resulted from a slip of the scribe’s pen.)  While there is some support from a few ancient manuscripts, the general consensus is that the reflexive reading is not original.  We did not discuss that possible interpretation, and it is not considered further in this addendum.

So how do we decide?  Is it “he” or “He” in 1 John 5:18?  As always, in a methodical inductive study, we go back to the text!  We can examine the evidence.  What are the arguments from the text for both interpretations?  Which understanding best represents John’s intention?

Arguments for “he” as the praying believer, the child of God

1. The immediate context prompted the idea that the “he” is a praying believer. John has just exhorted just such prayer for a brother in sin:  “If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life” (1 John 5:16).  Perhaps that prayer is key to the protection mentioned in verse 18.  (The complication of sin “not leading to death” was addressed in the original article about this discussion.)  We are certainly called to pray in this passage and in others to “bear one another’s burdens” if another is “caught in any trespass” (Galatians 6:1-2).  Looking out for one another’s spiritual formation is central to the community of believers.
2. John has referred to Jesus ten times in this passage alone, always using the word “Son” (huios, υἱὸς). Why would he suddenly switch to “the one born” in this verse?  In addition, that would be the only use of that description of Jesus in the New Testament.[1]  The fact that the author did not use “Son” argues against “he” being Jesus.
3. Similarly, in this passage alone John has used the phrase “born of God” specifically referring to believers (1 John 5:1, 4, 18a). Changing the meaning of the phrase, even in the same verse (18a and 18b) would seem unusual.  His consistent pattern is to use “born of God” to refer to Christian believers.

However, one of the objections during our discussion was the weight of responsibility.  Is the burden on the praying believer to protect or keep (tērei, τηρεῖ) the erring brother or sister?  That role would certainly be filled by the Son or by the Holy Spirit, perhaps in response to the prayer.  Saying that the praying believer protects the erring brother or sister would be something of an exaggeration.

Arguments for “He” as Christ, the Son of God

1. While many commentaries simply assume that the pronoun refers to Christ, Stephen S. Smalley (who I find always helpful) points out a grammatical detail that seems relevant to the question under consideration. “There is a logical change in tense from ὁ γεγεννημένος; (perfect; “anyone who has been born,” describing the generation of a child of God) to ὁ γεννηθεὶς; (aorist; literally, “the one who was born,” referring to the specific event, in the past, of the birth of Jesus).”[2]  John’s shift in tense is intended to make the distinction between the believer and Christ, pointing to the distinctive occurrence of Christ’s birth.  (For more details on the ten uses of the verb in this letter, see “Born of God in 1 John.”)
2. If your eyes have not yet glazed over with Greek tenses, bear with me. Something that Smalley does not point out (as far as I can find) is the consistency in John’s letter.  Eight other times he mentions those who “have been born” using the perfect tense Smalley mentions (2:29, 3:9 twice, 4:7, 5:1 twice, 5:4, and 18a).  In all of those eight uses he is describing Christian believers.  In 1 John 5:18b he uses the aorist tense, perhaps intentionally to differentiate between believers and Christ.
3. One other use of the verb “born” or “begotten” in 1 John is in the middle of 5:1. What is rendered in most translations as “Father” or “parent” in that verse is more literally “him who begat” (an aorist active participle, if you are interested).  “Father” is certainly a legitimate translation, since modern English seldom uses forms of the verb “beget” without awkwardness.  (For example, “every on that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him” – KJV).  John uses the verb “to be born” in an active sense to describe the action of God the Father.  When used this way, John employs the aorist tense, the same he uses in 5:18b, “the one born of God keeps him.”  Here is the point:  the Greek aorist tense (that Smalley suggests is “referring to the specific event, in the past, of the birth of Jesus”) is the same tense John uses to refer to the Father’s begetting of His Son.  The only times John uses that tense with that verb seem to be when he is emphasizing the unique fact of the Father begetting the Son.  In the majority of uses that describe the Christian believer, John consistently uses a different tense (Greek perfect).  That aspect of grammar supports the interpretation that “He protects…”

Conclusion

The immediate context of 1 John 5:18 might suggest that the “he” that provides protection might be a praying believer.  However, the grammar John consistently uses throughout the letter provides strong support for the more common interpretation that the “He” is Christ Himself.  While most commentaries seem to simply assume that identification, it is productive to investigate further, to “beat importunately”[3] on the text.  Rigorous, methodical, inductive study can reveal where we may have misunderstood Scripture (as is the case with my original understanding that the “he” referred to the praying believer).  Even if we end with the same conclusion that we started with (as is the case for several others in our discussion group who read “He” as Christ), the study reinforces our confidence in what we understand from Scripture.  Either way, careful inductive study is indispensable for our spiritual formation.

Careful inductive study is indispensable because it leads to increasingly accurate and appropriate application.  We (I) originally understood “he” in the verse as the praying believer.  Further exploration of the verse, the immediate context, and the entire book of 1 John compelled a change of mind.  That may be the most rewarding part of inductive Bible study – clarifying our understanding of who God is and how He works.

Naturally, even if the “he” in verse 18 is the praying believer, we believe that Christ is the active agent in protecting the erring brother.  Continued study confirms that “He” in verse 18 is indeed Christ Himself.  Digging deeper into Scripture adds to our confidence (v. 14) in our prayers.  We, the praying believers, are not the source of protection; He is.

[1] Stephen S. Smalley, 1,2,3 John, Word Biblical Commentary, v 51 (Waco, Texas:  Word Books, 1984), 302-303.

[2] Ibid.

[3] John Piper, The Legacy of Sovereign Joy (Wheaton, Illinois:  Crossway Books, 2000), 91.