For a discourse analysis of 1 John 2:28–3:12, please see Figure 1.

The following semantic networks are identified in the discourse analysis:

The Presbyter depicts Christian life as the existence and experience of fellowship¹⁰ in a family (Van der Merwe 2005:443f), inferring a familia Dei. He refers to God as the Father (ὁ πατήρ, 3:1) of the family and Christian believers as ‘children of God’ (τέκνα θεοῦ, 3:1–2, 10; 5:2), ‘born from God’ (γεγεννημένος ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ, 2:29; 3:9; also cf. 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18) and that ‘God’s seed abides in them’ (σπέρμα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ μένει, 3:9).¹¹ As a response, they declare God as ‘Father’ (πατήρ, 3:1; also cf. 1:2; 2:1, 14–15, 22–24; 2 John 4) and are ‘brother(s)’ (ἀδελφὸν, 3:9, 13) to each other.¹² Reference to Jesus as the ‘Son of God’ (υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, 3:8) occurs, to whom the children of God must amend their lives (2:6). The Spirit of God (τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ’, 4:2f) constitutes the Father’s presence (3:24; 4:13) and directs and edifies God’s children (2:27, αὐτοῦ χρῖσμα διδάσκει ὑμᾶς) in the familia Dei.¹³ In his application of family jargon, the Presbyter effects a ‘fellowship like that of an extended earthly family’ among the Father, Jesus the Son of God, the Holy Spirit and the children of God (cf. 1:3, 6, 7; Tollefson 1999:88; Van der Merwe 2005:443f.).

The Presbyter’s use of domestic metaphors enhances fellowship in the Johannine community. In effect, it evoked effective primary ‘actions, attitudes, and emotions’. These images embroil characteristic intellectual and emotional affections that exist within ancient families and have been applied to the Johannine community. These familial expectations are patterned in the interpersonal design of human circumstances. A ‘child’ perception, for example, implicates distinct ‘rights, duties, privileges, attitudes, pitfalls, problems, etc.’, which are related to the character of the family as determined by the father. Such connotations can establish ‘expectations, attitudes, emotions, and actions’ in God’s children, affecting them to feel ‘child-ish’. The same is applicable for ‘life in the family’ (Adams 1983:56; Van der Merwe 2009:96). Familial language¹⁴ seems to be used to reinforce communal boundaries (Parsenios 2014:94).¹⁵

In 1 John 3:1 (also 2:28), the Presbyter introduces the notion that believers are God’s children to remind his adherents of the extraordinary love of God¹⁶ for them. The verse commences with the verb ἴδετε (‘see’ or ‘behold’) in the imperative mode to emphasise and to reflect upon the remarkable love God has granted God’s children. No explicit references to love occur in the 1:5–2:2 pericope, nor to fellowship in the 2:28–3:12 pericope. However, it is evident from this context that love is essential to constitute fellowship where the righteousness of God is prevalent and experienced. Then consequently the children of God must live this accordingly.¹⁷ Hence, righteousness is embedded in κοινωνία, which subsequently is embedded in love (cf. 3:11, 12), within the confines of the familia Dei. Humanity is incapable to discern the immensity of this transcendent kind of love. Therefore, the Presbyter tried to express the mystery of this love, revealed in righteousness. Because of this, the Presbyter directs his adherents to live lives of righteousness, effected by loving God and loving one another (3:11; cf. Van der Merwe 2012:5-7).

This divine love nominates for believers the en route to be transformed, henceforth, to be termed ‘children of God’ (τέκνα θεοῦ; Akin 2001:133), They will then experience the righteousness of God, encouraging them to live accordingly, righteously. In fact, God bestows perpetual love on God’s children (Akin 2001:133). This certainly has implications for living a life characterised by righteousness. The Presbyter, in 3:10, semantically associates the phrase ‘to do righteousness’ (‘ποιῶν δικαιοσύνην’) with love – to love fellow believers as God loves (cf. 3:11; Parsenios 2014:92).

From the semantic network analysis, it is definite that Jesus plays a significant role in this pericope (cf. 2:28; 3:2–3, 5–7, 8).¹⁸

This pericope begins with an appeal to ‘abide¹⁹ in him’. According to the literary context the personal pronoun ‘him’ (αὐτῷ), absolutely, refers to Jesus. Moreover, this clause operates to connect the preceded section with the current one (cf. 2:27). The significance of God’s children ‘to abide’ in Jesus is related to the future coming (παρουσίᾳ) of Jesus which is mentioned twice in 2:28: ‘if he is revealed’ and ‘at his coming’. This happens so as to remind God’s children about their future existence. If they abide in Jesus, constituting a permanent relationship with him, being righteous as he is righteous (3:7), they ‘will have confidence (παρρησίαν) and not be put to shame before him at his coming’ (cf. Von Wahlde 2002:335).

Another conspicuous lexeme in this verse is the verb, reveals (φανερόω), which occurs five times in this pericope (2:28; 3:2, 5, 8).²⁰ This verifies the event of Jesus’ ‘revelation’ to be clearly a critical theme (see Figure 2).²¹

The ensuing declarations about Jesus (3:2–3; Fn cf. Van der Merwe 2012:3-4) present him as the prototype for the Children of God. However, for God’s children, aware of their existential status, this does not provide their conclusive status: ‘It has not yet been revealed what we will be (3:2)’. Consequently, the Presbyter focusses on the future: the children of God ‘must purify (ἁγνίζει) themselves, just as he [Jesus] is pure (ἁγνός)’. Here, their status parallels that of Jesus. The Presbyter unequivocally compares their behaviour with the behaviour of Jesus (Von Wahlde 2002:336).

In 1 John 3:3, the imitation of Christ (2:6), or living righteously, is concomitant with the Presbyter’s statement of purification, (ἁγνίζει), Christian identity and hope. In 3:2 he underlines, that God’s children already now can have confidence that ‘when Christ appears/is revealed’ (ἐὰν φανερωθῇ) they will be ‘like him for we will see him as he is’ (cf. Rm. 8:29; Col. 3:4).²² Thus, 1 John 3:2 affirms the eschatological promise that the children of God will be conformed to the image of God’s Son because of both their present-day identity as children of God (‘νῦν τέκνα θεοῦ ἐσμεν’) and living in purity (ἁγνίζει ἑαυτόν, 3:3). In these two verses (3:2–3), the Presbyter verifies the close relation between eschatology and ethics. Hence, the Presbyter’s call that ‘all who have this hope in him [Jesus] purify themselves, just as he [Jesus] is pure’ (3:3; Leung 2018:126).

In 1:5, the Presbyter depicts ‘God is light and in him there is no darkness at all’ and ‘in him [Jesus] there is no sin’ (3:5). Consequently, corresponding conduct is expected from the children of God. This infers they must ‘walk in the light’ as Jesus ‘walked in the light’ and ‘purify themselves, just as he is pure’ (3:3). Accordingly, they will be ‘righteous, just as (καθὼς), he [Jesus] is righteous’ (3:7; cf. Van der Merwe 2014:7-8).²³

Already in 2:1, the Presbyter denotes Jesus as righteous (Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν δίκαιον). In advance he prepares the reader for his explicit statement in 3:5, that ‘In him [Jesus] is no sin’. This orientation decodes the righteousness of Jesus from a soteriological perspective. By using the present tense, the Presbyter indicates that ‘Christ always has been, is, and will be without sin’. Therefore, those Christians, whose sin has been forgiven, must sin no more. Christians must combat sin powerfully and attempt purposefully to live righteously. Characteristic of God’s children is their liberation from the control and sovereignty of sin. Then claims from those living in sin, and simultaneously being children of God, would be irrelevant (Kistemaker & Hendriksen 2001:299).

This reasoning is verified by two exclamations: the first refers to the fact ‘that he [Jesus] was revealed to take away sins’ (3:5); the second is the exclamation that ensues in 3:8. The historic-salvific role of Jesus is consequently confirmed: he has abolished sin to empower a future life without sin.

A comparison occurs between the following two phrases: ‘who abides in him’ and ‘one who sins’ in 3:6. Accordingly, the linguistic context distinctly refers the personal pronoun ‘him’ (αὐτῷ) to Christ, and the phrase ‘remaining in him’ evokes the fundamental (Von Wahlde 2002:336) exhortation at the beginning of this pericope (2:28). Brown (1982:393–394) expounds: ‘[t]he logic of this statement flows from the preceding verse: there is no sin in Christ, and so those who abide in him should have no sin in them’. On the other hand, ‘no one who sins has either seen him or known him’, echoing the similar statement in 3:l that ‘it [the world] did not know him [God]’.

Both God (1:9; 2:29) and Jesus (2:1; 3:7) are referred to as being ‘righteous’. In 2:1, the Presbyter refers to Jesus exposing righteousness as a quality of God (2:1). Therefore, there is the reference in 3:7 that ‘Everyone who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous’.

Therefore, already at the beginning of this pericope, in 2:28–29, the Presbyter encourages the children of God to act rightly, to expose the righteous character of God. Then, in 3:7 he relates (καθώς) their righteous living (‘ὁ ποιῶν τὴν δικαιοσύνην δίκαιός ἐστιν’) with the righteous living (δίκαιός) of Jesus. The last statement in 3:7, ‘just as he [Jesus] is righteous’ (‘καθὼς ἐκεῖνος δίκαιός ἐστιν’) is analogous to that of ‘just as he [Jesus] is pure’ (‘καθὼς ἐκεῖνος ἁγνός ἐστιν’) in 3:3. Both statements highlight the nature of Jesus as the foundation of moral transformation. In 3:3, both the equivalent verb ἁγνίζει (‘purify’) and adjective ἁγνός (‘pure’) are hapax legomena. The fact is that Jesus’ purity provides firstly, an ethical paradigm and secondly, a powerful Christian impetus to be committed contrary to the attractions and offences in this adversative world (Leung 2018:127).

Hence, people are identified by their actions.²⁴ Merely birth from God (2:29; 5:1) and faith in Jesus (5:1) enable people to obey the Jesus paradigm of living righteously. Such conduct is nourished in the familia Dei.

In 3:8, the Presbyter disturbs his comparison of ‘the one who does not sin’ with ‘the one who does’ with reference to the ‘Son of God’. Again, he refers to Jesus having been ‘revealed’. This time it is ‘to destroy the works of the devil’. The reference to Jesus as the ‘Son of God’ emphasises the contrast between Jesus and the one who is ‘of the devil’ (3:8a) or a ‘son/child’ of the devil (3:10). Thus, the Presbyter endeavours to emphasise Jesus’ role in enabling the children of God not to sin (Von Wahlde 2002:337), but to live in the light. ‘The one who does what is right according to God’s standard and who, therefore, acknowledges and accepts God’s authority is righteous in the same way that Jesus was’ (Jobes 2014:209, epub).

In 1 John 2:29, the Presbyter writes, ‘If you know that He is righteous, you know that everyone who does righteousness has been born of Him’.²⁸ In this verse, the Presbyter uses a syntactical structure that he repeats in this pericope (2:29; 3:3, 4, 6, 9, 10). He pairs the Greek adjective, πᾶς (all, every) with a participle.²⁹ His objective is to partition the world into two opposite groupings. The motive behind this is to make the readers take cognisance of two severe options and to consequently understand what is right. He then invites them to make a choice (cf. 2:29; 3:3, 4, 6, 9, 10). This syntactical structure clearly relates to the rhetorical sententiae style (cf. Parsenios 2014:16–19).

To achieve this, the Presbyter compares the living of the children of God with children of the devil (3:10)!³⁰ Unbelievers continue to demonstrate that they have no fellowship with Christ. In fact, the Presbyter announces that those who persist in sin have neither ‘seen him [Jesus] nor known him’ (3:6). Also, ‘Anyone who does what is evil has not seen God’ (Jn 3 11). The verb to see (ἑώρακεν, in the perfect tense) should be interpreted in a spiritual sense. It parallels with the verb to believe. Hence, those, who delight in sin have no faith in Christ. Consequently, they do not know him personally. They are unbelievers (Kistemaker & Hendriksen 2001:299–300).

The Presbyter explains in 2:29 why faith in Jesus makes the difference: it is because ‘he is righteous’ (δίκαιός ἐστιν), ‘in him there is no sin’ (‘ἁμαρτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν’, 3:5).³¹ The reference to Jesus to be sinless is complemented by the approbative claims of the Presbyter that Jesus Christ was δίκαιός (2:1, 29; 3:7), ἁγίος (2:20) and ἁγνος (3:3). This is why Jesus can liberate sinners and when they abide in him they will be liberated from sin (Smalley 1984:157). Therefore, they, ‘…ought to walk just as he walked’ (2:6).

In this pericope, the Presbyter explains an epitome, an image of the character of the children of God.³² He urges them to take on the perfect character of Jesus Christ, even though it seems impossible (Burge 2011:253).

A helpful solution in understanding this ‘risky statement’ is to concentrate on the verb tenses. Normally, in Greek, a present tense denotes ‘continuous, repeated activity’ (Burge 2011:253).³³ In verses 3:6, 9, the following four verbs occur in the present tense: οὐχ ἁμαρτάνει (present active indicative, 6a); ὁ ἁμαρτάνων (present active participle, 6b); ἁμαρτίαν οὐ ποιεῖ (present active indicative, 9a); οὐ δύναται ἁμαρτάνειν (present active infinitive, 9b). (1) In 3:6a and 5:18, the Presbyter states that God’s children ‘do not sin’. The use of the Greek verb in the present indicative is to alert them to abstain from ongoing sin. (2) In 3:6b, the translation of the present participle, ‘the one who continues to sin’ expresses the same idea, that is, the implication of an ongoing activity. (3) In 3:9a the Presbyter uses a different phrase combination, a noun for sin (ἁμαρτίαν) with a different verb ποιεῖ (present indicative), ‘to practice sin’. (4) Finally, in 3:9b (cf. 3:9a) the Presbyter describes God’s children as ‘not able to sin’. Both verbs, οὐ δύναται (‘cannot’) ἁμαρτάνειν (‘to sin’) appear in the present tense. The Presbyter uses this interpretation to emphasise that continuous, habitual sin should be banned from the lives of God’s children (Burge 2011:253). Righteousness should be the new mode of existence, ‘to walk just as he [Jesus] walked’ (2:6).³⁴

The Presbyter explains that the σπέρμα (seed) of God makes believers children of God. Although he does not define this seed explicitly, according to the theological context of this pericope, it refers to the gospel (word) revived through the Spirit, through which believers became part of the familia Dei. Within Johannine convention, word and Spirit operate in combination to become a ‘life–giving word’. The Presbyter regarded this word as the foundational message which they have heard from the beginning (3:11): that is, those ‘who have been born of God’³⁵ have the ‘seed’ (σπέρμα)³⁶ of God abiding in them (3:9). In this verse the explanation moves from ‘do not sin’ (3:9), to ‘they cannot sin’ (3:9; Painter 2008:535f.). This implies that God’s children take on God’s character (their Father).

The Presbyter adds a new perspective which he already alluded to in 3:8. In 3:8, 9, he adopts the impossibility of the children of God to continue to sin. Already in 3:6, his reference about ‘sinlessness’ is founded on when people abide in God. They have ‘been born of him (God)’ (cf. 2:29) and consequently became children of God (3:1–2). In 3:9, the Presbyter turns the sequence around, namely, that the children of God became in a sense ‘supernatural’, ‘because God’s seed abides in them’ (Schnackenburg 1992:174).

He repetitively refers to those who live in Christ and have continuous fellowship with him, while obeying the Word of God.³⁷ However, he is fully aware that God’s children occasionally stumble into sin and when confessing their sins, God forgives and cleanses them.

This moves the Presbyter in 3:6, to discuss the condition of God’s children, by referring to the fact that ‘No one who abides³⁸ in him sins’. This declaration is a contrast to his assertion about Christ that ‘in him there is no sin’ (3:5). The present participle (μένων) postulates the person’s ‘ongoing’ way of life. An adversative analogous assertion, ‘no one who sins has either seen him or known him’, also includes a present participle to define an opposite category of people.

These two interpretations ‘imply a state of being rather than an act’. This relates to, and has consequences for, the Presbyter’s communication in his references to ‘sinlessness’ (Painter 2008:531–532). The Presbyter uses this contrast to emphasise the fundamental transformation that is founded via abiding in Jesus (2:6; Van der Merwe 2011:3–4). Firstly, they share an identity as children of God. Secondly, he then refers to the implications of this extraordinary claim in the previous verse (2:29), declaring that those born of God will live in ‘righteousness’ (δικαιοσύνη), that is in one of the divine characteristics.³⁹

For John, the moral anthropology of believers is grounded in their identity as children of God. This new familial identity entails a new mode of conduct, corresponding to the divine family ethos.⁴⁰ (Rhodes 2021:82–83)

Finally, a consideration is required to understand the sense of ‘sin’ for the children of God in as much as there is a difference between the pre- and post-experience of being born of God. The consequence of all sin committed prior to ‘being born of God’ is death (Rm 6:23). On the other hand, ‘been born of God’ (2:9) eradicates the penalty of death. ‘Been born of God’ does not abandon moral accountabilities at any stage (e.g. Mt 18:15–17; 1 Cor 11:29–32; Heb 12:4–13). Children of God are henceforth ‘forgiven’ (Jn 1 1:1–10) and ‘sinless’ (Jn 1 3:9; 5:18) because of their confession of sin (Jn 1 1:8–10; 5:16), ‘ultimately resulting in their sanctification and perfection in purity’ (Jn 1 3:3; Min 2017:89–90).