05_Biblica_Do_Layout 1 08/07/13 12:57 Pagina 418 418 TOAN DO his lack of clarity is puzzling with regard to the “implied” sin-object in peri. o[lou tou/ ko,smou. The absence of th/j or tw/n makes the syntax of the prepositional phrase ambiguous 14. Third, in light of the Johannine view of human sins, the use of peri. o[lou tou/ ko,smou does not seem congruent with other comments (1,5-10; 2,3-6). As it stands in the midst of the discussion on com- munity sin, the purpose of peri. o[lou tou/ ko,smou is unclear. The per- sonal pronoun “we” occurs in every verse in 1,1-10 and 2,3-6 15. R. Bultmann formulates his concern in the following way: kai. auvto.j i`lasmo,j evstin peri. tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n. Es ist der Ge- danke, daß Jesus Christus durch seinen Tod (sein Blut) die Sünden gesühnt hat, ebenso wie es in der Interpolation 1,7b ausgesprochen war, und wie es 4,10 wiederkehren wird. Dieser Gedanke [in Vers 2] stimmt aber nicht zu V. 1, in dem die Hoffnung auf die Sünden- vergebung dadurch begründet ist, daß Jesus Christus unser Für- sprecher (Anwalt) bei Gott ist 16. Bultmann questions the consistency of thought between 2,1-2 and 1,5–2,6. 1 John 1,7 speaks exclusively of “our sins”, and uses the ex- pression kaqari,zei h`ma/j avpo. pa,shj a`marti,aj. The personal pronoun hmaj implies the Johannine community. In 2,1 he explicitly addresses `/ the community members using tekni,a mou 17. Later, in 4,10, John uses a similar expression (i`lasmo.n peri. tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n) for “our sins”. However, he does not repeat peri. o[lou tou/ ko,smou in 4,10. For this reason R.E. Brown observes: “If there is a grammatical irregularity in these two peri phrases of 2,2[cd], it is that the object of the first is ‘our sins’, while the object of the second is ‘the whole world’ – a seeming mixture of things and people” 18. ROBERTSON, Grammar, 441, 1199. See n. 2. 14 See J. PAINTER, 1, 2, and 3 John (SP 18; Collegeville, MN 2002) 44- 15 51, 119-140; A. vON HARNACK, “Das ‘Wir’ in den johanneischen Schriften”, SPAW.PH (Berlin 1923) 96-113; and P. PERKINS, “Koinônia in 1 John 1,3-7: The Social Context of Division in the Johannine Letters”, CBQ 45 (1983) 631-641. R. BULTMANN, Die Drei Johannesbriefe (KEK 14; Göttingen 71967) 29. 16 BROWN, Epistles of John, 214, concludes that “in the Epistles teknon is 17 used in the plural for the children of God or the church, while teknion and paidion are used as direct address for the readers who are clearly Christians of the author’s own community”. BROWN, Epistles of John, 222. 18 © Gregorian Biblical Press 2013 - Tutti i diritti riservati