Interpreters of 1 John have long observed a fair degree of ambiguity in the use of the personal pronoun (αὐτός) with respect to God, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. There are several cases where the referent of the pronoun is difficult to determine in the immediate context and the language of God is seemingly obscure. In particular, 1 John 2:28–3:3 contains a density of occurrences where this ambiguity is most ostensible. Commentators disagree on the referents for each use of αὐτός in this passage. On the surface, there seems to be a subtle shift in 2:28–3:1 from Jesus (“when he appears”) to God (“born of him”) to the Father (“it did not know him”) without specific notice in the text. While some interpreters attribute this phenomenon to a lack of precision in John’s thought (e.g., Judith Lieu), others suggest that it is a deliberate technique employed by John used to affirm the Son’s close association with the Father (e.g., Constantine Campbell).
Amidst the rise of theological readings of Scripture, several scholars have proposed various methods under the rubric of “trinitarian exegesis.” Generally-speaking, these interpreters seek to read Scripture, especially its language of God the Father, Son, and Spirit, in dialogue with pro-Nicene trinitarian categories. Appropriately, John’s Gospel has been the subject of much of the discussion. However, there has been little attention given to the Trinity in John’s epistles. This paper proposes that 1 John 2:28–3:3 presents a special case for a Trinitarian reading in the epistles. I will argue that the ambiguity in John’s use of the personal pronoun (αὐτός) in 2:28–3:3 can be fruitfully examined according to the principle of what is common to the Father, Son, and Spirit, and of what is proper to each person as a case of Scripture’s twofold discourse about God.