¹ Translations following this approach are NRSV, NIV, NKJV, NASB, NEB, as well as most Continental translations. The exceptions to this scheme are the RSV and NIRV, which translate spe/rma au0tou~ as "God’s nature". The Luther Bibel (1984) translates this clause as "Gottes Kinder bleiben in ihm". This translation is supported by alternate readings in the RSV and NRSV.

² R. Brown, The Epistles of John: Translated with Introduction, Notes, and Commentary, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1982), 409.

³ The best overview of the four different interpretations is in R. Brown, Epistles of John, 408-411.

⁴ This view is held by Balz, Braune, Brooke, Brown, Büchsel, Chaine, Feuillet, Hauck, Haupt, Holtzmann, Loisy, Luthardt, Schnackenburg, Schneider, Skrinjar, and Vawter.

⁵ R. Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: Introduction and Commentary (New York: Crossroad, 1992), 175, 195.

⁶ Throughout this article "GJohn" is used to designate the fourth gospel, and "John" is used to designate the implied author of the five Johannine writings.

⁷ E. Haupt, The First Epistle of St. John: A Contribution to Biblical Theology, trans. W. B. Pope (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1879), 192.

⁸ R. Brown, Epistles of John, 410-411.

⁹ This view is held by Alford, Barclay, Bede, Braun, Couture, de Jonge, de la Poterie, and Malatesta.

¹⁰ E. Malatesta, Interiority and Covenant: A Study of ei]nai e0n and me/nei e0n in the First Epistle of Saint John (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978), 247-248.

¹¹ I. H. Marshall, The Epistles of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 186. Cf. G. Strecker, The Johannine Letters: A Commentary on 1, 2, and 3 John, trans. L. Maloney, ed. H. Attridge, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 102.

¹² This view is held by W. Alexander, Bultmann, de Wette, Dodd, du Preez, Johnston, Klauk, Law, O’Neill, Plummer, Stott, Vincent, Vogler, and Westcott.

¹³ B. F. Westcott, The Epistles of St. John: The Greek Text with Notes and Essays (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950), 107. The reference here to GJohn 1:13 is oblique at best; it does not favor this interpretation over any others.

¹⁴ R. Law, The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of St. John (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1914³), 389.

¹⁵ W. Alexander, The Epistles of St. John: Twenty-One Discourses with Greek Text, Comparative Versions, and Notes Chiefly Exegetical (New York: Eaton & Mains, 1880), 183.

¹⁶ This view is held by N. Alexander, Argyle, Bengel, Moffatt, Sander, and Wohlenberg.

¹⁷ J. A. Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament: Vol 5, trans. W. Fletcher (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1858), 128.

¹⁸ Wohlenberg, "Glossen zum ersten Johannesbrief I", Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift 12 (1901), 583. Wohlenberg also says, alluding to GJohn 8:33, 37, "Abrahams rechter Same ist Gottes Same, und Gottes Same bleibt im Hause Gottes immerdar"., 583.

¹⁹ F. F. Bruce, The Epistles of John: Introduction, Exposition and Notes (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995²), 92. Cf. R. Brown, Epistles of John, 409. Where he says, "The most that one can say for this interpretation of 3:9b is that it does not lack all possibility". A. W. Argyle in, "1 John iii. 4f", Expository Times 65 (1953), 63, also notes that this "rendering is in agreement with v. 6 [of 1 John 3]: pa~j o( e0n au0tw|~ me/nwn ou0x a(marta&nei".

²⁰ Along these line there is even an instance of the "seed" of a God in Pindar’s Pythian Odes 3.15. This is interesting for this study because Pindar uses "spe/rma qeou~" in his description of the intercourse between the god Phoebus and Coronis, the daughter of Phlegyas. The text reads kai\ fe/roisa spe/rma qeou~ kaqaro&n.

²¹ C. K. Barrett, The New Testament Background: Selected Documents (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1989), 65.

²² In H. von Arnim, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1964).

²³ MT and ET Jeremiah 31:27.

²⁴ (81%) 176 out of 218 occurrences are in the transferred sense. Cf. E. Burton, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, ICC (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1977), 505, where, speaking of the LXX, he says that spe/rma "is most commonly a collective noun meaning "posterity"".

²⁵ Because spe/rma can be used in a collective sense it rarely appears in the plural. There are four occurrences in the LXX: 1 Sam. 8:15; Lev. 26:16; Ps. 125:6; Isa. 61:11. All four are accusative (spe/rmata). (rfzE occurs only once in the plural (1 Sam. 8:15).

²⁶ See T. D. Alexander, "Genealogies, Seed and the Compositional Unity of Genesis", Tyndale Bulletin 44 (1993), 255-270. 49 of the 218 canonical uses of spe/rma are in the book of Genesis, and 98/218 in the Pentateuch.

²⁷ MT Ps. 105:6. Likewise Isa. 41:8, su\ de/ Israhl pai=j mou Iakwb o#n e0celeca&mhn spe/rma Abraam o#n h0ga&phsa.

²⁸ Contra G. Quell, "spe/rma", TDNT, 7.542, who says, "Expressions like "seed of Abraham, Israel, David" belong to the non-mythical human sphere. They stands (sic) for what comes from the loins, 2 S. 7:12. They simply serve to express the sequence of generations and inclusions in blood-relationships". How Quell can associate statements like spe/rma Abraam o#n h0ga&phsa with a "non-mythical human sphere" is difficult to grasp.

²⁹ 4x: 3 Macc. 6:3; Pss. of Sol. 9:9, 18:3; and Test. of Levi 8:15. According to J. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983) all these are first or second century BC.

³⁰ 9 out of 14 occurrences, according to K. Rengstorf, A Complete Concordance to Flavius Josephus (Leiden: Brill, 1973).

³¹ Josephus also uses spe/rma in Bell., 2.276 where he describes the sufferings of the Jews under the proconsul Albinus as one of the "seeds" that led to the war with Rome and the destruction of Jerusalem.

³² Here Balaam says of the Israelites, "ta_ me\n sw&mat 0 au0toi=j e0c a)qrwpi/nwn diepla&sqh sperma&twn, e0k de\ qei/wn e1fusan ai9 yuxai/: dio_ kai\ gego&nasin a)gxisporoi qeou~". F. H. Colson translates this as, "Their bodies have been moulded from human seeds, but their souls are sprung from divine seeds, and therefore their stock is akin to God". F. H. Colson trans., Philo VI, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1959³), 421. Cf. C. D. Yonge trans., The Works of Philo: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993), 485.

³³ S. Shultz, "spe/rma", TDNT, 7.543.

³⁴ Not including 1 John 3:9, the possible variant in 2 Cor. 9:10, and the spermalo&goj of Acts 17:18, whose sense has no bearing on this discussion. Declination: spe/rma (23) spe/rmatoj (8) spe/rmati (7) sperma&twn (3) spe/rmasin (1).

³⁵ Cf. S. Schultz, "spe/rma", TDNT, 7.545. For the Gospels he says, "In each case the reference is to the seed of plants which the farmer sows". For 1 Cor. he says this is a "reference to the seed of plants". cf. BAGD, 761. Paul’s usage here is in an analogy to the resurrection body. Cf. C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, Black’s New Testament Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1980), 371. Also cf. M. E. Dahl, The Resurrection Body: A Study of I Corinthians 15 (London: SCM Press, 1962) 121-125.

³⁶ Cf. E. Burton, Galatians, 505-510.

³⁷ The children referred to are certainly believers, since following God’s commands and holding to the testimony of Jesus are Johannine marks of the church. Cf. 1 John 5:3, 10.

³⁸ GJohn 3:5 Jesus answered, "Very truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born (gennhqh=|) of water and Spirit (e0c u3datoj kai\ pneu/matoj)".

³⁹ See M. Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994²), 101-108.

⁴⁰ "Different words sharing a common lexical form may actually be more closely related in meaning to words with an entirely different lexical form than they are to words having the same lexical form". P. Cotterell and M. Turner, Linguistics & Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 179.

⁴¹ Matthew selects spe/rma here because of its transferred sense, as opposed to that of spo&roj. It would have been nonsense for him to say "o( spo&roj e0stin oi9 ui9oi\ th=j basilei/aj".

⁴² R. Brown, Epistles of John, 410. Cf. BADG, 761-763. Although these words due not display complete synonymy, it would be more helpful to think of these words as partially synonymous, in the way expressed by P. Cotterell and M. Turner. "By partial synonymy we mean a true identity of meaning between two lexemes in at least some, rather than all contexts; or for some of the senses of the lexeme, if not for all". Cotterell and Turner, Linguistics & Biblical Interpretation, 159. Cf. D. Crystal, A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991³), 340. Also cf. S. Ullman, The Principles of Semantics (Oxford: Blackwell, 1957), 108-125.

⁴³ C. H. Dodd, Johannine Epistles, 77. The Irenaeus citation is to Harvey’s edition (Cambridge: 1857). The reference in D. J. Unger’s trans., St. Irenaeus of Lyons Against the Heresies: Book I, J. Dillon ed. (New York: Paulist Press, 1992) is 1.7.22.

⁴⁴ As Irenaeus himself explained in the second century, for Valentinus "it is not good conduct that leads one into Fullness; no, it is the "seed" which is sent from there [i.e. above] immature, but is perfected here below". D. J. Unger, Against the Heresies, 1.6.26. Ou0 ga_r pra~cij ei0j Plh/rwma ei0sa&gei, a)lla_ to_ spe/rma to_ e0kei=qen nh/pion e0kpempo&menon, e1nqa de\ teleiou/menon. Greek text from J. T. Nielsen, ed., Irenaeus of Lyons Versus Contemporary Gnosticism: Selections from Book I and II of Adversus Haereses, Textus Minores, vol. 48 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977), 19.

⁴⁵ Cf. G. Bornkamm, "musth/rion", TDNT, 4.802-828. Esp. 824 where he says, "In, sum, musth/rion is a rare expression in the NT which betrays no relation to the mystery cults. Where there seem to be connections (e.g., in sacramental passages), the term is not used; where it is used, there are no such connections. In spite of certain analogies, there are thus serious objections against bringing Jesus or Paul under the category of the mystagogue".

⁴⁶ Who questions the meanings of: basileu/w, didaskali/a, eu0doke/w, latreu/w, mnhmoneu/w, tima&w, u9pakou/w? Yet all of these words appear 21 times in the NT, less than half as many times as spe/rma.

⁴⁷ M. Joos, "Semantic Axiom Number One", Language 48 (1972), 257. Cf. M. Silva, Biblical Words, 153-156. This law is often summarized as, "the best meaning is the least meaning".

⁴⁸ C. H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, 75.

⁴⁹ R. Schnackenburg, The Gospel According to John (New York: Crossroad, 1990), 1.105-1.111. See also C. K. Barrett, The Gospel of John and Judaism, trans. D. M. Smith (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), 59, where he says, "It is important not to overlook the Semitic ring of the language of the gospel, and its importance should not be underestimated", p. 59. M. Hengel, The Johannine Question (Philadelphia: Trinity Press, 1989), 110-114.

⁵⁰ M. Hengel, Johannine Question, 110. As with Schnackenburg, Hengel draws on the work of K. Beyer, Semitische Syntax in Neuen Testament (1962) and A. Schlatter, "Die Sprache und Heimat des vierten Evangelisten", Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie 6 (1902) and his Der Evangelist Johannes: Wie er spricht, denkt und glaubt (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1975⁴).

⁵¹ See F. Blass, A. Debrunner, R. Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), § 259. Cf. M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek: Illustrated by Examples, 4th ed. (Rome: Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici, 1963) § 183. Cf. also A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 3d ed. (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1919), 790.

⁵² N. Alexander, The Epistles of John: Introduction and Commentary (London: SCM Press, 1962), 86-87. One might add that if this is a tautology then the Johannine writings are replete with them. Therefore its tautologous nature is an argument in favor of this reading.

⁵³ I. H. Marshall, Epistles of John, 186, n.6.

⁵⁴ J. Louw & E. Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, confirm this when they correlate genea& , te/knon, and spe/rma in 10.28, where they are all taken to mean "descendants".

⁵⁵ Taking synonymy as understood in linguistics as partial and not complete (since complete synonymy is rare, if it exists at all). See note 42 above for a definition of partial synonymy.

⁵⁶ Or the NT, cf. Isa. 44:3, o#ti e0gw_ dw&sw u3dwr e0n di/yei toi=j poreuome/noij e0n a)nu/drw| e0piqh/sw to_ pneu~ma& mou e0pi\ to_ spe/rma sou kai\ ta_j eu0logi/aj mou e0pi\ ta_ te/kna sou. and Sirach 44:12, e0n tai=j diaqh/kaij e1sth to_ spe/rma au0th/w~n kai\ ta_ te/kna au0tw~n di 0 au0tou/j.

⁵⁷ But the usage of the constructio ad sensum in the NT is sporadic. See F. Blass, A. Debrunner & R. Funk, A Greek Grammar, § 134. Not all NT writers follow it consistently.

⁵⁸ This can be seen most easily in John’s usage of the collective o1xloj. (e.g. GJohn 6:5). (John’s other uses of spe/rma (GJohn 8:33, 37) with collective sense are both predicate nominatives and therefore do not govern the verb. So we have to examine his usage of another collective.) o1xloj is used 20x in the Johannine literature, and 12 of those in the nominative, and each time with a singular verb.

⁵⁹ In the U.S.A. we can say "the crowd is" (whereas in England it would be "the crowd are" because they follow the constructio ad sensum) but we do not say "the children is", but rather "the children are", because we have no collective.

⁶⁰ Cf. A. E. Brooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, ICC (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1957²), 89. "It has the advantage of referring au0tou~ and e0n au0tw|~ to the same person". A final syntactical note: In the Johannine writings there is no set syntagmatic formula for the use of the verb me/nein. There are many possible subject and object relations. See E. Malatesta, Interiority and Covenant, for a detailed study.

⁶¹ P. P. A. Kotzé, "The Meaning of 1 John 3:9 with reference to 1 John 1:8 and 10", Neotestamentica 13: Studies in the Johannine Letters (Pretoria: NTSSA, 1979), 69. R. Schnackenburg, Johannine Epistles, 151. R. Bultmann, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, trans. R. P. O’Hara, ed. R. Funk, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1973), 43. "The epistle could have been concluded with 2:27 and originally probably was".

⁶² E. Malatesta confirms this subsection, but misses the larger structural chiasmus shown by the inclusio of 2:28 and 3:24. Cf. E. Malatesta, Interiority and Covenant, 237. Cf. also W. Nauck, Die Tradition und der Charakter des ersten Johannesbriefes (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1957), 1, for confirmation of this section.

⁶³ These correspond to N. Lund’s categories of the "law of the shift at the centre", and the "law of shift from centre to the extremes". N. Lund, Chiasmus in the New Testament: A Study in the Form and Function of Chiastic Structures (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992), 41.

⁶⁴ C. H. Dodd, Johannine Epistles, 81. Cf. R. Schnackenburg, Johannine Epistles, 151. "Doing what is right and refraining from sin become a mark of being born of God or being a child of God". Cf. also 2:29b pa~j o( poiw~n th\n dikaiosu/nhn e0c au0tou~ gege/nnhtai.

⁶⁵ D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 126. Cf. C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text, 2d ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1978), 164. Where he says John’s construction "serves to accentuate e0k qeou~". Both commentators are discussing GJohn 1:13.

⁶⁶ I. H. Marshall, Epistles of John, 186. Emphasis added.

⁶⁷ F. F. Bruce, Epistles of John, 92. Italics are his.