inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (1John 3:16)

Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)

The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).

For this verse, translators typically select the inclusive form (including the addressee).

Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.

complete verse (1 John 3:16)

Following are a number of back-translations of 1 John 3:16:

  • Uma: “This is a sign so that we know what is called love: Yesus gave his life so that we could have salvation/goodness. So, we also must give our lives to help our relatives.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “We (incl.) know what true love is like, for Almasi, because of his love for us (incl.) submitted/surrendered his life and he died taking away our (incl.) sins. Therefore we (incl.) also should submit/surrender even our (dual) lives for our (incl.) fellow-men.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “The reason we know that God loves us (incl.) very much is because Jesus allowed himself to be killed as our substitute. And as for us (incl.) also, it is necessary that we help our companions who are believers even if that help is the means of our death.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “The way-we -know the nature/likeness of true love, Jesu Cristo gave his life for us. Therefore we also, we should be prepared to give our lives for our siblings/cousins (from here on, brothers).” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Consider this, that as for Jesu-Cristo, he even gave his life/breath just because of us so that we would be saved/freed. Therein we can now comprehend what is meant by true valuing. Therefore as for us, it’s necessary for us also to help our siblings in believing, even though it could lead to our life/breath being severed.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “Christ has shown us what it means to love a fellowman in that he gave himself to die for us. Also we must do this, when it is necessary to die for our brethren, let it be done.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
  • Yatzachi Zapotec: “We know that Christ loves us because he gave his life dying for us, and we know likewise we must love our fellows. If it is necessary we must forsake ourselves and die to help our fellows.”
  • Eastern Highland Otomi: “Christ showed us what it is that is really love, in that he delivered up his own life in regard to us. And we will do the same, in that we will love our siblings, we won’t be afraid to help them, even though we die.”
  • Tzotzil: “Thus we know that Jesus Christ loves us because he gave himself to be killed on our account. Thus we also, it needs that we give ourselves to be killed on account of the brethren.” (Source for this and two above: John Beekman in Notes on Translation 12, November 1964, p. 1ff.)

Translation commentary on 1 John 3:16

The verse refers to the love which Christ has shown, and which Christians should show in imitation of Christ.

By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us: the introductory by this (compare 2.3) points forward to the that clause, which indicates by what means we know love. The pronouns he and his refer to Christ. The clause may better be transposed; for example, ‘the fact that he/Christ laid down his life for us causes us to know love,’ or ‘Christ laid down his life for us. Thus he showed us what love is.’ Where the noun love has to be rendered by a verb, one may say, for example, ‘Christ has caused us to know (or has shown us) how to love (or what it is really to love) when he laid down his life for us.’ If it is obligatory to mention a subject and a goal of the verb “to love,” it is probably best to say ‘… how we should love our brothers.’

The verb “to know” is used here with a nonpersonal goal; similarly in 3.20 (“God … knows everything”), 4.16 (“we know … the love God has for us”), and 2 John 1 (“all who know the truth”). In this construction the meaning of the verb closely resembles that of “to know” with a personal goal (compare 2.3), namely, to have intimate knowledge of something, realizing what it is like, and what are its practical implications. Some languages have the same expression in both cases, while in others one has to use different renderings.

He laid down his life for us: in this expression life is viewed as a cloak which one can lay down or take off. The aorist tense is used to show that the reference is to a specific event in history, namely, Jesus’ death. Some other renderings used are ‘he gave/offered his life for us,’ ‘he was willing (or ready) to die for us,’ (compare Good News Translation‘s renderings of the same expression in John 10.11, 15, 13.37).

He, literally “that one,” refers to Christ; see comments on 2.6. For life the Greek uses psuchē, for which see comments on “life” in 1.1. The preposition for may be rendered as ‘on behalf of,’ ‘for the sake of,’ ‘in order to help (or save).’

Since the following sentence draws a conclusion, and can be rendered as ‘so,’ ‘consequently.’

We ought: the pronoun is emphatic; it contrasts with “he” in the preceding sentence. The present tense of the Greek verb indicates duration. For the meaning and some renderings of the verb, see comments on 2.6.

Quoted with permission from Haas, C., de Jonge, M. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on The First Letter of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .