1Jn 5:20 KJV And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
Who is the True God and Eternal Life here ?
As acknowledged by all sides, grammar, cannot determine the referent identity of the True God and eternal life.
Identifying the demonstrative pronoun οὗτός with the nearest personal identity can also be problematic as seen in 2 John 1:7
For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one [οὗτός] is the deceiver and the antichrist.
Is Jesus the deceiver and the antichrist? Of course not.
While we can't simply identify the immediate personal noun as the referent for who οὗτός is, we can look at the context.
In 1 John 5:20, the Father of Jesus is plainly identified as God and "him who is true" is clearly identified the Father of Jesus.
20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.
So the True God is the God just identified as the father of the son and the father of the son, Jesus Christ, is identified as the one who is true. The Father is clearly the true God.
This of course accords with other verses that exclusively identify the Father of Jesus Christ as the True God.
1 Thessalonians 1:9-10 9 For they themselves report concerning us the kind of reception we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, 10 and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.
1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, 2 since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.
-John 17:1-3
Now just because there is only one True God, the Father, doesn't mean that anyone else referred to as a god is necessarily a false god. As Jesus points out other beings are referred to in the scriptures as gods in John 10:34. In the scripture that Jesus refers to (Psalms 82) God is seated in a council amoung the gods who he refers to as his sons.
God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment: -Psalms 82:1 Psalms 82:6 6 I said, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you;
Another passage refers to God as the God of gods.
For the Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who is not partial and takes no bribe. -Deuteronomy 10:17 (See also Ps. 136:2; Dan. 11:36)
If God is not the God of the dead, (Matthew 22:32, Mark 12:26-27, Luke 20:37:38), he certainly isn't the God of false gods. But whoever those may be that are rightly and scripturally referred to as gods, the only True God would surely be the God who is the God of them all - the God of Gods - the Most High. And while Jesus is rightly referred to as divine he constantly defers to one as the God of him who he exclusively identifies as the Father. Jesus continues to have a God even after his resurrection as is quoted in Revelation.
Revelation 3:12-13 12 The one who conquers, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God. Never shall he go out of it, and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name. 13 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’
The Father, having no God above him is clearly the only True God, The Most High, The Almighty. Jesus from such distinction is consistently excluded. He is not the Most High because he has a God above him. There is only one person that Jesus our Lord consistently and solely identifies as God and that is the Father.
Regarding the identity of the Father with eternal life we should not think of such identification as a one-for-one identity - that God is no more or no less than eternal life, and eternal life is no more and no less than God.
Eternal life is a property of God that he can to some degree share with his creation to also possess, but only by his will. When it says Jesus is life, it is not, again, to identify that eternal life as exactly defining Jesus, but instead to identify the dependency of our relationship with eternal life with our relationship with Christ as Christ is the proximate source of our eternal life. And so while it can be said that Christ is the proximate source of eternal life, God, the Father, who raised Jesus from the dead and granted Jesus to have life in himself (John 5:26 - who grants the True God such things?), is the ultimate source of eternal life as 1 John reveals.
And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
-1 John 5:11
So just as Jesus can be said to be the life, because our relationship with life itself depends on our relationship with Christ, It is ultimately the case the our relationship with eternal life is ultimately dependent upon God himself. Indeed in such a sense is God the Father, even more so, the eternal life.
Jesus, who was sent by God taught that the ultimate objective of the relationship with Jesus is to have a relationship with God, the Father, and that this relationship is the means by which we may all have life
John 14:6 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. -John 17:3
So Jesus came to give us understanding so that we may know God the Father who is the True God and the ultimate source of eternal life.
1 John 5:20 20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.
Daniel B Wallace, in his "Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics", page 326 and 327 (in a section about the demonstrative pronoun, specifically, οὗτός) offers this comment about 1 John 5:20 -
This text is exegetically problematic for a variety of reasons. What concerns us here is what the antecedent is. Many scholars see ὁ Θεὸς rather than Χριστός as the antecedent, even though Χριστός is closer. Winer argues, for example, that "in the first place ἀληθινὸς Θεὸς is a constant and exclusive epithet of the Father; and secondly, there follows a warning against idolatry and ἀληθινὸς Θεὸς is always contrasted with εἴδωλα" [Winer-Moulton, 195]
On behalf of seeing Χριστός as the antecedent are the following arguments:
- Although it is true that ἀληθινὸς Θεὸς is not elsewhere referred to Christ, ἀλήθεια is and is so in the Johannine literature (John 14:6). Further, ἀληθινὸς Θεὸς is not a "constant ... epithet" as Winer supposes, being found only in John 17:3 and 1 John 5:20!
- Christ is also said to be ζωή in John's writings (John 11:25, 14:6, 1 John 1:1, 2), an epithet nowhere used of the Father
- The demonstrative pronoun οὗτός, in the Gospel and Epistles of John seems to be used in a theologically rich manner. Specifically, of the approximately seventy instances in which οὗτός has a personal referent, as many as forty-four of them (almost two thirds of the instances) refer to the Son. Of the remainder, most imply some sort of positive connection with the Son. What is most significant is that never is the Father the referent. For what its worth, this datum increases the probability that Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ is the antecedent in 1 John 5:20.
The issue cannot be decided on grammar alone. But suffice to say here that there is no grammatical reasons for denying that ἀληθινὸς Θεὸς is Jesus Christ.
Overview
There are similarities between John 17:3 and 1 John 5:20:
And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. (John 17:3 ESV)
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. (1 John 5:20)
Both speak of eternal life, both use the identical phrase, ἵνα γινώσκωμεν so that we may know, both have the phrase ἀληθινὸς Θεὸς, true God, and both have Jesus Christ. There are also differences. The letter speaks of has His Son; the Gospel has no reference to Son of God.
In addition, the reader knows there is a difference in perspective. The Gospel presents words Jesus spoke before His death and resurrection; the letter understands the meaning of what was was said in the light of the glorification of Jesus. This perspective accounts for the occasional "mismatch" between the letter and the Gospel:
My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. (1 John 2:1)
And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— (John 14:16 NIV)
In the Gospel Jesus says He will send the Advocate, παράκλητον; in the letter, John uses the term to refer to Jesus. The difference lies in what happened. Jesus did return to the Father and sent the Advocate, but, just as Jesus only spoke words from the Father (cf. John 8:28, 12:49, 14:10), the Holy Spirit speaks only words He hears (cf. John 16:12-13). The letter reflects the belief what is heard from the Holy Spirit is only what Jesus says to the Father on the behalf of the believer.
Eternal Life - Life Eternal
John 17:3 begins with ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή, the eternal life; 1 John 5:20 ends with ζωὴ αἰώνιος, life eternal. Also, eternal life in the Gospel is knowing the only true God and Jesus Christ who you have sent: both are necessary. According to Jesus, the only true God by Himself is not eternal life.
Obviously, John composed the letter to end with life eternal not eternal life. The general sense may be the same, but the contrast with the Gospel places emphasis on life. In this way the letter reflects more focus on what the believer has, life eternal, where the Gospel places the focus on what is possible, eternal life. Again, the difference is historical. The Gospel presents Jesus speaking before His glorification and so anticipates what is possible; the letter is written with the knowledge of what did happen for those who believe.
An ending of what is already possessed, life eternal, follows how the phrase ἵνα γινώσκωμεν, so that we may know is used. What Jesus said so that we may know, ἵνα γινώσκωμεν, has become what the Son of God has done, given us understanding, so that we may know.
Finally, life eternal recalls the beginning of the letter.
the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us (1 John 1:2)
the eternal life is τὴν ζωὴν τὴν αἰώνιον, the life the eternal. The life made made manifest is that which is proclaimed, the life the eternal in the opening is life eternal in the closing. The life in the opening, is Jesus Christ who was with the Father and is now the Advocate with the Father who has given us understanding, so we may know what is life eternal.
Furthermore, a comparison with the opening of the letter highlights an important distinction between John 17:3 and 1 John 5:20. The ending of the letter makes no mention of Father. In other words, the pronoun οὗτός may refer to either Jesus or the True God, but there is no justification to a claim John intends "Father" which is absent, and, with the prayer and opening in mind, was purposely removed.
Questionable Grammar
The NET Bible alerts one to a question of grammar in the text:
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us insight to know him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This one53 is the true God and eternal life. (NET)
οἴδαμεν δὲ ὅτι ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ἥκει καὶ δέδωκεν ἡμῖν διάνοιαν ἵνα γινώσκωμεν τὸν ἀληθινόν καὶ ἐσμὲν ἐν τῷ ἀληθινῷ ἐν τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀληθινὸς θεὸς καὶ ζωὴ αἰώνιος
The study note explains the issue centers on the pronoun οὗτός which can mean "He" but is most frequently translated along the lines of "this:"
53 sn: The pronoun This one (οὗτος, houtos) refers to a person, but it is far from clear whether it should be understood as a reference (1) to God the Father or (2) to Jesus Christ. R. E. Brown (Epistles of John [AB], 625) comments, “I John, which began with an example of stunning grammatical obscurity in the prologue, continues to the end to offer us examples of unclear grammar.” The nearest previous antecedent is Jesus Christ, immediately preceding, but on some occasions when this has been true the pronoun still refers to God (see 1 John 2:3). The first predicate which follows This one in 5:20, the true God, is a description of God the Father used by Jesus in John 17:3, and was used in the preceding clause of the present verse to refer to God the Father (him who is true). Yet the second predicate of This one in 5:20, eternal life, appears to refer to Jesus because although the Father possesses “life” (John 5:26; 6:57) just as Jesus does (John 1:4; 6:57, 1 John 5:11), “life” is never predicated of the Father elsewhere, while it is predicated of Jesus in John 11:25 and 14:6 (a self-predication by Jesus). If This one in 5:20 is understood as referring to Jesus, it forms an inclusion with the prologue, which introduced the reader to “the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us.” Thus it appears best to understand the pronoun This one in 5:20 as a reference to Jesus Christ. The christological affirmation which results is striking, but certainly not beyond the capabilities of the author (see John 1:1 and 20:28): This One [Jesus Christ] is the true God and eternal life. See also D. B. Wallace, Granville Sharp’s Canon and Its Kin: Semantics and Significance, Studies in Biblical Greek 14, ed. D. A. Carson (Bern/New York: Peter Lang, 2009), 273-77.
While the grammar is not clear, eternal life is not otherwise attributed to the Father and, as noted above, recalls the opening of the letter.
Another grammatical consideration not described in detail concerns the use of the article. The letter has, ὁ ἀληθινὸς θεὸς καὶ ζωὴ αἰώνιος. This TSKS construction uses the article with καὶ to link two substantives. Thus, the true God and life eternal are referring to the same person.
Conclusion
The evidence points the True God and Life Eternal as being Jesus.
As the NET note states οὗτός refers to a person. It may mean "this," but the use in the letter follows the etymology of οὗτος which is from the article ὁ and the pronoun αὐτός. A literal translation would be "this Him." One might argue a more explicit personal pronoun could have been used, but had John used only article ὁ instead of οὗτός, the case for understanding the referent was intended to be God would be much stronger.
It is possible to understand the pronoun as referring to "the True God." However, based on how the letter was composed, there is little, if any, justification for a claim "Father" is the referent. If John did have Jesus' prayer in mind, and it seems clear he did, then it is obvious he purposely avoided any reference to Father when ending of the letter. Not only did he avoid "Father," he removed μόνον from Jesus' identification of the Father: σὲ τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεὸν.1This deliberate editing of what Jesus said not only reinforces the evidence οὗτος points to Jesus, it removes the possibility John has "Father" in mind.
1. It also follows understanding μόνον to mean only as in alone, which is how John uses μόνον throughout the Gospel. Jesus calls the Father the "alone" True God because the Son and Holy Spirit are temporarily on the earth. When Jesus returns, μόνον is no longer appropriate. Regardless of only or alone, removing the term from what Jesus says, is best explained as a deliberate device to distance "Father" from what is written in the letter.
I am in Strong Agreement with Barnes Barnes in his commentary gives the following reasons showing that The True God in that Verse is referring to Jesus.
(1) The grammatical construction favors it. Christ is the immediate antecedent of the pronoun “this” - οὗτος houtos. This would be regarded as the obvious and certain construction so far as the grammar is concerned, unless there were something in the thing affirmed which led us to seek some more remote and less obvious antecedent. No doubt would have been ever entertained on this point, if it had not been for the reluctance to admit that the Lord Jesus is the true God. If the assertion had been that “this is the true Messiah;” or that “this is the Son of God;” or that “this is he who was born of the Virgin Mary,” there would have been no difficulty in the construction. I admit that his argument is not absolutely decisive; for cases do occur where a pronoun refers, not to the immediate antecedent, but to one more remote; but cases of that kind depend on the ground of necessity, and can be applied only when it would be a clear violation of the sense of the author to refer it to the immediate antecedent.
(2) This construction seems to be demanded by the adjunct which John has assigned to the phrase “the true God” - “eternal life.” This is an expression which John would be likely to apply to the Lord Jesus, considered as “life,” and the “source of life,” and not to God as such. “How familiar is this language with John, as applied to Christ! “In him (i. e. Christ) was life, and the life was the light of people - giving life to the world - the bread of life - my words are spirit and life - I am the way, and the truth, and the life. This life (Christ) was manifested, and we have “seen it,” and do testify to you, and declare the eternal life which was with the Father, and was manifested to us,” 1Jo 1:2.” - Prof. Stuart’s Letters to Dr. Channing, p. 83. There is no instance in the writings of John, in which the appellation life, and “eternal” life is bestowed upon the Father, to designate him as the author of spiritual and eternal life; and as this occurs so frequently in John’s writings as applied to Christ, the laws of exegesis require that both the phrase “the true God,” and “eternal life,” should be applied to him.
(3) If it refers to God as such, or to the word “true” - τὸν ἀληθινόν (Θεὸν) ton alēthinon (Theon) it would be mere tautology, or a mere truism. The rendering would then be, “That we may know the true God, and we are in the true God: this is the true God, and eternal life.” Can we believe that an inspired man would affirm gravely, and with so much solemnity, and as if it were a truth of so much magnitude, that the true God is the true God?
(4) This interpretation accords with what we are sure John would affirm respecting the Lord Jesus Christ. Can there be any doubt that he who said, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;” that he who said, “all things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was made;” that he who recorded the declaration of the Saviour, “I and my Father are one,” and the declaration of Thomas, “my Lord and my God,” would apply to him the appellation “the true God!”
(5) If John did not mean to affirm this, he has made use of an expression which was liable to be misunderstood, and which, as facts have shown, would be misconstrued by the great portion of those who might read what he had written; and, moreover, an expression that would lead to the very sin against which he endeavors to guard in the next verse - the sin of substituting a creature in the place of God, and rendering to another the honor due to him. The language which he uses is just such as, according to its natural interpretation, would lead people to worship one as the true God who is not the true God, unless the Lord Jesus be divine. For these reasons, it seems to me that the fair interpretation of this passage demands that it should be understood as referring to the Lord Jesus Christ. If so, it is a direct assertion of his divinity, for there could be no higher proof of it than to affirm that he is the true God.
One poster made the following statement: "We note the consistent delineation between God (Father) and Lord Jesus throughout the NT.
36Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ Acts 2:35,6"
The Apostle Luke made this declaration at Luke 2:11, "for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, WHO IS Christ the Lord." Jesus was already the Savior, Messiah and the Lord.
What Acts 2:35-36 is teaching according to the context is the fact that His resurrection revealed or established Him as the true Savior, Messiah and the Lord.
Now, I found an interesting parallel regarding the issue of the true God. John 1:6-9, There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John. (John the Baptist). He came for a witness, that he might bear witness of the LIGHT, that all might believe in Him. Vs8, He/John was not the light, but came that he might bear witness of the LIGHT. Vs9, There was the TRUE LIGHT which coming into the world enlightens every man."
1 John 1:5, "And this is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is light and in Him there is no darkness at all." Notice that the true light at John 1:9 is identified as Jesus Christ and is used interchangeably with God here at 1 John 1:5.
In short, there is nothing inconclusive about the fact that Jesus is identified as the true light with God who is light at 1 John 1:5.
Greek language and grammar shuns needless repetition of the subject. Unlike English, where we would simply choose a variation on the word to avoid mindless repetition, Greek simply omits the word, continuing on the assumption that the subject has not changed.
Those unfamiliar with Greek grammar may question why so often the KJV translation appears to have added a word because the KJV translators were open enough to italicize words that they had added which were not explicitly present in the original text, whereas other translations do not thus inform the reader.
However, the words are not really "added." They are required in the grammar. For example, suppose we translate the English sentence: "Stop!" into a language requiring both a subject and a verb. That sentence would then be translated as "You stop!" The "you" must be added to fit the grammar of the target language, even though this subject was not required in the original language.
In Greek, this tendency to omit the repetition of the subject can lead to some ambiguity at times. However, in 1 John 5:20, there should be no ambiguity. The reason for this is that the subject and the object are clearly separate, and Greek noun cases and verb declensions make this obvious.
Notice the grammatical notations indicating nouns as subjects or objects based on their cases as follows:
N-NMS = Noun - Nominative (subject) Masculine Singular
N-GMS = Noun - Genitive (possessive) Masculine Singular
N-AFS = Noun - Accusative (object) Feminine Singular
N-DMS = Noun - Dative (object of preposition) Masculine Singular
N-NFS = Noun - Nominative Feminine Singular
Of that list, the more important ones to follow are the "accusative" (object) and "nominative" (subject) forms. However, these cases are also ascribed to pronouns and articles. If there is an article without a noun, that noun was deemed unnecessary, as it can be understood by context. Such is the case with the "Art-AMS" (Article-Accusative Masculine Singular) under the interlinear gloss of "Him who [is]." The word "father" is omitted, because it is expected that when contrasted with "son" it will be clear that the Father is the one referenced.
The verse is divided into three expressions, subdivided by clauses, each containing its own subject, verb, and object (which in Greek are determined by their cases or declensions and not by their order of appearance in the clause).
These are the expressions (following the KJV):
1) [Subject = "Son of God"; Object is "him"]
a) And we know that
b) the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding,
c) that we may know him
d) that is true,
[Subject = "we"; (prepositional) object "him that [is] true"]
a) and we are in him
b) that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ.
[Subject = "This" (referring back to subject of last mention "him that is true"); no direct object]
a) This is the true God, and eternal life.
Notice the clear shift in subject between expressions 1 and 2. This is required in Greek in order to avoid ambiguity. This clarification was made via the phrase "even in his son Jesus Christ." This defining statement tells us that the subject is no longer the son.
Because there is no such change in subject between expression 2 and expression 3, the subject remains the same. The only logical way to construe the final expression's subject as "Son Jesus Christ" is to claim that the Son is also his own Father, i.e. the subject of expression 2 being the Son could then legitimately serve for expression 3 as the Son. If, however, the word "son" means anything, there must also be a father, and the father cannot be the son. (One does not father himself or herself.)
Scholars may argue, and many will choose to see what is not present in the text simply because it follows their preconceived views. However, those who truly understand Greek syntax and grammar will realize that "the true God" can only reference the Father because "the Son" is no longer in the scope as subject (nominative) for the expression.
To answer the OP's questions in the comments, a few more points relative to the "true God" seem pertinent.
The Bible teaches us who "the only true God" is. Jesus, praying to the Father in John 17, says:
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John 17:3, KJV)
These words are recorded by the same John who wrote 1 John 5:20, the verse in question. John cannot be thought ignorant on the question, nor would he have contradicted his own writings to say that someone else was the true God. If the Father is the true God, all others are excluded--including the Son, for, as all understand, the Son is not the Father.
So if the Greek (or English) grammar were considered insufficiently clear, the comparison to other scriptures makes us certain of the Father being the correct antecedent of "true God" in 1 John 5:20.
Rogers Jr. and Rogers III (1998: 599) insist that “the pronoun houtos in 1 John 5:20 clearly refers to Jesus” (cf. also Wallace, 1996: 326-27).
What is theologically noteworthy is that Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1 (and perhaps 2 Thess. 1:12) are both Granville Sharp grammatical constructions—namely, Sharp’s rule #1 (Sharp, 1803: 3-7).
This rule is named after its founder (not inventor) Granville Sharp (1735-1813; cf. Sharp, 1803). Sharp was passionate in his unyielding belief in the full deity of Jesus Christ. Sharp’s research of the Greek New Testament led him to discover six grammatical rules by which the Greek article ho and the conjunction kai were utilized. Remarking on the validity of Sharp’s grammatical rules, Beisner (1998: 46) explains:
Those who know Greek can confirm the accuracy of the conclusions drawn here by consulting C. Kuehne, “The Greek Article and the Doctrine of Christ’s Deity,” Journal of Theology: Church of the Lutheran Confession 13, no. 3 (September 1973): 12-28; 13, no. 4 (December 1973): 14-30; 14, no. 1 (March 1974): 8-19; 15, no. 1 (March 1975): 8-22, in which Kuehne brilliantly explains, illustrates, and defends the six parts of Sharp’s rule.
Although there were six grammatical rules that Sharp discovered, rule #1 is most recognized and cited (cf. Greenlee, 1986: 23). Generally (not verbatim), rule #1 states that when the connective kai connects two nouns of the same case (singular nouns that are not proper [e.g., personal names]), and the article ho precedes the first noun, but not the second, each descriptive noun refers to the first named person (cf. Sharp, 1803: 3-7; Greenly, 1986: 23). Rule #1 is also signified by the abbreviation, TSKS (i.e., The-Substantive-Kai-Substantive).
Hence, Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1 contain TSKS constructions emphasizing the full deity of the Son. Titus 2:13 reads: “Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.” Notice the phrase tou megalou theou kai sōtēros hēmōn Iēsou Christou, literally, “the great God and Savior of us Jesus Christ.” Here, the conjunction kai connects both singular descriptive nouns, theou and sōtēros and the article tou proceeds the first noun, theou, but not the second noun, sōtēros. Therefore, according to Sharp’s grammatical rule, Jesus Christ is tou megalou theou kai sōtēros— “the great God and Savior.” The same great truth is found in 2 Peter 1:1.
I've just written a blog post on this question but will just highlight a couple of points that I think need further comment after reading the existing answers.
Considerations of grammar suggest that the οὗτος in 5:20f refers back to its immediate antecedent, i.e., to "Jesus Christ" in v 20e, and on this and other grounds the majority of modern scholars with more or less confidence holds that the statement "this is the true God and eternal life" is a christological affirmation. (Julian Hills, "'Little Children, Keep Yourselves from Idols: 1 John 5:21 Reconsidered," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 51 [1989]: 301).
This assessment of the communis opinio is now a bit dated, but having consulted a lot of newer scholarship, it does not appear that the pendulum has shifted.
Some of the other answers dismiss the majority view on the grounds that scholars merely follow their preconceptions. This claim is lacking in critical thinking ("the scholars" have preconceptions, but I don't?), borders on conspiracy-theorism, and is at odds with the spirit of StackExchange as an expert community.
ὁ͂υτος vs. ἐκε͂ινος. Dottard's answer observed (via Daniel B. Wallace) that ὁ͂υτος is used frequently of Jesus in the Johannine writings but never of the Father. ὁ͂υτος is the masculine singular nominative of the proximal demonstrative pronoun, comparable to "this" in English. I would just add that the masculine singular nominative of the distal demonstrative pronoun ἐκε͂ινος (comparable to "that" in English) is used several times of the Father in Johannine literature (John 1:33; 5:19; 5:37; 5:38; 6:29; 8:42). (It is also used several times of Jesus and the Holy Spirit). This suggests that the Johannine writer may be uncomfortable referring to the transcendent Father as "this one." It is the Son who manifests God's proximity.
Scholars have identified a curious phenomenon in 1 John whereby there is often ambiguity as to whether a personal pronoun or other word of attribution refers to the Father or the Son.
Judith M. Lieu speaks of
"the frequent ambiguity as to whether 'he' (autos) refers to God or to Jesus" (I, II & III John: A Commentary [Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2008], 215).
Terry Griffith notes that
"the use of pronouns in 1 John is often so ambiguous that commentators are frequently divided as to whether Jesus or God is the referent" (Keep Yourselves from Idols: A New Look at 1 John [London: Sheffield Academic, 2002], 75).
According to D. Moody Smith,
"in 1 John there is often a question of which, the Father or the Son, is the antecedent. This is a perennial and difficult problem" ("The Historical Figure of Jesus in 1 John," in J. Ross Wagner, C. Kavin Rowe & A. Katherine Grieb, eds., The Word leaps the Gap: Essays on Scripture and Theology in Honor of Richard B. Hays [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008], 313).
For Georg Strecker,
"the Johannine idea of the unity of the Son with the Father" posited in John 10:30 "can be seen in 1 John in the interchangeability of the personal pronouns" (The Johannine Letters: A Commentary on 1, 2, and 3 John [trans. Linda M. Maloney; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1996], 193 n. 44).
Strecker gives as examples 1 John 1:5, 6, 7, 10; 2:3-6, 25, 27-28; 3:24; 4:13, 19, 21; 5:6, 14, 15, 20. In similar fashion, he writes,
"the author leaves the readers in a state of unclarity about the application of personal pronouns and words of attribution, because he cannot admit any alternative between christology and theology: God is in Christ!" (The Johannine Letters, 82).
The ambiguity of ὁ͂υτος in 1 John 5:20 must be read within this wider tendency in the letter. Perhaps it is intentional, and the writer is seeking to make a point: either the Father or the Son could equally be called "the true God," because they are "one thing" (̔́εν, John 10:30). Given that the letter is primarily concerned with christological heresy (1 John 2:22-24; 4:1-3), the very least we can say is that the writer is not concerned that his readers would fall into heresy if they interpreted "the true God" with reference to Jesus Christ.
Answer
Whichever way one looks at the verse, the straight answer to the question is that the true God and eternal life in this particular verse is the Son of God, Jesus Christ.
Part I - Hermeneutics
A common sensical reading of the verse, applying the proper hermeneutical and exegetical principles, in the proper context, will point to the above one and sure conclusion; as also other similar sentence structures in the New Testament, especially in Johannine writings.
I have tried to scrutinize a considerable number of verses where the Greek word “houtos” is used in the Nominative Masculine Singular (NMS) case in the New Testament (excepting only Mark and Luke), in order to find out a decisive way to settle this matter. (There are around 189 occurrences including Mark and Luke).
This is what I observed:
Finding #1:- Unlike the relative pronoun “hos” and its variants that take the prior noun as the antecedent, “houtos” is a demonstrative pronoun that takes the real subject of the sentence (not the object) as its antecedent in the majority of the cases.
Finding #2:- In very rare cases, “houtos” takes the prior noun as the antecedent.
First, let us take the rare cases, where “houtos” takes the preceding noun as its antecedent.
“But He [real subject] spoke of “Judas Iscariot” [object], Simon's son [object qualified and stressed], for this (houtos) one was about to betray Him, being one of the Twelve” (John 6:71).
In the above, though the real subject is “He”, that is, Jesus, the object is Judas Iscariot qualified and stressed as “Simon’s son” and “houtos” takes Judas/son as the antecedent.
Another example:
“And now [imperative sentence; hence “You” as the real subject is implied] send men to Joppa and call for “Simon” who is surnamed Peter [object qualified and stressed]. This (houtos) one is lodged with one Simon, a tanner” (Acts 10:5-6).
Here again, the object “Simon” is qualified and stressed with “Peter” which is immediately before “this”. So “houtos” takes Simon/Peter as its antecedent.
My point is that when looked at this way, 1 John 5:20 will show that Jesus is the true God:
1 John 5:20:
“And we know that “the Son of God” [the real subject] has come, and He has given to us an understanding that we may know the “true One” and we are in the “true One”, in His Son, Jesus Christ. This (houtos) is the true God and the life everlasting”.
In the above, the Son of God is the real subject of the sentence. But the last object “His Son” is qualified and stressed with “Jesus Christ” and is just prior to “This”. So “houtos” is the Son, Jesus who is the true God and the life everlasting.
Finding #2:- In almost the cases, the real subject of the sentence is the antecedent of “houtos”.
But in the majority cases, the real subject is the real antecedent of the demonstrative pronoun “houtos”. Common sense, context and the sentence structure all make it so. Let us see a few examples:
“But if anyone [real subject] has not “the Spirit of Christ”, this (houtos) one is not His” (Rom 8:9).
In the above, the real subject of the sentence is “anyone” and it is the real antecedent of “houtos”. Though “the Spirit of Christ” is more important than “anyone”, it is not the subject and hence not the antecedent.
“consider the Apostle and Chief Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus [real subject], being faithful to “Him” who appointed Him, as also Moses was in all His house. For this (houtos) One has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses” (Heb 3:3).
Again, in the above sentence Christ Jesus is the real subject and God the Father is the object. Hence “houtos” is Jesus.
“Everyone [real subject] hearing the “word of the kingdom”, and not understanding—the evil one comes, and snatches that which has been sown in his heart; this (houtos) is that sown by the way” (Matt 13:19).
Everyone is the real subject and hence the real antecedent of “houtos”.
Now let us see two more examples from John himself, before looking at 1 John 5:20:
“But the one [real subject] seeking the glory of “the One” who sent Him, this (houtos) One is true, and unrighteousness is not in Him” (John 7:18).
Here, Jesus is saying that “the one”, that is, Jesus is the real subject and hence is the true one though He was sent by God. Here, God the Father is the object and hence is not the antecedent of “houtos”.
“because many deceivers [real subject] entered into the world, who are not confessing “Jesus Christ” [object] coming in flesh; this (houtos) one is he who is leading astray, and the antichrist” 2 John 1:7).
As is clear, it is the deceivers who are antichrist leading astray, not Jesus Christ.
Now let us look at 1 John 5:20:
1 John 5:20:
“And we know that the Son of God [real subject] has come, and He has given to us an understanding that we may know the “true One”, and we are in the “true One”, in “His Son Jesus Christ”. This (houtos) is the true God and the life everlasting”.
It is crystal clear that in the above, the antecedent of “houtos” is the real subject, the Son of God; not the object, the true One.
So, whichever way we approach this verse, whether through the real subject in most cases or through the immediately preceding noun in very rare cases, “Son of God, Jesus Christ” is the real antecedent and hence “true God and Life everlasting”. This is “to the glory of God the Father” (Phil 2:11).
We have one more verse as an example to show that the same person acts as the “real subject” as well as the immediately preceding antecedent:
“There came a man [the real subject] —having been sent from God—whose name is “John”, this (houtos) one came for testimony” (John 1:6-7).
(Man is the real subject and John is the immediately preceding noun to “houtos” and the meaning is inescapable).
Part II - Repetition of Articles
In English grammar, there is a rule regarding the use of articles (a, an, the) as follows: When two nouns or adjectives are joined by “and” preceded by one article, they point to the “same” person or thing. If there are two articles, they point to two persons or things.
For example, “a black and white picture” is one picture that is both black and white. But “a black and a white picture” is in fact two pictures; one black and one white. Similarly, “the Chairman and CEO” is the same person who holds both roles together. But “the Chairman and the CEO” are two persons; one a Chairman and the other a CEO.
In Greek also there is such a rule known famously as the TSKS or Granville Sharp rule. The TSKS is the short for The + Substantive (i.e., noun) + Kai + Substantive (i.e., noun). The TSKS structure, since there is only one definite article in the structure, denotes that both nouns point to the same person.
Some examples:
Gal 1:4 - “the God and Father of us”. Here God and Father are the same Person.
Rom 15:6 & 1 Pet 1:3 – “the God and Father of the Lord”. Here also God and Father are the same Person.
2 Pet 1:11 & 2 Pet 2:20 & 2 Pet 3:18 – “of the Lord of us and Savior, Jesus Christ”. Same Person.
Similarly, in 1 John 5:20, we see the same rule applied to the same Person, proving clearly that “the Life everlasting” and “true God” are the same Person:
“the true God and Life everlasting”.
Now let us see who this everlasting Life is, according to the Scripture:
“And the Life was revealed, and we have seen, and we bear witness, and we announce to you the everlasting Life which was with the Father, and was revealed to us.” (1 John 1:2).
Yes, “the Word of Life” (1 John 1:1) was “in the beginning with God and was God” (John 1:1).
Conclusion
It is inescapable: the true God and Life everlasting in 1 John 5:20 is Jesus Christ.
KJV Matthew 18:4 states,
"Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven."
In the Greek text of Matthew 18:4,
ὅστις οὖν ταπεινώσει ἑαυτὸν ὡς τὸ παιδίον τοῦτο, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ μείζων ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν.
The word οὗτός in Matthew 18:4 does not refer to the child (παιδίον), but to the one who humbles himself like a child. Therefore, we can conjecture that οὗτός in 1 John 5:20 also refers to the ἀληθινόν and ἀληθινῷ, and υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, not specifically to Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ as the identifier of being the Son of God (υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ). In this way, the υἱὸς in the nominative case is the main subject of the verse and is characterized as the true God and eternal life.
In 1 John 5:20, the Greek text is
οἴδαμεν δὲ ὅτι ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ἥκει καὶ δέδωκεν ἡμῖν διάνοιαν, ἵνα γινώσκωμεν τὸν ἀληθινόν, καὶ ἐσμὲν ἐν τῷ ἀληθινῷ, ἐν τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ. οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀληθινὸς θεὸς καὶ ζωὴ αἰώνιος.
By considering the usage of οὗτός in both verses, it becomes evident that it refers to the ἀληθινόν and ἀληθινῷ, as well as υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, highlighting the υἱὸς (son) in the nominative case as the central subject of the verse; in contrast to "ἐν τῷ πονηρῷ" in 1 John 5:19 "within the Evil One". This identification characterizes the Son as the true God and eternal life, emphasizing the divine nature and eternal aspect associated with the Son of God.
This understanding is supported by the following manuscript:
M-02c (Ac) 5th c. corrector, Codex Alexandrinus, a reinked ms. of the entire NT, located in the British Library, classified as an Aland category III text, Byzantine in the Gospels, category I Alex. elsewhere
1 John 5:20
Και οιδαμεν οτι ο υιος του Θ̅Υ̅ ηκει και εδωκ◦ν ημιν διανοιαˉ ινα γεινωσκομεν τον αληθεινον Θ̅Ν̅ και εσμεν εν τω αληθεινω εν τω υιω αυτου Ουτος εστιν ο αληθεινος Θ̅Σ̅ και ζωη αιωνιος
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know the true God, and we are in the true one, in His Son. This is the true God and eternal life.
A lot has already been said, so I will try to keep this as simple as possible;
Before I begin, there will always be the ‘easy’ fall back position, that Jesus is God but came as a human and not God on earth hence xyz, albeit at the same time the same people shout about the miracles Jesus done to show the power only God could have!
There is only One God, the Almighty and referenced often as the father.
John 17:3 Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.
John 20:17 ….. ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” [God and Jesus referenced separately]
God gave him the power
of his own self, can do nothing (John 5:30).
Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying,All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
John 13:3 Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God;
John 17:2 - Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. 2For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him.
Jesus prayed to the father to be saved
Hebrew 5:7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence.
Jesus fears death (Mark 14:36). 36 “Abba,Father,” he said, “everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.”
Clear confirmation God is separate to Jesus
Hebrew 1:9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, Your God, has anointed You above Your companions with the oil of joy.”
Philippians 2:9 Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place and gave Him the name above all names,
Mark 16:19 After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God.
[if you are God you don’t need to be anointed / exalted or sit on the right hand side]
Are the disciples also God
John 17:21 that all of them may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You. May they also be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.
Conclusion:
God cannot exalt God, God does not need to pray to God to be saved - there is a clear different Jesus was sent by God and everything was in Gods hand and Jesus only obeyed and asked for Gods help.
God & Jesus equal: https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/69382/33268
Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. John 17:3
Jesus is praying to the Father here as the context shows.
Whenever we encounter a difficult passage, we seek confirmation from other passages that speak of the same issue.
John has already established the source of eternal life and has already identified the true God. So we can apply that previously unambiguous statement to the passage in 1John 5 also. Removing the need to form faulty conclusions by considering one verse in isolation.
We note the consistent delineation between God (Father) and Lord Jesus throughout the NT.
36Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ Acts 2:35,6
And to remove all opportunity for misunderstanding, we also read,
He has been exalted at the right hand of God Acts 2:33
Certainly there has been much debate about who is the true God in 1John 5:20.
The arguments are inconclusive based on grammar alone, and so we proceed knowing that scripture does not contradict scripture. Here even the same author is providing evidence that Jesus is not the true God; Jesus’ God is the true God and he is the son of the true God.
That Jesus himself said without equivocation, that he has the same God we do, rendering him NOT the true God who is above all - including Jesus!
Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” John 20:17
There is one body and one spirit, just as you also were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all. Eph 4:4-6
Granting that John 1 John 5:20 says that Jesus is the true God and that John 17:3 says that the Father is the only true God, then that would mean that there are two (2) true Gods. Jesus could not be the only true God as the Father is because that contradicts what he said in his prayer in John 17:3. According to Jesus, his and his Father's testimonies equals 2 testimonies as John 8:17-18 shows, Jesus said that the testimony of two men is true I am he that beareth witness of myself and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. Thus, Jesus cannot be the only true God as his God is and be counted as "one" 1 as John 8:17-18 show.
1John 5:20 ASV
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life
John 17:3 ASV
And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, even Jesus Christ
John 8:18-18 ASV
Yea and in your law it is written, that the witness of two men is true I am he that beareth witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.
1 John 5:20, when taken out of context and isolated from the rest of God's word may appear to be saying something that it is not truly saying. If the word "only" in John 17:3 mean solitary, exclusive and no one besides, how can there be another true God besides the Father? This fact was spoken by Jesus while he was praying to his Father which he called his true God. If Jesus is the true God, was he being disingenuous while he was praying and was he praying to himself? If Jesus clearly identified the Father as the only true God, and if one interprets 1John 5:20 to mean that Jesus is the true God, then that would mean that Jesus is the Father himself. But Jesus is not the Father because Jesus himself teaches us that the Father is the ONLY true God and that he (Jesus) is the one whom the Father sent. John 17:3 How then must we correctly interpret 1 John 5:20 to agree with what Jesus himself teaches us in John 17:1-3.
Does 1 John 5:20 really say the Son of God is the true God? Let us examine; The verse has the son of God appearing in the first line and then we have the true God and eternal life at the end of the verse. Who gave his son to save us and give us eternal life? Jesus or his Father/God? Who is the Father of the son (Jesus)? Is Jesus the Father of himself? Is John refuting what he had written in John 17:3? In the first line of 1 John 5:20, let us ask ourselves who has come? It was Jesus, the son of God. The verse also tells us that the reason why the son of God came, to give us understanding so that we may know him that is true. Who was John referring to with the phrase "so that we may know him who is true"?
In John 17:3-6 we find answers to these questions. John 17:6 says I manifested thy name unto the men whom thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them to me; and they have kept thy word. Jesus made known God's name. and in John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, even Jesus Christ. If Jesus is the faithful and true witness and his Father/God bears witness to his statements. then Jesus could not be the true God whom he identifies as his Father. In 1 John 5:11, just 9 verses before the verse in question, we find, And the witness is this, that God gave unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Notice that it is God who is the source of eternal life not Jesus. Jesus own life was caused by his Father, as John 6:57 show.
John 17:6 ASV
I manifested thy name unto the men whom thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them to me; and they have kept thy word
1 John 5:11 ASV
And the witness is this, that God gave unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son
John 6:57 ASV
As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he that eateth me, he also shall live because of me
Some claim this verse identifies Jesus as "the true God." They do this by insisting the antecedent to the word "this" is a reference back to "Jesus Christ" in the previous sentence. Using the same line of reasoning, Jesus would then be the antichrist in 1 John 2:22. Also, in 2 John 1:7 is John saying that Jesus' flesh is the deceiver and the antichrist? The verses cited show that John does not always have the immediate antecedent.
1 John 2:22 ASV
For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
2 John 1:7 ASV
Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son
Jeremiah 10:10 ASV
But Jehovah is the true God; he is the living God, and an everlasting King: at his wrath the earth trembleth, and the nations are not able to abide his indignation.
1 John 5:20 is telling us of the same thing found in John 17:3 and John 17:6. Jesus has come so might know the true one.
One poster commented and offered me "this little fact, apart from John 17:3, there is no place in the NT where the Father is called the "true God". I tried looking for a precedent that shows Jesus as the true God and found none. But I found one in the Old Testament that shows Jehovah is the true God, Jeremiah 10:10. One should ponder then the presence of unambiguous and unequivocal verses showing the Father of Jesus as the only true God and analyze both the absence and /or the semblance of a verse purporting to equivocate the plain and unequivocal statements of who the true God is. John 17:3, Jeremiah 10:10 and the 1John 5:20 show that the Father/Jehovah is the only true God. There is no verse in the bible that plainly says that Jesus is the only true God. Hence, he is not the only true God.
Deuteronomy 4:39 says Know therefore this day, and lay it to thy heart, that Jehovah he is God in heaven above and upon the earth beneath; there is none else.
