Note

 A quick note here.  The purpose of my going through the larger context of 1 John is NOT to suggest that my interpretation is "better" than Dan's.   It's merely to look at Dan's cherry picked proof texts in context and determine if Dan's eisegesis is correct.   It's possible, even likely, that Dan'll try to suggest that the things I've pointed out are not clear "to him" or that his "reason" can't reconcile John's words with his hunches about God.   I'm merely suggesting that we look at what John says in context and compare that to what Dan says about what John said and what he really meant.