JOHN,
EPISTLES
OF
The
chief
ground
of
the
objections
raised
against
the
Johannine
authorship
of
the
First
Epistle
la
the
alleged
presence
of
references
to
heretical
modes
of
thought
which
belong
to
a
later
age.
Docetism,
Gnosticism,
and
even
Montanism
are,
it
is
said,
directly
or
indirectly
rebuked,
and
these
forms
of
error
do
not
belong
to
the
Apostolic
period.
The
reply
is
threefold,
(a)
Those
who
ascribe
the
Epistle
to
John
the
Apostle
do
not
date
it
before
the
last
decade
of
the
1st
cent.,
when
the
ApostoUo
age
was
passing
into
the
sub-Apostolic.
(6)
No
references
to
full-grown
Gnosticism
and
other
errors
as
they
were
known
in
the
middle
of
the
2nd
cent,
can
here
be
found.
But
(c)
it
can
be
shown
from
other
sources
that
the
germs
of
these
heresies,
the
general
tendencies
which
resulted
afterwards
in
fully
developed
systems,
existed
in
the
Church
for
at
least
a
generation
before
the
period
in
question,
and
at
the
time
named
were
both
rife
and
mischievous.
The
points
chiefly
insisted
on
are:
the
doctrine
of
the
Logos;
the
form
of
the
rebuke
given
to
the
antichrists;
the
references
to
'knowledge'
and
'
anointing
'j
the
insistence
upon
the
coming
of
Christ
in
the
flesh,
in
con-demnation
of
Docetic
error;
the
distinction
between
mortal
and
venial
sins
;
and
some
minor
objections.
In
reply,
it
may
be
said
that
none
of
these
is
definite
or
explicit
enough
to
require
a
later
date
than
a.d.
100.
The
Epistle
is
indeed
indirectly
polemic
in
its
character.
While
con-structive
in
tboueht,
the
passing
references
made
in
it
to
opponents
of
the
truth
are
strong
enough
to
make
it
clear
that
the
opposition
was
active
and
dangerous.
But
there
is
nothing
to
show
that
any
of
those
condemned
as
enemies
of
Cnrist
had
more
fuUy
developed
tendencies
than,
for
example,
Cerinthus
is
known
to
have
manifested
in
his
Christology
at
the
end
of
the
Ist
century.
Judaizing
Gnosticism
had
appeared
much
earlier
than
this,
as
is
evidenced
by
the
Epistles
to
the
Colossians
and
the
Pastoral
Epistles.
The
use
of
the
words
'Paraclete'
(20
and
'pro-pitiation'
(2^),
and
the
way
in
which
the
coming
of
Christ
IS
mentioned
in
2^,
have
also
been
brought
forward
as
proofs
of
divergence
from
the
teaching
of
the
Gospel,
on
very
slender
and
unconvincing
grounds.
2.
Place
and
Date.
—
Whilst
very
little
evidence
is
forthcoming
to
enable
us
to
fix
exactly
either
of
these,
the
general
consensus
of
testimony
points
very
decidedly
to
Ephesus
during
the
last
few
years
of
the
1st
century.
Irenseus
(adv.
Hwr.
iii.
1)
testifies
to
the
production
of
the
Gospel
by
St.
John
during
his
residence
in
Asia,
and
the
probability
is
that
the
Epistle
was
written
after
the
Gospel,
and
is,
chronologically
perhaps
the
very
latest
of
the
books
of
the
NT.
If,
as
some
maintain,
it
was
written
before
the
Gospel,
it
caimot
be
placed
much
earlier.
The
determination
of
this
question
is
bound
up
with
the
authorship
and
date
of
the
Apoca^
lypse,
—
a
subject
which
is
discussed
elsewhere.
(See
Revelation
[Book
of]).
3.
Form
and
Destination
—
This
document
has
some
of
the
characteristics
of
a
letter,
and
in
some
respects
it
is
more
hke
a
theological
treatise
or
homiletical
essay.
It
may
best
be
described
as
an
EncycUcal
or
Pastoral
Epistle.
It
was
addressed
to
a
circle
of
readers,
as
is
shown
by
the
words,
'I
write
unto
you,'
'beloved,'
and
'Uttle
children,'
but
it
was
not
restricted
to
any
par-ticular
church,
nor
does
it
contain
any
specific
personal
messages.
The
term
'catholic
epistle'
was
used
from
very
early
times
to
indicate
this
form
of
composition,
but
in
all
probabiUty
the
churches
of
Asia
Minor
were
kept
more
especially
in
view
by
the
writer
when
he
penned
words
which
were
in
many
respects
suitable
for
the
Church
of
Christ
at
large.
A
reference
in
Au-gustine
to
3'
as
taken
from
John's
'Epistle
to
the
Parthians'
has
given
rise
to
much
conjecture,
but
the
title
has
seldom
been
taken
seriously
in
its
literal
mean-ing.
It
is
quite
possible
that
there
is
some
mistake
in
the
text
of
the
passage
(Quoest.
Evang.
ii.
39).
4.
Outline
and
Contents.
—
Whether
Gospel
or
Epistle
was
written
first,
the
relation
between
the
two
is
per-fectly
clear.
In
both
the
Apostle
writes
for
edification,
but
in
the
Gospel
the
foundations
of
Christian
faith
and
doctrine
are
shown
to
he
in
history;
in
the
Epistle
the
JOHN,
EPISTLES
OF
effects
of
belief
are
traced
out
in
practice.
In
both
the
same
great
central
truths
are
exhibited,
in
the
same
form
and
almost
in
the
same
words;
but
in
the
Gospel
they
are
traced
to
their
fount
and
origin;
in
the
Epistle
they
are
followed
out
to
their
only
legitimate
issues
in
the
spirit
and
conduct
of
Christians
in
the
world.
So
far
as
there
is
a
difference
in
the
presentation
of
truth,
it
may
perhaps
be
expressed
in
Bishop
Westcott's
words:
'The
theme
of
the
Epistle
is,
the
Christ
is
Jesus;
the
theme
of
the
Gospel
is,
Jesus
is
the
Christ.'
Or,
as
he
says
in
another
place:
'
The
substance
of
the
Gospel
is
a
commentary
on
the
Epistle:
the
Epistle
is
(so
to
speak)
the
condensed
moral
and
practical
appUcation
of
the
Gospel.'
The
style
is
simple,
but
baffling
in
its
very
simpUcity.
The
sentences
are
easy
for
a
child
to
read,
their
meaning
is
difficult
for
a
wise
man
fully
to
analyze.
So
with
the
sequence
of
thought.
Each
statement
follows
very
naturally
upon
the
preceding,
but
when
the
re-lation
of
paragraphs
is
to
be
explained,
and
the
plan
or
structure
of
the
whole
composition
is
to
be
described,
systematization
becomes
difficult,
if
not
impossible.
Logical
analysis
is
not,
however,
always
the
best
mode
of
exposition,
and
if
the
writer
has
not
consciously
mapped
out
into
exact
subdivisions
the
ground
he
covers,
he
follows
out
to
theirissues
two
or
three
leading
thoughts
which
he
keeps
consistently
in
view
throughout.
The
theme
is
fellowship
with
the
Father
and
the
Son,
reaUzed
in
love
of
the
brethren.
Farrar
divides
the
whole
into
three
sections,
with
the
headings,
'
God
is
Ught,
'
'
God
is
righteous,'
'God
is
love.'
Plummer
reduces
these
to
two,
omitting
the
second.
With
some
such
general
clue
to
guide
him,
the
reader
will
not
go
far
astray
in
interpreting
the
thought
of
the
Epistle,
and
its
outline
might
be
arranged
as
follows:
—
Introduction:
The
life
of
fellowship
that
issues
from
knowledge
of
the
gospel
(1'-').
i.
God
is
Light.
The
believer's
walk
with
God
in
light
(15-ioj-
gin
and
jtg
remedy
(2^-^);
the
life
of
obedience
(2'-"):
fideUty
amidst
defection
(2'-'-^').
ii.
God
is
Riqhteous
Love.
True
sonship
of
God
manifested
in
brotherly
love
(3>-'*).
Brotherhood
in
Christ
a
test
of
allegiance
and
a
ground
of
assurance
(3^^-^).
The
spirits
of
Truth
and
Error
(4i-6).
The
manifestation
of
God
as
Love
the
source
and
inspiration
of
all
loving
service
(4'-^),
The
victory
of
faithin
Love
Incarnate
(5^-^2V
C(mcZim(»i:Thea3suredenjoymentof
Life
Eternal
(5^3-21),
Such
an
outUne
is
not,
however,
a
sufifioient
guide
to
the
contents
of
the
Epistle,
and
a
very
different
arrange-ment
might
be
.justified.
The
writer
does
not,
however,
as
has
been
asserted,
'ramble
without
method,'
nor
is
the
Epistle
a
'
shapeless
mass.
'
The
progress
discernible
in
it
is
not
the
straightforward
march
of
the
logician
who
proceeds
by
ordered
steps
from
premises
to
a
foreseen
conclusion:
it
is
rather
the
ascent
by
spiral
curves
of
the
meditative
thinker.
St.
John
is
here
no
dreamer;
more
practical
instruction
is
not
to
be
found
in
St.
Paul
or
St.
James.
But
his
exhortations
do
not
enter
into
details:
he
is
concerned
with
principles
of
conduct,
the
minute
application
of
which
he
leaves
to
the
individual
conscience.
The
enunciation
of
princi-ples,
however,
is
uncompromising
and
very
searching.
His
standpoint
is
that
of
the
ideal
Christian
life,
not
of
the
effort
to
attain
it.
One
who
is
born
of
God
'
cannot
sin';
the
'love
of
God
is
perfected'
in
the
believer,
and
perfect
love
casts
out
fear.
The
assured
tone
of
the
Epistle
allows
no
room
for
doubt
or
hesitation
or
conflict
,
one
who
is
guided
by
its
teaching
has
no
need
to
pray,
'Help
thou
my
unbeUef.'
The
spirit
of
truth
and
the
spirit
of
error
are
in
sharp
antagonism,
and
the
touchstone
which
distinguishes
them
must
be
resolutely
applied.
The
'world,'
the
'evil
one,'
and
'antichrist'
are
to
be
repelled
absolutely
and
to
the
uttermost;
the
writer
and
those
whom
he
represents
can
say,
'
We
know
that
we
are
of
God,
and
the
whole
world
lieth
in
the
evil
one.'
Bright
Ught
casts
deep
shadows,
and
the
true
Christian
of
this
Epistle
walks
