Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary: 1, 2 & 3 John

Citation preview

1, 2 & 3 John

Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary: 1, 2 & 3 John Publication Staff President & CEO Cecil P. Staton Publisher & Executive Vice President Lex Horton Vice President, Production Keith Gammons Book Editor Leslie Andres Graphic Designers Amy Davis Dave Jones Assistant Editors Rachel Stancil Kelley F. Land

Smyth & Helwys Publishing, Inc. 6316 Peake Road Macon, Georgia 31210-3960 1-800-747-3016 © 2009 by Smyth & Helwys Publishing All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-57312-809-4

SMYTH & HELWYS BIBLE COMMENTARY

1, 2 & 3 John Peter Rhea Jones

PROJECT EDITOR R. SCOTT NASH Mercer University Macon, Georgia

OLD TESTAMENT GENERAL EDITOR SAMUEL E. BALENTINE Union Theological Seminary and Presbyterian School of Christian Education

NEW TESTAMENT GENERAL EDITOR R. ALAN CULPEPPER McAfee School of Theology Mercer University Atlanta, Georgia

Richmond, Virginia AREA OLD TESTAMENT EDITORS MARK E. BIDDLE Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond, Virginia

AREA NEW TESTAMENT EDITORS

KANDY QUEEN-SUTHERLAND Stetson University Deland, Florida

RICHARD B. VINSON Salem College Winston-Salem, North Carolina

PAUL REDDITT Georgetown College Georgetown, Kentucky Baptist Seminary of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky

R. SCOTT NASH Mercer University Macon, Georgia

advance praise This fine commentary seeks to bridge the gap between the insights of biblical scholars and lay readers. Along with interpretative insights, it uses sidebars on contextual, cultural, and homiletic matters to lead readers to connections with the contemporary church. —Robert Kysar Professor Emeritus of Preaching and New Testament Candler School of Theology Emory University

This is the work of a mature scholar, and it shows. Only a writer with a seasoned love of the Bible and biblical scholarship, the eye of a critic, the ear of a student of language, and the heart of a pastor could produce such a rich and multifaceted commentary. Those who take Peter Rhea Jones as their guide to the wonders and mysteries of the Johannine Epistles will find their own skills and faith maturing as they read. —R. Alan Culpepper Dean, McAfee School of Theology Mercer University

Contents ABBREVIATIONS

xi

AUTHOR’S PREFACE

xv

SERIES PREFACE HOW TO USE THIS COMMENTARY

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

xvii xxi

1

Concerning the Word of Life, 1 John 1:1-4

17

The First Movement: God Is Light, 1 John 1:5–2:27

31

Fellowship with God, 1 John 1:5–2:2

35

Keeping the Commandments, 1 John 2:3-6

51

The Condition of the New Commandment, 1 John 2:7-11

61

Pastoral Empowerment, 1 John 2:12-14

71

Love of the World and Love of the Father, 1 John 2:15-17

85

Concerning Those Who Are Trying to Deceive You, 1 John 2:18-27

97

The Middle Movement: God Is Righteous, 1 John 2:28–4:6

109

The Children of God and the Children of the Demonic, 1 John 2:28–3:10

111

Love and Hate in the Community, 1 John 3:11-18

135

The Assurance of Abiding, 1 John 3:19-24

149

Discerning the Spirit of Truth and the Spirit of Perception, 1 John 4:1-6

161

The Third Movement: God Is Love, 1 John 4:7–5:12

175

Exhortation to Love, 1 John 4:7-21

177

The Cruciality of Believing in Jesus Christ, Son of God, 1 John 5:1-12

205

Epilogue: Celebration of Certitude, 1 John 5:13-21

Part Two: Orientation to 2 and 3 John

223

243

2 John

249

3 John

267

BIBLIOGRAPHY

285

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS

295

INDEX OF SIDEBARS AND ILLUSTRATIONS

297

INDEX OF SCRIPTURES

299

INDEX OF TOPICS

305

Dedication In honor of William Edward Hull Once my doctoral professor and then esteemed colleague By turns he was distinguished professor, pastor, provost A splendid preacher An exceptional interpreter of John An academic visionary




ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS COMMENTARY Books of the Old Testament, Apocrypha, and New Testament are generally abbreviated in the Sidebars, parenthetical references, and notes according to the following system. The Old Testament Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1–2 Samuel 1–2 Kings 1–2 Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther Job Psalm (Psalms) Proverbs Ecclesiastes or Qoheleth Song of Solomon or Song of Songs or Canticles Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Ezekiel Daniel Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah

Gen Exod Lev Num Deut Josh Judg Ruth 1–2 Sam 1–2 Kgs 1–2 Chr Ezra Neh Esth Job Ps (Pss) Prov Eccl Qoh Song Song Cant Isa Jer Lam Ezek Dan Hos Joel Amos Obad Jonah Mic

xii

Abbreviations Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi

Nah Hab Zeph Hag Zech Mal

The Apocrypha 1–2 Esdras Tobit Judith Additions to Esther Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus or the Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach Baruch Epistle (or Letter) of Jeremiah Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Daniel and Susanna Daniel, Bel, and the Dragon Prayer of Manasseh 1–4 Maccabees

1–2 Esdr Tob Jdt Add Esth Wis Sir Bar Ep Jer Pr Azar Sus Bel Pr Man 1–4 Macc

The New Testament Matthew Mark Luke John Acts Romans 1–2 Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians 1–2 Thessalonians 1–2 Timothy Titus Philemon Hebrews James 1–2 Peter 1–2–3 John Jude Revelation

Matt Mark Luke John Acts Rom 1–2 Cor Gal Eph Phil Col 1–2 Thess 1–2 Tim Titus Phlm Heb Jas 1–2 Pet 1–2–3 John Jude Rev

Abbreviations Other commonly used abbreviations include: AD

BC

C. c. cf. ch. chs. d. ed. eds. e.g. et al. f./ff. gen. ed. ibid. i.e. LCL lit. n.d. rev. and exp. ed. sg. trans. vol(s). v. vv.

Anno Domini (“in the year of the Lord”) (also commonly referred to as CE = the Common Era) Before Christ (also commonly referred to as BCE = Before the Common Era) century circa (around “that time”) confer (compare) chapter chapters died edition or edited by or editor editors exempli gratia (for example) et alii (and others) and the following one(s) general editor ibidem (in the same place) id est (that is) Loeb Classical Library literally no date revised and expanded edition singular translated by or translator(s) volume(s) verse verses

Selected additional written works cited by abbreviations include the following. A complete listing of abbreviations can be referenced in The SBL Handbook of Style (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1999): AB ABD ACCS ANF ANTC BA BAR CBQ HTR HUCA ICC

Anchor Bible Anchor Bible Dictionary Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture Ante-Nicene Fathers Abingdon New Testament Commentaries Biblical Archaeologist Biblical Archaeology Review Catholic Biblical Quarterly Harvard Theological Review Hebrew Union College Annual International Critical Commentary

xiii

xiv

Abbreviations IDB JBL

Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible Journal of Biblical Literature

JSJ

Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament King James Version Septuagint = Greek Translation of Hebrew Bible Mercer Dictionary of the Bible Masoretic Text New American Standard Bible New English Bible New International Commentary on the New Testament New International Version Novum Testamentum New Revised Standard Version New Testament Studies Orientis graeci inscriptiones selectae Old Testament Library Perspectives in Religious Studies Review and Expositor Revised Standard Version Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers Sacra pagina Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Today’s English Version Word Biblical Commentary

JSNT JSOT KJV LXX MDB MT NASB NEB NICNT NIV NovT NRSV NTS OGIS OTL PRSt RevExp RSV SBLSP SP TDNT TEV WBC

Author’s Preface Now what seems quite a long time ago editor Alan Culpepper approached me about contributing a commentary to the then fresh vision of a new and different kind of commentary. I recall being taken by its creative design. My own journey with the Letters of John actually go back to teenage when I was given a copy of Charles Sheldon’s popular book In His Steps. I was affected by quotations from 1 John at the heading of some chapters. Later as an instructor in beginning Greek I began to note the recurrence of the Greek verb menø and began to underline with red ink the numerous usages in my Greek New Testament. In my dissertation on patternism, with a particular interest in the New Criticism and especially the work of the Shakespearean critic Robert Heilman, I made application to the abidance motif in 1 John and how it functioned. In the categories of Heilman I found in the mystical metaphor abiding “reiteration plus variation” and in 3:23-24 his category of “synthesis scene.” Editing an edition of Review and Expositor I wrote on the structure of 1 John and emerged with three movements starting with God as light, righteous and love, each having ethical implications for the would-be believer. I came to what has become a lasting view that 1 John while polemical remains profoundly pastoral. Later I had the privilege of doing an extended booklet on the Letters based in large part on the seminal work of Robert Law, The Tests of Life, which left a lasting influence. In preparing this commentary over a number of years, I made the decision at the outset to ground my analysis in my own exegesis primarily. My Greek concordance became my constant companion as I evaluated usages first in the letters, then John and beyond. This added duration to my efforts but also a certain satisfaction. I came to see the pivotal role of John 13:34-35 in its influence on the very nature of the community and late in the process was tutored to recognize a familial ecclesiology. Existentially I came out, despite the conflict implied in the Epistles, with an awesome vision of church defined by reciprocal love alongside belief in Jesus. No wonder Wesley liked 1 John so well. I want to express my appreciation to my assistants at McAfee School of Theology. Brian Wright early on xeroxed numerous articles and Jacob Cook with computer expertise helped with final stages.

xvi

Author’s Preface

I owe a special thanks to Megan Devane, who keyed in the basic manuscript. I thank the entire Smyth & Helwys team. I also want to express my appreciation to Ellen Miles Jones, my partner in marriage and ministry.

Peter Rhea Jones March 9, 2009

SERIES PREFACE The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary is a visually stimulating and user-friendly series that is as close to multimedia in print as possible. Written by accomplished scholars with all students of Scripture in mind, the primary goal of the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary is to make available serious, credible biblical scholarship in an accessible and less intimidating format. Far too many Bible commentaries fall short of bridging the gap between the insights of biblical scholars and the needs of students of God’s written word. In an unprecedented way, the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary brings insightful commentary to bear on the lives of contemporary Christians. Using a multimedia format, the volumes employ a stunning array of art, photographs, maps, and drawings to illustrate the truths of the Bible for a visual generation of believers. The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary is built upon the idea that meaningful Bible study can occur when the insights of contemporary biblical scholars blend with sensitivity to the needs of lifelong students of Scripture. Some persons within local faith communities, however, struggle with potentially informative biblical scholarship for several reasons. Oftentimes, such scholarship is cast in technical language easily grasped by other scholars, but not by the general reader. For example, lengthy, technical discussions on every detail of a particular scriptural text can hinder the quest for a clear grasp of the whole. Also, the format for presenting scholarly insights has often been confusing to the general reader, rendering the work less than helpful. Unfortunately, responses to the hurdles of reading extensive commentaries have led some publishers to produce works for a general readership that merely skim the surface of the rich resources of biblical scholarship. This commentary series incorporates works of fine art in an accurate and scholarly manner, yet the format remains “user-friendly.” An important facet is the presentation and explanation of images of art, which interpret the biblical material or illustrate how the biblical material has been understood and interpreted in the past. A visual generation of believers deserves a commentary series that contains not only the all-important textual commentary on Scripture, but images, photographs, maps, works of fine art, and drawings that bring the text to life.

xviii

Series Preface

The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary makes serious, credible biblical scholarship more accessible to a wider audience. Writers and editors alike present information in ways that encourage readers to gain a better understanding of the Bible. The editorial board has worked to develop a format that is useful and usable, informative and pleasing to the eye. Our writers are reputable scholars who participate in the community of faith and sense a calling to communicate the results of their scholarship to their faith community. The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary addresses Christians and the larger church. While both respect for and sensitivity to the needs and contributions of other faith communities are reflected in the work of the series authors, the authors speak primarily to Christians. Thus the reader can note a confessional tone throughout the volumes. No particular “confession of faith” guides the authors, and diverse perspectives are observed in the various volumes. Each writer, though, brings to the biblical text the best scholarly tools available and expresses the results of their studies in commentary and visuals that assist readers seeking a word from the Lord for the church. To accomplish this goal, writers in this series have drawn from numerous streams in the rich tradition of biblical interpretation. The basic focus is the biblical text itself, and considerable attention is given to the wording and structure of texts. Each particular text, however, is also considered in the light of the entire canon of Christian Scriptures. Beyond this, attention is given to the cultural context of the biblical writings. Information from archaeology, ancient history, geography, comparative literature, history of religions, politics, sociology, and even economics is used to illuminate the culture of the people who produced the Bible. In addition, the writers have drawn from the history of interpretation, not only as it is found in traditional commentary on the Bible but also in literature, theater, church history, and the visual arts. Finally, the Commentary on Scripture is joined with Connections to the world of the contemporary church. Here again, the writers draw on scholarship in many fields as well as relevant issues in the popular culture. This wealth of information might easily overwhelm a reader if not presented in a “user-friendly” format. Thus the heavier discussions of detail and the treatments of other helpful topics are presented in special-interest boxes, or Sidebars, clearly connected to the passages under discussion so as not to interrupt the flow of the basic interpretation. The result is a commentary on Scripture that

Series Preface

focuses on the theological significance of a text while also offering the reader a rich array of additional information related to the text and its interpretation. An accompanying CD-ROM offers powerful searching and research tools. The commentary text, Sidebars, and visuals are all reproduced on a CD that is fully indexed and searchable. Pairing a text version with a digital resource is a distinctive feature of the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary. Combining credible biblical scholarship, user-friendly study features, and sensitivity to the needs of a visually oriented generation of believers creates a unique and unprecedented type of commentary series. With insight from many of today’s finest biblical scholars and a stunning visual format, it is our hope that the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary will be a welcome addition to the personal libraries of all students of Scripture. The Editors

xix

HOW TO USE THIS COMMENTARY The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary is written by accomplished biblical scholars with a wide array of readers in mind. Whether engaged in the study of Scripture in a church setting or in a college or seminary classroom, all students of the Bible will find a number of useful features throughout the commentary that are helpful for interpreting the Bible. Basic Design of the Volumes

Each volume features an Introduction to a particular book of the Bible, providing a brief guide to information that is necessary for reading and interpreting the text: the historical setting, literary design, and theological significance. Each Introduction also includes a comprehensive outline of the particular book under study. Each chapter of the commentary investigates the text according to logical divisions in a particular book of the Bible. Sometimes these divisions follow the traditional chapter segmentation, while at other times the textual units consist of sections of chapters or portions of more than one chapter. The divisions reflect the literary structure of a book and offer a guide for selecting passages that are useful in preaching and teaching. An accompanying CD-ROM offers powerful searching and research tools. The commentary text, Sidebars, and visuals are all reproduced on a CD that is fully indexed and searchable. Pairing a text version with a digital resource also allows unprecedented flexibility and freedom for the reader. Carry the text version to locations you most enjoy doing research while knowing that the CD offers a portable alternative for travel from the office, church, classroom, and your home. Commentary and Connections

As each chapter explores a textual unit, the discussion centers around two basic sections: Commentary and Connections. The analysis of a passage, including the details of its language, the history reflected in the text, and the literary forms found in the text, are the main focus

xxii

How to Use This Commentary

of the Commentary section. The primary concern of the Commentary section is to explore the theological issues presented by the Scripture passage. Connections presents potential applications of the insights provided in the Commentary section. The Connections portion of each chapter considers what issues are relevant for teaching and suggests useful methods and resources. Connections also identifies themes suitable for sermon planning and suggests helpful approaches for preaching on the Scripture text. Sidebars

The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary provides a unique hyperlink format that quickly guides the reader to additional insights. Since other more technical or supplementary information is vital for understanding a text and its implications, the volumes feature distinctive Sidebars, or special-interest boxes, that provide a wealth of information on such matters as: • Historical information (such as chronological charts, lists of kings or rulers, maps, descriptions of monetary systems, descriptions of special groups, descriptions of archaeological sites or geographical settings). • Graphic outlines of literary structure (including such items as poetry, chiasm, repetition, epistolary form). • Definition or brief discussions of technical or theological terms and issues. • Insightful quotations that are not integrated into the running text but are relevant to the passage under discussion. • Notes on the history of interpretation (Augustine on the Good Samaritan, Luther on James, Stendahl on Romans, etc.). • Line drawings, photographs, and other illustrations relevant for understanding the historical context or interpretive significance of the text. • Presentation and discussion of works of fine art that have interpreted a Scripture passage.

How to Use This Commentary

Each Sidebar is printed in color and is referenced at the appropriate place in the Commentary or Connections section with a color-coded title that directs the reader to the relevant Sidebar. In addition, helpful icons appear in the Sidebars, which provide the reader with visual cues to the type of material that is explained in each Sidebar. Throughout the commentary, these four distinct hyperlinks provide useful links in an easily recognizable design.

Alpha & Omega Language

This icon identifies the information as a language-based tool that offers further exploration of the Scripture selection. This could include syntactical information, word studies, popular or additional uses of the word(s) in question, additional contexts in which the term appears, and the history of the term’s translation. All nonEnglish terms are transliterated into the appropriate English characters.

Culture/Context

This icon introduces further comment on contextual or cultural details that shed light on the Scripture selection. Describing the place and time to which a Scripture passage refers is often vital to the task of biblical interpretation. Sidebar items introduced with this icon could include geographical, historical, political, social, topographical, or economic information. Here, the reader may find an excerpt of an ancient text or inscription that sheds light on the text. Or one may find a description of some element of ancient religion such as Baalism in Canaan or the Hero cult in the Mystery Religions of the Greco-Roman world.

Interpretation

Sidebars that appear under this icon serve a general interpretive function in terms of both historical and contemporary renderings. Under this heading, the reader might find a selection from classic or contemporary literature that illuminates the Scripture text or a significant quotation from a famous sermon that addresses the passage. Insights are drawn from various sources, including literature, worship, theater, church history, and sociology.

xxiii

xxiv

How to Use This Commentary

Additional Resources Study

Here, the reader finds a convenient list of useful resources for further investigation of the selected Scripture text, including books, journals, websites, special collections, organizations, and societies. Specialized discussions of works not often associated with biblical studies may also appear here. Additional Features

Each volume also includes a basic Bibliography on the biblical book under study. Other bibliographies on selected issues are often included that point the reader to other helpful resources. Notes at the end of each chapter provide full documentation of sources used and contain additional discussions of related matters. Abbreviations used in each volume are explained in a list of abbreviations found after the Table of Contents. Readers of the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary can regularly visit the Internet support site for news, information, updates, and enhancements to the series at www.helwys.com/commentary. Several thorough indexes enable the reader to locate information quickly. These indexes include: • An Index of Sidebars groups content from the special-interest boxes by category (maps, fine art, photographs, drawings, etc.). • An Index of Scriptures lists citations to particular biblical texts. • An Index of Topics lists alphabetically the major subjects, names, topics, and locations referenced or discussed in the volume. • An Index of Modern Authors organizes contemporary authors whose works are cited in the volume.

Part ONE: Orientation to 1 JohN First John is, among other things, the source of influential sayings that has powered the imitation of Christ/God for disciples. It has been the vehicle of forgiveness for those troubled by their sins, served as a primary impetus for “loving one A Sample of Memorable Sayings another,” which is the the durable defi1. The one saying that he or she abides nition of God as love. First John is so in him ought to walk just as that one walked (2:6). aphoristic as to be quotable, memo2. If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just rable, and influential. [A Sample of Memorable Sayings]

to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1:9). 3. God is love (4:8, 16). 4. We know that we have passed out of death into life because we love the brothers and sisters (3:14). 5. In this is love, not that we have loved God but God loved us and sent his Son as an expiatory sacrifice for our sins (4:10). 6. Those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen (4:20, NRSV).

During an historical crisis involving a splintering church, 1 John was drawn up and sent out to forge or solidify fellowship among like-minded congregations in a time when some schismatics (2:19) denied a corporeal Christ. From the outset of the exordium (1:1-3), the author establishes the baseline of the earliest beginnings of Christianity and the defining corroboration of eyewitnesses. From the first to the last sentence, the goal of the Epistle is to be logically and emotionally convincing in a way that reflects the indirect influence of rhetorical argumentation. First John functions in a pastoral-polemical fashion—in that order, the pastoral encompassing the polemical. I came to see the magnitude of the pastoral in exegesis of 2:12 and following. Throughout the Epistle, the writer seeks to empower and encourage his readers with what they already “have” and to call them back to what they heard from the beginning of their faith. Recent scholars have put a considerable premium upon the pastoral.1 Nearly all of the purposes for writing statements pivot toward the pastoral side (2:1, 12, 13, 14, 21; but cf. 2:26), including the classic 1 John 5:13 parallel to John 20:31. Other astute students of 1 John have shown that 1 John does indeed contend with at least seven boasts or claims from a rival version of the faith, testing each of them; however, in these instances and others, 1 John discredits the alternate versions.2 Unearthing these boasts helps us reconstruct the situation that called the Epistle into

2

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

being. The Epistle demonstrates the inconsistencies of opponents who claim much, yet who fail to love fellow believers and who deny the corporeal nature of Christ (4:2). Extended and explicit polemic appears prominently at 2:18-27 and 4:1-6 particularly. First and 2 John may also have been circular letters—that is, intended to be passed from congregation to congregation. We do well to remember that we have only one side of the dispute and not even all of the details of the one side. The alert reader of the Epistle will pay attention not only to the opponents’ claims embedded in the text but will also take note of the epistolary writer’s “counter claims.” More should be made of the claims of and by the Epistle itself. It is a contention here that “the Elder” (a title used explicitly by the John the Evangelist writer of 2 and 3 John, who is assumed to be the author of 1 John as well) more than rivals his rivals. Aggressively and authoritatively (and with no little persuasive appeal), the author stakes out a case of his own. Speaking both individually and apostolically, the writer wastes no space in making a connection “with the beginning” as a kind of unassailable posiImage Not Available tion, including a particular and due to lack of digital rights. privileged relationship with God (1:1-3). Please view the published Hard on the heels of the exordium, he commentary or perform an Internet decisively identifies the content and search using the credit below. divine source of the original message (1:5). One of the most remarkable and reiterated characteristics of the letter relates to forceful assertions of selfevident generalizations (such as “everyone who,” 2:23, 3, 4, 6, 9, 15; 4:7, 8; and “the one” with a participle, 2:4, 9-11, 22, 23; 3:7, 8, 14; 4:6, 16, 18, 20, 21; 5:10, 12). These perspectives, which Saint John the Evangelist and his symbol. Second half of 12th C. Elephant carry considerable implicit authority, ivory, Louvre, Paris, France. (Credit: Jean-Gilles Berizzi. Réunion des Musées probably reflected the Johannine comNationaux / Art Resource, NY) munity and school as well as the Elder individually. Some of these generalizations may have been worked out in community or school discussions, by study of the Gospel of John, and through teaching sermons by the Elder, fragments of which may make up portions of the Epistle. What did the writer have in mind as to what was taught from the beginning, other than the entire Johannine tradition? One might

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

speculate in the light of the Epistle that the writer intended to include eternal life revealed in the Son (1:1-3 explicitly; 5:20), the Son revealed to take away sins (3:5), the necessity of loving one another (3:11 explicitly, 4:7, 11, 21), knowledge that Jesus is the Christ (2:22), possibly the inseparableness of the Son and Father (2:23), teachings about sin (3:5-6), and the necessity of believing in Jesus (3:23), among other things. This body of teaching would be in the closest association with being begotten of God by the Spirit. Furthermore, the warm address “my little children” (2:1) could imply a teacher to pupil relationship (cf. Sir 3:1; 4:1). One also finds an occasional command (2:28; 4:1) or authoritative opinion (2:18-27; 4:14-16). The author deigns to announce what time it is eschatologically (2:8, 17). Furthermore, the Elder is eager to make sturdy claims for the recipients, reflecting an uncommon respect and defense of the genuine believer (2:12-14). He communicates his conviction that the readers are imbued disciples. The religious assets of the recipients alone are more considerable, so the writer implies, than those who insist on reprogramming them. Those born of God are empowered, according to the genius of the Johannine faith, and participate in special community. “Together they deliberate the authenticity of their own religious claims,” Lieu astutely puts it.3 The cumulative effect of this Christian leader’s counter claims allows him to rest his case at the close with a remarkable series of assurances (5:14-20). The modern reader should not fail to add to this side of the ledger the vigorous claims the Elder propounds for his version of the Son of God. Quite routinely the author thinks of Jesus as Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23, 24; 3:8, 23; 4:9, 10; 5:5, 10, 12, 13). He portrays Jesus not only as quite corporeal (4:2), but he projects the Son as offering an atoning sacrifice for sins (2:2; 4:10), scarcely necessary if one has no sin. This strong insistence upon an atoning sacrifice provides counterbalance to the rival interpretation. In a real sense the conflict of alternative versions of the faith became the context of claims, especially concerning knowing and abiding in God. The Elder responds with both reminder and testimony. I am indebted to Robert Law’s classic The Tests of Life, in which he pointed out that 1 John is an “apparatus of tests.”4 He meant that the Epistle contains numerous tests, frequently repeated, that allow one to ascertain the presence of authentic faith. Since then, in a similar vein, Stephen Smalley in 1, 2, 3 John has written of the conditionalities of true faith.5 This fundamental insight immediately enlarges one’s understanding of the Epistle, allowing one to reflect upon its intent as well as its continuing relevance. Law also

3

4

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

An Apparatus of Tests There are nearly thirty tests (27) in the course of the five chapters with many of them including words of assurance to the Christian. One detects four emerging patterns of introduction: (ean) if we may . . . (especially 1:510), (ho legon) the one saying . . . (especially 2:4-11), (pas ho) everyone who . . . (especially 2:23–3:12; 4:7-11), (ho and a participle) the one . . . (especially 4:12–5:12). These introductory formulae usually presage the tests. The expression pas ho is particularly frequent and widespread, another fact abetting the unity of the book.

used meaningful terms like “cyclic” and “spiral” to characterize the development within 1 John. The recurring theme of love works particularly well with the concept of spiral development. [An Apparatus of Tests]

These tests, in my view, discrediting and affirming, tend to march by means of “conditionalities,” “dualities,” “incompatibilities,” “inseparabilities,” and “antitheses.” Conscious awareness of these modes of thinking helps open up the letter. The little word “if ” at the beginning of many clauses, especially the Greek ean, is P. R. Jones, “A Structural Analysis of 1 John,” RevExp 67 (1970): 440. a key for reading 1 John. Students learning Greek by reading 1 John encounter these socalled conditional sentences in every chapter (20 times). These characteristic conditional constructions correlate with the passionate concern for authentic Christianity throughout. The reader runs into such suppositions as “If we say we have fellowship with God,” “If we say that we have no sin,” “If anyone loves the world,” in contexts that potentially challenge. This conditionality, not limited to the “if ” clauses, was not in the abstract but closely related to the threatening circumstances. A certain fairness is reflected; the general truth is applicable to all, not only to the adversaries. These conditionalities represent choice and reflect spiritual reality. Even a cursory reading of 1 John turns up a stunning array of dualities, a reflection of rhetoric and worldview. Early on, the dualities of light and darkness play a dramatic counterpoint (1:5–2:11). We run across truth and falsehood, the spirit of deception and the spirit of truth (cf. John 8:44-46), the children of God and the children of the devil, love and hate. We come upon notions of the antichrist on the one side and the Father and Son on the other. Sinlessness and sinning are pitted against one another in absolutes and then nuanced. On one end of the spectrum stands the world and on the other the Johannine church. Defectors or secessionists (2:19) represent a decided alternative to those faithful to the faith as espoused by the Elder. Of course, such stark contrasts startle the modern reader. The Johannine church, a sect on the fringe of the Roman Empire, by its choice of language implies its own sense of embattlement. Such metaphors may be an intrinsic aspect of polemic. These metaphoric systems seem drawn from the Johannine tradition itself. Many of these dualistic ways of thinking can be found in the Qumran

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

materials, especially the Rule of the Community (1QS). Of course the schism itself engendered a rhetoric of polarities. [Light Versus Darkness] Incompatibilities for our intrepid author include things such as • • • • • • • • • • • •

5

Light Versus Darkness Light: Life, truth, Johannine church, God, children of God Darkness: Death, falsehood, world, devil, children of the devil

love of the world and doing the will of God (2:15) boastful claims not buttressed by life realities (1:6, 8) being born of God and continuing to sin (3:9; 4:18) walking in the light and hating one’s sisters or brothers (2:9) truly belonging to the community versus leaving it (2:19) being unrighteous and being a child of God (3:10) continuing to sin and knowing God (3:6) having material possessions and not helping the destitute (3:17) murdering and eternal life (3:15) loving only with words (3:18) a condemning heart and confidence before God (3:21) being “out of ” God and being “out of ” the world (4:5-6).

Equally striking and important are the numerous inseparabilities, which are also telling in the quest for discerning authentic and inauthentic faith:

John’s First Epistle

• love of God and love of sisters and brothers (4:19-21; 5:10; 3:16-17) • the Son and the Father (1:3; 2:23, cf. 2 John 3, 9) • eternal life and the Son (5:11-12) • being in the light and walking in the light (1:6; 2:9-11) Illustration from Biblia: Das ist die gantze Heilige Schrifft, Alten und Neuen Testaments / teutsch übersetzet von D. Martin Luther, Author: Luther, Martin, 1483–1546. (Credit: Courtesy of the • living in him and walking as Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University) Jesus did (2:6) • obeying the divine comJohn writes his first epistle, as the image of a dove representing the Holy mandments and receiving Spirit and the Latin word for love, “amor,” appear in the sky. what is asked (3:22) • loving one another and believing in the name (3:13) • loving God, being born of God, and knowing God (4:7).

6

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

The pattern of thesis and antithesis is another characteristic of the Epistle.6 The author works out the consequences of each as it were. I count fifteen examples of classic antithetical parallelism (1:6, 7, 8, 9, 10; 2:4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 22, 23; 3:4, 6, 7, 9, 14, 15; 4:2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 16, 18, 20, 21; 5:10, 12). Several of these parallelisms have an additional “capping dicta” that reiterates in artful fashion. Careful readers soon detect a theocentric starting point in 1 John whereas the Gospel of John works from a christocentric base, though both a theology of God and of Christ appear substantially in both. It gradually dawned on me that the writer thought theologically and produced a powerful theological ethic. His move from a primary conception of God and Christ into a life shape for the genuine believer: • God is light (1 John 1:5), Jesus is the light of the world (at least in John 1:4, 5); therefore, a bona fide disciple walks in the light (1:7) • God is righteous (2:29), Jesus Christ is the righteous one (2:1); therefore a Christian does righteously (2:29; 3:7) • God is love (4:8, 16), Christ is the embodiment of the love of God (4:9, 10); therefore a real disciple loves fellow believers (4:11). The author and those he represents thought theologically with a pronounced ethical interest, a major realization that can open the book for the modern student. These three core concepts of God speak to the Jewish thought behind the Epistle Three Senses of Love in 1 John inasmuch as all three are easily documented in the 1. The love of God for the world (4:8, Old Testament. At the same time, all three are 9, 16; cf. John 3:16) definitively embodied in Jesus, most especially the 2. The love of Christ in laying down his life for the world (2:1-2; 3:16) latter two. [Three Senses of Love in 1 John] 3. The love of brothers and sisters by fellow This observation about the theological ethic disciples (3:17; 4:7, 11). leads to a consideration of the structure of the Epistle. Three movements can be detected with a roughly similar pattern, the book being decidedly repetitious. The first movement runs from 1:5 to 2:27, the middle movement begins at 2:28 and closes at 4:6, and the climactic movement starts at 4:7 and ends at 5:12. First John 5:13-21 serves as an epilogue or perhaps a peroratio. The segments concern light, righteousness, and love, respectively, each beginning with a theological assertion about God immediately followed by the ethical and then closing with the christological. Theodor Häring wrote a classic article in which he commended the same divisions as I have mentioned above along with isolation of an alternating ethical and christological thesis found in each

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

segment.7 It is remarkable that more than a century later, John Painter chose to adopt Häring’s outline in his own impressive commentary! Furthermore, while I identified the three movements of 1 John as God is light, righteous, and love originally on my own, Nagl certainly preceded with the same three designations.8 Interestingly and significantly, one also finds concern about loving one another persistently present in all three movements (2:9, 10, 11; 3:10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17; 4:7, 8, 11, 12), not merely in the latter as one might expect, making love a more persistent theme than eternal life (cf. John 6:54-56) and likely reflecting the intensity of acrimony in the community contributing to the schism. First John persuades with remarkable persistence in the rhetorical tradition. As to the three primary species of rhetoric all make some appearance. One certainly observes epideictic in the obvious desire of our writer to encourage, bolster the recipients of the letter to hold firm and deepen commitment to core values of Johannine faith. You do indeed find the oratory of praise and blame. The reader encounters amplifications reminiscent of John 13–17. Furthermore, 1 John tends to be more present oriented than generally is the deliberative. The author does defend the theological understanding of his community and urges a positive verdict as in the judicial form of rhetoric. He exhorts his readers to make a positive judgment on the beginning and to assign it a pivotal significance. As to rhetorical structure one could designate a prescript (1:1-2), a stasis (1:3-4), purpose for the letter (but followed by many others, as 2:1; 5:13); perhaps a propositio (3:23-24), and an exhortatio (5:14-21 and many other texts). One would be hard put to find a narratio in the autobiographical sense (but cf 2:12-14) and any probatio would be found both before and after the proposition. The simpler style of the deliberative rhetoric fits more naturally the structure. One also finds a certain advisory aspect to 1 John and on occasion focus on future benefits (2:28–3:3) as in deliberative. As to types of evidence in the judicial model you can certainly find the experiential (2:12-14, 20, 27; 3:21; 4:13) and historical with the several references “from beginning.” Overt appeal to Old Testament evidence is scarce (3:12). Our author does depend upon logical deductions, argues from testimony (as 1:1-2; 5:6-12) and from realms of origin (3:4-10, 12; 4:5-6), analogies to the experience of Jesus (3:1; 4:17), the authority of confessions of faith, and very basically from the character of God. I would call attention to topics or topoi, especially those with the preposition “concerning” (peri ). We do well to see a mixture of

7

8

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

rhetorical types, to avoid pressing this unique letter into preconceived categories, yet to heighten our sense of its rhetorical flair, including its memorable aphorisms. I consider the best single designation to be the epideictic.9 We will not clutter the commentary itself with constant technical terms from rhetoric but will often describe the rhetoric functionally. As a teacher of first-year students of Greek who were translating 1 John, I stumbled upon “abidance,” which I eventually came to see as a presiding metaphor for the Epistle. I began to underline the verb “abide” or “abide in” and soon counted 24 usages with 3 others implied. Though this important term menø occurs 40 times in John as opposed to only 24 times in 1 John, there are approximately 897 verses in the Gospel but only 105 in 1 John. Hence, “abide” is more dominant in 1 John comparatively, appearing once in every 4 or 5 verses while occurring only once in every 22 verses in the Gospel. Indeed, “abiding” is most prominent in 1 John among all the New Testament books. Abidance functions as a kind of presiding metaphor, and when one adds the themes of fellowship, “being in” (einai en), and numerous usages of “in” (en), it amounts to a major motif characteristic of the Epistle. [The Function of Abiding in 1 John]

Long recognized as summing up primary concerns of the letter, 3:23-24 seems to function as a kind of “synthesis scene” for the The Function of Abiding in 1 John The critical question is whether these usages are fortuitous or significant thematically. The stubborn objective fact of so much repetition demands some account. Orthodoxy and orthopraxy are generally recognized as the two major axes of 1 John. Consider then the conjunction of menø with key passages concerning “orthopraxy.” One who actually abides in God imitates Christ (2:6), loves his brother (2:10; 3:14, 15, 17, and 24; 4:12, 16b), does not sin (3:6, 9) but has the moral efficacy to overcome the Evil One (2:14c), does the will of God (2:17), and stays in fellowship with other Christians (2:19). Now consider the appearance of menø with passages on “orthodoxy.” The true believer who is abiding confesses Jesus as the Son of God (3:24; 4:15), has the received teaching (2:27) and the Spirit (4:13), and can be confident in the Parousia (2:28). Hence it appears that the passages with menø also contain the two major themes. It should be noted that these themes when brought together act to qualify the nature of Johannine mysticism and ethics. It also appears that menø is the nexus for a host of other ideas in 1 John. Abiding is associated with rebirth

(3:9), seeing and knowing (3:6), and eternal life. It is associated with the metaphor of God as Light (2:10), the presence of the Spirit (2:27; 3:24; 4:13), and the Word of God in the believer (2:14c, 24). These represent most of the subsidiary motifs in the letter, and menø is blended with each. The contents of the mystical metaphor of abiding are delineated by “reiteration plus variation.” The believer abides in God (4:13, 15, 16b), and God abides in the believer (4:12, 15, 16b); Christ abides in the believer (3:24), and the believer has personal fellowship with Christ (3:27a, c, 28; 3:6, 24); and the believer abides in the Son and the Father (2:24). The reciprocal quality is evident. P. R. Jones, “A Structural Analysis of I John,” RevExp 67 (1970): 442–43. For extensive studies of abiding see Jürgen Heise, Bleiben: Menein in den Johanneischen Schriften (Tubingen: Mohr, 1967) and E. Malatesta, Interiority and Covenant (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978). Extensive commentaries as those by Brown, Strecker, Schnackenburg, and Painter also provide excellent resource. I have been tutored by Judith Lieu’s work to see the differences between 1 John and John 15 as well as the similarities as relates to the deployment of abiding. The primary meaning of remaining faithful stands out more prominently in 1 John.

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

9

Frank Stagg on Orthopraxy entire Epistle.10 Two commandments emerge, John is concerned to protest more than reminiscent of the two commandments coma wrong Christology. His interest is by no mended by Jesus (Mark 12:33), which insist means speculative. His Christological concern is equally upon christological orthodoxy and for orthopraxy as well as for orthodoxy. He wants orthopraxy of love in action. “Abiding” is the his readers to behave like Jesus (2:6), not just to believe that he is the Christ, that Jesus Christ middle term, the Spirit being the corroborating came in the flesh, and that the Father is known agent. Here essential Johannine Christianity through the Son. He wants his readers to have appears. These two commandments are not elecChrist’s kind of existence, not just creedal cortives but core courses. [Frank Stagg on Orthopraxy] rectness. First John participates in what might be called Frank Stagg, “Orthodoxy and Orthopraxy,” RevExp 67 (1970): 425. a recognizable “Johannine frequency,” the unique style and vocabulary of the Gospel that is distinct from the typical expressions of the Synoptics (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). First John shares vocabulary and even constructions with the Gospel of John, which is probably the founding narrative for Johannine Christianity. Despite the undeniable commonality of spirit, language, and theology, 1 John should be read for its own distinctiveness. “Lieu’s Law,” as I call it, presses the student to read 1 John apart from the Gospel so its own uniqueness may be heard.11 First John enjoys a fetching persona of its own in responding to a church in crisis. Parallels between the Gospel and 1 John are so important, however, that they will be brought forward in this commentary with first priority given to the text of 1 John. Some other introductory issues will be Uniqueness of 1 John in relation to the taken up later in the exegesis itself. [Uniqueness of Gospel of John 1 John in relation to the Gospel of John]

Regular reading of the text will also turn up repeated theological terms such as “knowing,” “believing,” and “loving.” Concerned to provide assurance to true disciples, the pastoral author utilizes formulas that suggest means of knowing for sure. This assured knowledge may issue from the report of eyewitnesses or may be confirmed by spiritual union and being begotten of God. Believing involves confession of Jesus as Christ and as Son come in the flesh (4:2), accepting the Johannine gospel (4:7-11), and trust in Christ’s atoning potential (1:5–2:2). Believing definitely takes on a considerable cognitive dimension. Loving derives from the originating love of God, the laying down of one’s life (3:18; 4:9, 11), and perfecting the love of God through the love of one another. The Johannine gospel emerges

An imminent last hour (2:18), expiation (2:1; 4:10), anointing of believers (2:20, 27), lust (2:16-17), antichrists (2:18, 22; 4:3), lawlessness (3:4), false prophets (4:1), spirit of error (4:6), mortal or non-mortal sins (5:16-17), and ethical considerations (3:4; 4:20) are singled out by Robert Kysar. He speculates that the author may have had to rethink his own theology and shape a Christian ethic in practical terms because of the secessionists’ departure. Earlier on Floyd Filson scored quite a point that the word “therefore” (oun) occurs 200x in John but never in 1 John (but cf. 3 John 8). He also isolated key words of the Gospel never in the Epistles, including the nouns “writing” (12x), “glory” (11x), “Lord” (52x), and “law” (13x), and the verbs “glorify” (22x), “seek” (34x), “judge” (19x), and “send” (32x), arguments considerable enough to throw serious doubt on common authorship. Robert Kysar, “John, Epistles of,” ABD, 3:907. Floyd Filson, “First John: Purpose and Message,” Int 23 (1969): 260.

10

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

Map of Asia Minor

Resources on the Theology of the Epistles Brown, R. E. Community of the Beloved Disciple. New York: Paulist, 1979. Lieu, Judith. The Theology of the Johannine Epistles. Cambridge: University Press, 1991. Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Theology. Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press, 1981. Kümmel, Werner Georg. The Theology of the New Testament. Translated by John E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1973. Ladd, George Eldon. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993. Marshall, I. Howard. New Testament Theology; Many Witnesses, One Gospel. Downers Grove IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 2004. Strecker, Georg. Johannine Letters. Hermeneia. Edited by Harold Attridge, translated by Linda M. Malony. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.

decisively at 4:7-11. The attentive reader should not miss the frequent significance of the simple preposition “in” (en) concerning an internal spirituality or interiority. [Resources on the Theology of the Epistles]

Speaking of attentive reading that rewards in striking fashion, the interpreter who begins to take into account the languages of 1 John, especially the language of the family, will benefit immediately. By “languages” I mean universes of discourse from which our author draws. Extensively and early the writer utilizes the intimate language of the family of the Father and the Son and the children of God.12 These children are begotten by the Father (as 2:29; 3:9; 4:7); his seed abides in the children (3:9). By 1:3 the Elder has spoken of the Father and the Son

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

11

in close connection with the senders of the Epistle and the inviting possibility of others belonging to this virtual family. The most casual reader takes note of the many verses addressing the “children” (2:1,12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21) as virtually synonymous to the “beloved” (2:7; 3:2, 21; 4:1, 7, 11). This central category of children becomes more explicit with the frequent terminology of “the children of God” (3:1, 2, 10; 5:2; cf 4:4). Indeed, these children have known the Father (2:14a), and the father has named them children (2:14) and out of paternal love has called them children (3:1b). The author confirms this status as realized (3:1c). The letter speaks of the teaching of the children (2:27), and the giving Father also imparts the spirit to the believers (3:24; 4:13). This giving Father also imparts the spirit to the believers (3:24; 4:13). Then recall the abidance motif (with the focus on relationship) and the pronounced emphasis upon “brothers” (2:9, 10, 11; 3:10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17; 4:20, 21; 5:16). Throughout the Epistle, the believers’ identity was that of Ephesus brothers and sisters; they were Roman gate, formerly with statues of the Imperial family, connects the expected to relate to one marketplace of Ephesus with the small square on which stands the Celsus another in Christian commuLibrary. Gate erected in 3–4 BC by two freed slaves. nity as such. Then remember the urgent and oft repeated enjoinder to “love one another” (3:11, 23; 4:7, 11, 12; 5:2). At 5:2 loving one another is expressed as loving the children of God. Loving the Father and loving the brothers are linked (as 4:21), quite natural in familial terms. The very sign of the vaunted transfer from death into eternal life is as tangible as loving one another (3:14). Even the widely noted text 3:23 comes down to two family issues: believing in the Son and loving one another. The text 2:12-14 allows some insight into how these early believers were portrayed and likely thought of one another. Mazeus-Mithridates Gate in Ephesus. (Credit: José Luiz / Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0) Here you find not only little

12

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

children, but fathers and young people—not just as routine categorizations but in familial relationships. Now the seriousness of hating in the community with the examples of the sin of Cain (3:12) and the secessationists’ abandonment of the family (2:19) makes even more sense. The sin of Cain was not just murder but fratricide, the absolute antithesis of the loving of one another this community was taught from the beginning (cf. John 13:34-35). Rather, from the perspective of our writer, believers should be willing to die for their brothers and sisters (3:16), not hurt them. Indeed, if one believer sees another in need, she or he should love them by providing for that need (3:17). If a believer notices a fellow believer sinning, he or she should pray for them out of love and family responsibility (5:16). In this special family the Father is experienced as light, righteousness, and love. Indeed the love of this Father precedes the love of the children for their Father (4:10,19). The Father out of this love sent his only Son (4:9), a Son who is unique—not simply one of the children of God, a Son who protects the children (2:18). This extra category of Son is a little awkward within the familial metaphor since there are children as well. Nonetheless, the Father does have commandments (2:3, 4, 7, 8; 3:22-24; 4:21; 5:2-3; cf. 2 John 5, 6) and commands (3:23; cf. 2 John 4) and expects obedience of the children (2:5; 5:2). Religion for this Johannine community involves not just a relationship with God but also a reciprocal love with other believers as a group; the love has both a horizontal and a vertical dimension. While the actual term family admittedly does not occur in our letter, the components of a family, once seen as a whole, are quite obvious. Indeed, the pastoral writer does conceive of the church in terms of the metaphor of family.13 We receive 1 John more dynamically once this gestalt takes shape in our minds. Other significant language appears in 1 John, some of which we have already mentioned. Clearly what might be called stock theological terms are used, some of them prominent in John, words such as conquering (2:13, 14; 4:4), true (2:8, 27; 5:20), and truth (1:6, 8; 2:4, 21; 3:18, 19; 4:6; 5:7), expiation or atoning sacrifice (2:2; 4:10), the blood of Christ (1:7; perhaps 5:6, 7), cleansing and forgiving (1:7, 9; 2: 7, 8, 12), eternal life (as 1:2), day of judgment (4:17), name (3:23; 5:13), advocate (2:1), believe (3:23; 4:1, 16; 5:1, 5, 10, 13) and revelation past (1:1-3, 5; 2:8,10; 4:9), present (2:18; 3:2, 14) and future (2:28; 3:2; 4:17). These universes of discourse derive from various worlds.

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

Close reading turns up other interesting language such as witness (1:1-3, 5; 4:14; 5:7-11), the senses of hearing, seeing, touching (1:1-3, 5; 2:24; 3:6; 4:12,14) often as corroborating witness. Still others include the associated language of beginnings (1:2, 13, 14; 2:7, 13, 24; 3:8, 11) proclamation (1:1, 2, 3, 5; 3:11), knowing (2:3, 4, 11, 13, 18, 20, 21, and others), sin (1:7, 8, 9; 2:1, 12; 3:4-5, 8, 9; 4:10; 5:16, 17) including sins of hate (2:9, 11; 3:13, 15; 4:20) lying (1:4; 2:21, 22, 27), and love of the world (2:15-16). The writer draws also from the language of prayer (3:21-22; 5:14-17) and indulges in the language of perfection (2:5; 4:12, 17,18), all texts related to love. The extent of the language of warning (1:6, 8, 10; 2:4, 15-17, 18-25; 3:6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13-15, 17; 4:1-6, 8, 20; and 5:10, 12) and the language of assurance (1:7, 9; 2:1, 3, 5, 10; 2:12-14, 21, 27, 29; 3:2-3, 7, 9, 19-22; 4:4, 10, 12, 13; 5:19-20) provide definite clues to the intents of the writer and the perceived needs of the recipients. To generalize concerning this topic, follow the flow of 1 John: 1:1-10 2:1-14 2:15-28 2:27–3:18 3:19-24 4:1-5 4:7-21 5:1-5 5:6-12 5:13-20

Language of witness and proclamation Language of writing Language of warning Language of revelation of righteousness Language of confidence Language of warning Language of love Language of faith Language of witness Language of certitude

As to traditional issues of authorship, date, and provenance, church tradition favors the Apostle John, the late first century, and Ephesus in Asia Minor. The Apostle John likely did originate and become the formative influence upon the Johannine tradition. The late date and possibly the location were as tradition had it (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.1.1; Irenaeus, Haer., 3.1.2). The interpreter must take full notice that 1 John not only lacks formal characteristics of a letter but the name of its author is not given. While 1 John stands as anonymous, many scholars accept common authorship of the three Epistles. In any event, 2 and 3 John were written by someone with the title “the Elder.” While the several Epistles could have been penned by John the Apostle (one would expect then the title of an apostle), they were written more likely by someone such as John the Elder, a follower of the Beloved Disciple and possibly

13

14

Part One: Orientation to 1 John

disciple of the Lord (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.3f ). The undeniable commonality of thought and characteristic expression, the definite differences between the Gospel of John and this Epistle, the notable “we” (1:1-3; 4:14f; cf. John 21:24), and the prevailing reconstruction of stages in a developing Johannine tradition14 comport well with the hypothesis of a Johannine School.15 The further speculation of the Elder as a kind of principal of the Johannine School bears consideration16 as does the suggestion that the epistolary author might have had a hand in the final writing of the Farewell Discourse.17 This Johannine Epistle insists that both orthodoxy and orthopraxy have claims upon the Christian, that both belong to a kind of irreducible essence. For the author and those for whom he speaks (including women) Christianity is (1) perseveringly abiding in God and God in the believer, (2) believing in Christ as Son of God, and (3) loving one another in a community of mutual love. For this influential Epistle, the love command (John 13:34) becomes nothing less than the sine qua non of Christian faith. The revelation of God as light, righteousness, and love represents a splendid starting place for understanding God and fashioning an ethic, understandable even to children. The emerging ethic reflects a classic example of how one’s understanding of God influences everything else. The cruciality of confession and forgiveness of sin, the rich spirituality of abidance, and the ecclesiological vision of mutual love make a lasting contribution, as does the insight that the real humanity of Jesus belongs to any adequate Christology, as nineteenth-century Christians again perceived. The life of 1 John lingers. “The wind being in my face, tempering the heat of the sun,” wrote John Wesley, “I had a pleasant ride to Dublin. In the evening I began expounding the deepest part of the Holy Scripture, namely the First Epistle of John . . . . Here are sublimity and simplicity together, the strongest sense and the plainest language.”18

Notes 1. Hans Conzelmann, “Was von Anfang vor,” In Neutestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann (ed. Walther Eltester; BZNW 21), 201; Pheme Perkins, The Johannine Epistles (New Testament Message, vol. 21; Wilmington DE: Michael Glazier, 1979); Ruth B. Edwards, The Johannine Epistles (NT Guides; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996).

Part One: Orientation to 1 John 2. John Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John (SP; ed. Daniel J. Harrington S.J.; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002); Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982). 3. Judith Lieu, The Theology of the Johannine Epistles (Cambridge: University Press, 1991), 26. 4. Robert Law, The Tests of Life (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909). 5. Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC 51; Waco TX: Word Books, 1984). 6. See P. R. Jones, “A Structural Analysis of 1 John,” RevExp 67 (Fall 1970): 440–41; and especially Thomas Johnson, The Antitheses of the Elder, Ph.D. diss., Duke University, Ann Arbor, University Microfilms, 1979. 7. Theodor Häring, “Gedankengang und Grundgedanke des ersten Johannesbriefs,” in Theologische Abhandlungen Carl von Weizacker . . . gewidmet (Freuburg: J. C. B. Mohr, 1892), 171–200. 8. E. Nagl, “Die Gliederung des ersten Johannesbriefes,” Biblische Zeitschrift 16 (1922–1924): 77–92. 9. See George A. Kennedy, New Testament Interpretation through Rhetorical Criticism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1984); Colin G. Cruse, The Letters of John (The Pillar New Testament Commentary; ed. D. A. Carson; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001); and Clifton Black, The Rhetoric of the Gospel: Theological Artistry in the Gospels and Acts (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2001). 10. A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948). 11. Of course, I am being informal in making up the term “Lieu’s Law.” Lieu, in her new commentary, goes so far as to assert that “1 John nowhere appeals to or assumes knowledge of the Gospel, and indeed that the latter seems unlikely.” See I, II & III John: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2008), 8. I am not able to hold such a view for these writings with such remarkably similar style and theology, though I concur with her insistence on the priority of the text at hand. Neither can I agree with the late Raymond Brown, who in his comment at 1:5 concerning the Greek angelia, goes so far as to say that “when the Johannine believers spoke about the contents of what we call GJohn, they may have referred to it as the angelia.” Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; ed. William Foxwell Albright and David Noel Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1982), 194. Of course, this is possible, and the word angelia probably referred to the Johannine gospel as it were, but it is a reach to identify it with the Gospel of John. It is worthy to note how removed Lieu’s position is from that of the long dominant views of Brown. I wonder if both are influenced by their starting points, 2 and 3 John in the one instance and John in the other. Future Johannine scholarship should be interesting! 12. Klaus Scholtissek, ”Kinder Gottes und Freunde Jesu,” in Ekklesiologie des Neuen Testaments: für Karl Kertelge (ed. Rainer Kampling and Thomas Söding; Freiburg: Herder, 1996), 184–211. This article stimulated my thinking and caused me to reread and rethink the Epistle, not only regarding the language of family but other language as well. 13. Ibid., 185. 14. For an impressive if theoretical reconstruction of stages of the Johannine tradition, see Raymond Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple (New York: Paulist, 1979), 166–67. Early on I read the careful arguments of C. H. Dodd against common

15

16

Part One: Orientation to 1 John authorship of the Gospel and Epistles and the substantial rejoinder of W. F. Howard supporting common authorship. The commonalities are admittedly extensive in both word choice and ideas, but the absence of major words from John in 1 John, such as glory, and the absence of little words in 1 John give cause for pause. While the writer of 1 John most likely wrote 2 John, and the writer of 2 John likely wrote 3 John as well (and hence the three Epistles came from a single hand), it is less likely that this author produced the preponderance of the Gospel. See C. H. Dodd, “The First Epistle of John and the Fourth Gospel,” Bulletin of John Rylands Library 21 (1937): 129–56; also W. F. Howard, “The Common Authorship of the Johannine Gospel and Epistle,” JTS 48 (1947): 12–25. This exchange remains classic. 15. See the influential study by Alan Culpepper, The Johannine School (Missoula MT: Scholars, 1975), which traces the history of the idea, does an in-depth investigation of parallel ancient schools, and commends a reconstruction. See also his The Gospel and Letters of John (Nashville: Abingdon, 1998), and, on the Epistles alone, I John, 2 John, 3 John (Atlanta: John Knox, 1985); and Craig Bubeck, ed., John, Hebrews–Revelation (Eastbourne, England: Cook, 2005), 165–98. On Johannine traditions see Culpepper, John, the Son of Zebedee (Studies on Personalities of the New Testament; Columbia: University of South Carolina, 1994), 89–95. 16. Martin Hengel, The Johannine Question (Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990), 109–135. Hengel is likely correct as well that the Gospel had a southern Palestinian origin but was not written in a Jewish milieu. Hengel also thinks that the Koine Greek in which it is written contains a Semitic flavor, not translation Greek yet simple (110). The same holds for the Greek of 1 John. 17. Fernando F. Segovia, The Farewell of the Word: The Johannine Call to Abide (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991). 18. Wesley entered these words in his journal for 18 July 1765. See The Works of John Wesley, in Journals and Diaries (Nashville: Abingdon, 1993), 6:13.

Concerning the Word of Life 1 John 1:1-4

COMMENTARY Comparisons with John 1:1-18

While the rhetorical force of the opening lines may not compare with the elegance of the celebrated prologue of the Gospel of John, the first four verses of 1 John succeed in making quite an impact in accumulating fashion. These opening lines (beginnings usually are important in a literary work) present an important christological claim. The lines also allow the reader to overhear something of the typical Johannine missionary preaching. These verses virtually cry out for comparison with John 1:1-18. First of all, the introductory paragraph of the Epistle is too reminiscent or parallel to the prologue of John to be accidental. Indeed, some suspect conscious imitation.1 The reader notes a movement or thought sequence from word to life to light in both, though neither light nor darkness is explicit in 1 John until v. 5. Observe the immediate mention of “beginning” in both prologues and the centrality of the Son. Both are christocentric, though the Epistle will devise theocentric starting points. Father and Son are prominent in both. A notable bearing witness appears in both, primarily featured by the Baptizer in John (vv. 6-9) and the mysterious “we” in the Epistle (and John 1:14b). Indeed, both writings by their nature bear witness and invite faith. Both use the language of “beholding” (theaomai in v. 14b in John and v. 1d in 1 John). Such commonalities imply the value of interpreting John by John just as we compare parallel passages in different Pauline Epistles. These commonalities allow us to seat the preface of the Epistle in the matrix of Johannine theology, perhaps a Johannine school of similar conceptuality. Secondly, however, the opening lines of the Epistle are custom fit, crafted for the crisis. Closer comparative reading of the two prologues uncovers telling differences that bear upon each one’s distinctive

18

1 John 1:1-4

intent. Each must be read on its own. The early word “beginning” in the Epistle (1:1a) can be read as referring to the time of the ministry of Jesus, for example, and one is at least suspicious whether “word” carries the exalted meaning of the Logos as in John 1:1 or implies more message or gospel.2 While the famed Advent claim “The Word became flesh” stands pivotally present in John (1:14a), the issue is more the Life revealed as well as incarnated in the Epistle (1:2a). The differences are actually quite helpful in discerning the particular design of the exordium of the Epistle for all its echoes or conscious imitation of the Gospel. The Epistle says nothing overtly either about a christological role in creation or about the glory of Jesus. We read nothing of grace and truth or Moses and the Law, issues far more relevant for the probable situation of painful separation from Judaism during the development of John, but not one of the issues that called forth the Epistle. We do find fellowship concerns in the first paragraph (1 John 1:3-4), most revealing considering the schism in the church (2:19). The most obvious characteristic of the Epistle’s introduction, which manages to become a monotonous drumbeat within the compass of three verses, centers on hearing and seeing this Life manifested in a person. The Epistle’s agenda, dictated by an alarming diminution of the real humanity of Jesus, often referred to as an early form of docetism (appearing), called for an unambiguous confession of Jesus really come in flesh (4:2). Interestingly, the ironies of the Gospel’s overture are missing in the Epistle, including Jesus’ own people not receiving him (1:11), but 1 John wastes no time in exposing those claiming to be true believers yet walking in darkness (1:6). The epistolary writer does not address the issue of rejection like John (vv. 10-11) but is passionately concerned about acceptance and inclusion (vv. 3-4). So comparison to the prologue of John is telling. Similarly, further insight into the particular message of the first paragraph of 1 John can be derived from the seemingly unpromising analysis of its tangled syntax in the original Greek, less apparent in modern translations. The opening lines cry out for rearrangement. Verse 1 begins with a series of parallel constructions (relative clauses) and closes with a prepositional phrase (“concerning the word of life”) that may be the theme, but the first verse ends without a primary verb in sight, only to be followed by an interruption or parenthesis (v. 2) still with no period. Verse 3 resumes the direction of v. 1, picking up again with a relative clause. Much repetition occurs, especially “hearing” and “seeing”

1 John 1:1-4

(vv. 1ab, 2b, 3a) and “announce” or “declare” or “proclaim” (vv. 2b, 3b). Most students take the primary verb “proclaim” or “declare” from v. 3 and supply it earlier. The NRSV boldly adds a third “declare” at the beginning, making it far smoother and clearer but more removed from the literal Greek: “We declare to you what was from the beginning, what we have heard . . . .” The NIV retains the rhetorical flourish of the opening relative clauses of v. 1 but does supply its own “this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.” Several speculations may be tendered in the form of questions for the reader. Does the opening “declare” in the NRSV give the Epistle, or at least the preface, a more manifesto feel? Does the “proclaim” of the NIV imply sermon for 1 John? Could the seemingly tangled grammar of the epistolary prologue suggest dictation? Were a translation to supply “witness” as well as a primary verb, would it capture even more of the sense of 1:1-3 (cf. John 8:14, 18)? First John 1:1-4 may be categorized informatively as a prologue or incipit, but the rhetorical term exordium, which like a prologue introduces an extended poem, may be used to begin a speech. (Aristotle makes elaborate remarks about various exordia in his classic Art of Rhetoric 3.13.3-14.12.) A proper exordium must declare purpose and announce crucial themes. Among such themes one finds “from the beginning,” tangibility of the Son, eternal life, revelation, fellowship, the Father and the Son as inseparables. Among purposes one finds the forging or firming of a fellowship at 1:3, appealing to self-interest. The writer utilizes the language of eyewitness testimony (cf. John 1:33) and spiritual relationships. Exegetical Observations

The first words refer to “what was from beginning” (v. 1a). Coming as they do at the outset, they seem to echo Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1. Many superb scholars do in fact interpret them as portraying the absolute beginning.3 For Schnackenburg, “from the beginning” does not refer to the doctrine preached from the beginning but “to the personal bearer of the archetypal being (‘him who is from the beginning,’ 2:13-14)” as is supported by “the word of life.”4 Raymond Brown, however, made a strong and convincing case for the reference being to “the person, words, and deeds of Jesus” in company with his disciples after his baptism,5 a view held by this commentator as well because the contextual proximity and relative construction parallel to “what we have heard . . . seen . . .”suggest the same event, and due to the use of “from,” typical in 1 John,

19

20

1 John 1:1-4

Beginnings Note that in Johannine thought, great interest centers on beginnings, a pivotal concept, whether it has to do with a pre-creational existence (John 1:1; cf. Heb 1:10), the historical ministry of Jesus (John 8:25; 15:27; 16:4; cf. Acts 1:2122; Phil 4:15), or the outset of discipleship (1 John 2:7, 24; 3:11; 2 John 5; 6). The author’s appeal to authority depends particularly upon the teaching (commandments) of Jesus and consistency with the instruction given to the recipients. He refers not to the beginning of time but to the beginning of the community.

rather than “in beginning” as John 1:1. While the grandeur of the first clause of the Gospel is undeniable, the epistolary writer has nothing less important in mind in his first clause than the beginning of Christianity. It will certainly be recognized, however, from v. 2 and its reference to eternal life and being “with the Father” that our author intends preexistence and transcendent significance. Admittedly, it is a hard call: one could take “was” at v. 1a as primordial, then interpret “and” at the beginning of v. 2 as stage two, temporally, to the precreational beginnings (1:1a). [Beginnings] The rolling relative clauses (v. 1) involving hearing, seeing, and touching have in common firsthand sensory perception that corroborates the physicality of Jesus. The audibility, visibility, and tangibility are established early on as an anti-gnostic or at least anti-docetic antidote (4:2-3; 2 John 7). And observe how the tangibility is heightened. The writer, not content to claim seeing and touching as signs of empirical reality, accentuates the seeing as “with our own eyes” and the touching as “with our own hands.” The author goes out of the way to stress the historical, spatio-temporal fleshly existence of Jesus as in the account of his death in John 19:34-35. Indeed, the Gospel includes an important christological model of hearing and seeing (3:31-32). The One from heaven testifies to what he has seen and heard from the Father (8:26, 28). The disciples then hear what Jesus says, “the words of God” (3:34; 8:47), thus having the authority of what comes ultimately from the Father. Also, pertinently Peter says to Jesus, “You have the words of eternal life” (6:68). In 1 John the message “heard” includes the ethical, especially the commandment to love one another, and puts a premium upon the teaching of Jesus. Both the words and person of Jesus are at issue in this crisis within the Johannine church (1 John 3:23). [Resurrection Accounts in the Gospel] The other word used for seeing in v. 1, translated “looked at” (NRSV, NIV), might involve the sight of faith. It is an elevated word of seeing that can suggest penetrating beyond what was accessible to outward vision, possibly suggesting a discernment of the inward glory of Jesus or the aspect of revelation. [Particular Verb of Seeing]

This opening verse and the following two verses give the reader an almost inescapable sense of an eyewitness claim, especially “our eyes” and “our hands.” It reads so much like a witness announcement that the hypothesis has been advanced that 1:1-5 was an

1 John 1:1-4 Resurrection Accounts in the Gospel While the resurrection is apparently not at issue in 1 John, it appears more than likely that v. 1 includes in its scope appearances of the risen Christ as recounted in John. For example, the Beloved Disciple saw the linen wrappings lying in the tomb (20:5) and, entering, saw and believed (20:8), forging a vital connection between seeing and believing. Mary Magdalene looked into the tomb (20:11), encountered the risen Lord through hearing and perhaps touching, announced to the disciples that she had seen the Lord (same verbal form), and reported what she had heard him say (20:18). The Lord would show the disciples both his hands and his side, and they would report that they saw the Lord (20:20, 24). The resistance of Thomas to Easter belief, refusing to believe unless he saw the imprint of the nails in his hands (20:25), also tends to stress the reality of Jesus. His realization of the continuity between the historical Jesus and the resurrected Lord came through seeing and touching (20:27). Could it be that 1 John 1:1-4 is more related to the resurrection than normally thought? Could testimony about the cross also be conveyed through the Beloved Disciple (John 19:25-27, 33-34)? In this famous painting by Holman Hunt, Christ stands at a door holding a lantern that illuminates the darkness, offering light to those on the inside who may open the door and enjoy his fellowship (cf. 1 Jn 1:3-4). William Holman Hunt (1827–1910). The Light of the World. Keble College, Oxford, Great Britain. [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PD-old-100)]

original witness report and the rest of the Epistle an exposition.6 At first impression, the mysterious “we” in the prologue certainly calls up the idea of actual eyewitnesses.7 Does the author speak in the name of the body of disciples, possibly as the last surviving representative thus asserting apostolic authority,8 or is it a literary or editorial “we,”9 or is the author associating the elders of Ephesus with himself?10 Is it somehow the witness of the Beloved Disciple11 or his disciples, tradition bearers who preserve his witness, possibly in a Johannine school?12 Does it mean “we, the Johannine community” (John 1:14) since “we” later in the Epistle includes author and readers?13 Is it the church in solidarity with eyewitnesses?14 Certainty cannot be enjoyed here, nor for that matter does the same “we” occur throughout the Epistle. It does indeed often include the author and the readers, the associative usage, but scarcely in the case of the preface in the light of v. 3. Here at v. 3 it seems most likely to be a matter of augmented apostolic authority

21

22

1 John 1:1-4

similar to 4:14 and John 1:14. We could be hearing the report of the Beloved Disciple through his circle. We could be reading the report of the Elder John, a second John in Ephesus, which could fit a number of these groupings. And we cannot dogmatically exclude the disciple John as the writer. I suspect something like a Johannine school stands in the background, perhaps with the C. H. Peisker, “theaomai,” EDNT, 2:136. Elder John as the primary spokesperson. Whatever the exact identity, the haunting impression of an actual eyewitness report is not easily dismissed! Importantly, in John 15:27 the apostles are described as eyewitnesses from the beginning. They are eyewitnesses and advocates. The text purports to reflect the apostolic voice and in effect credentializes (cf. Gal 1–2), desirous that this witness be received (4:6). [Import of “concerning the Particular Verb of Seeing The verb theaomai connotes “intensive, thorough, lingering, astonished, reflective, comprehending observation,” and in passages like John 1:14 and 1 John 1:1 can suggest going “beyond reflective observation to an awareness of matters that are not perceptible to the senses . . . .” We have here not merely sight but insight. We could have the intuitive faith at the tomb (John 20:8) and in the boat (21:7).

word of life”] Import of “concerning the word of life” The prepositional phrase “concerning the word of life” can be interpreted as a life-giving message (cf. John 5:24; 1 John 3:14; Phil 2:16), or as the preexistent Logos (cf. John 1:1), or both. To put it another way, should “word” (logos) be capitalized? C. H. Dodd convincingly argued for the rendering of “gospel” (John 6:68; 2 Tim 1:10; Acts 5:20), “the life-giving Word of God which came to men through Christ and is embodied in the Gospel.” Brown pointed out how in the following verse “the theme of ‘life’ and not the theme of ‘word’ is developed.” Verse 5 with its “message” appears to be decisive along with other typical texts (1:10; 2:5, 7, 14). This prepositional phrase beginning “concerning” signals here and elsewhere the topic of one of the topoi. “Life,” however, does not stand merely for something you hear but for someone you could see and touch and hear, a personification. Eternal life and the Son are inseparable in 1 John (cf. 5:11-12). C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932), 5. Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982), 164.

Verse 2, a kind of parenthetical interruption, functions effectively as an explanation or epexegesis of “concerning the word of life.” The author makes an announcement of a momentous event: the life “appeared” (NIV) or “was revealed” (NRSV). The manifestation of the preexisting Life was a momentous event. [Greek Meaning] Jesus, his name so far withheld, functions not only as the object of the proclamation but the very embodiment of divine life (1:1). In his origin, ministry, personal teaching, and his resurrected life, the very character of eternal life, a prevailing theme in both the Gospel and the Epistle, emerged tangibly. The famous words of the Johannine Christ graphically illustrate this: “I am the resurrection and the life; the one believing in me, even though he or she may die, will live” (John 11:25). One might be inclined on the basis of v. 2 to name 1 John “The Epistle of Eternal Life,” particularly in the light of 5:13. The introductory sentences show how and in whom that life was uniquely manifested, and the rest of the Epistle shows how and in whom the presence of that life in professing believers may be discerned. Verse 2 makes two primary claims regarding the Life, preexistence with the Father and a verified manifestation. Eternal life, for the Epistle, resides in

1 John 1:1-4

23

the Son but is given to believers. Some see Greek Meaning eternal life as the primary theme.15 The Greek word in the passive can mean “appear” or “become concerned While reiterating the claims of v. 1 and folprecisely with concrete appearance and its value lowing the interruption of v. 2, v. 3 advances to for knowledge in emphasizing God’s salvific the purpose of the writing with the use of “so activity . . . .” that” (hina). Both what the apostles had seen P. G. Mueller, “phaneroo,” EDNT 3:414. and heard are announced to the recipients, the past event expressed in the perfect tense shows that it continues to have results. It may seem inappropriately evangelistic as a reflection of the typical preaching from the community (and cf. John 17:26). Of course, the writer wants the readers to firm up their alliance. The revelation (vv. 1-2) demands declaration, both in teaching and personal activity, so that the recipients might have fellowship with those who affirm the original revelation of eternal life. The marked eagerness to proclaim, as though “we cannot keep from speaking about what we have heard and seen” (Acts 4:20), indicates that the faithful commitment of the recipients was not a foregone conclusion but the outcome poised delicately in the balance. The author claims a privileged position as spokesperson for those to whom the manifestation was made (v. 2) and for those who have direct fellowship with Father and Son (v. 3). The witnesses function as a vital intermediate link. The Epistle itself functions by reaching out through its written witness and proclamation, not inviting the readers to become Christians but to remain faithful followers (cf. John 15:4). Indeed, the modern reader “witnesses the Christian community struggling to rescue itself from an annihilation resulting from a schismatic movement.”16 [Mutual Indwelling] The final verse of the exordium expresses a surprising purpose for writing: that our joy may be completed (perfect passive subjunctive). This satisfying but unselfish attitude is of Mutual Indwelling one who has no greater joy than reports that his The fellowship enjoyed with God, both children continue to walk in the truth (2 John 4; with the Father and the Son, calls to mind mutual indwelling in John 15. Bultmann had 3 John 3-4). This expression, the perfection or it right when he observed that while the word completion of joy in relational terms, also “fellowship” (koinonia) appears only in passing (1 appears in the Gospel (3:29; 15:11; 17:13), a John 1:3, 6, 7) the motif appears throughout the complete joy Jesus himself experienced in felbook wherever it speaks of being in God (2:5; lowship with the Father. Some manuscripts say 5:20) or abiding in God (2:6, 24), and in the recip“your joy” rather than “our joy,” probably influrocal formula, we are in God and he is in us (3:24; 4:13). enced by John 16:24. The author writes with a Rudolf Bultmann, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles certain implicit confidence that the Epistle (trans. Philip O’Hara; ed. Robert Funk; Philadelphia: Fortress, will succeed, the recipients will respond. 1973), 13. However, behind the scenes we should envision

24

1 John 1:1-4

a competition of two rival groups who send out representatives vying for support. The Elder and the community struggle with an unrequited sense of unease and hope for a good outcome. “These things” (tauta) may well refer to the content of the entire letter. The passion of the writer lies with his Epistle meeting with acceptance and his readers being connected with the authentic apostolic tradition. The author’s joy will be lessened if the readers do not share it. For 1 John, (1) the Christian message is grounded in the apostolic witness of those who were with Jesus, (2) the Son was a real historical figure with an authoritative message, (3) fellowship characterizes this Johannine religion, and (4) faith depends upon revelation.

CONNECTIONS Fellowship

The word koinonia, which includes partnership, belongs in the common language of a growing number of laity. We could say it all started in Galilee when Jesus appointed twelve that they might be with him (Mark 3:14). He chose a company of friends who held everything in common. This original group that Jesus forged into a fellowship was comprised of opposites both in temperament, such as John and Peter, and in political views, such as those held by Simon the Zealot and Matthew the tax collector. [The Upper Room and the Book of Acts] [The Fellowship at Antioch]

Many overcome the loneliness of an impersonal city through acceptance in a church fellowship, many find their best friends in a common ministry or through a Sunday school class, and many find a redemptive fellowship in a warm and loving church. Religion as fellowship stands out in the first chapter of 1 John as essential, central, and meaningfully relevant. [Koinonia a Long Way from Home] Preaching as Witness and Announcement

The opening overture of 1 John can be given an assortment of labels, such as prologue or preface or incipit or exordium, but it might also be named a witness announcement in the light of its content and spirit, leading to the second “connection.” The first paragraph provides an inspiring model for a homiletic and a personal witness. In a sermon emphasizing the experience of the

1 John 1:1-4

Christian religion, Gerald Kennedy centered on 1 John: “I think sometimes that the spirit of the New Testament is best expressed in the words of 1 John 1:1 . . . .”17 Take note of two important dimensions of authentic preaching: as announcement or declaration, and as witness. For 1 John this momentous announcement involves a great offer of eternal life, a Life seen and heard and touched. Jesus releases a lifegiving message or gospel, a word that can lead to a great rite of passage from death to a life of loving one another (3:24). In the spirit of John, “to as many as receive him, he gave to them authority to become children of God, to the ones who believe in his name” (1:12), and again, “out of his abundance we have all received one grace after another” (1:16). [The Preacher as Herald] Here we find the influential model of heralds of God, a style pursued by

25

The Upper Room and the Book of Acts A. M. Hunter called special attention to the fateful April evening in the upper room when such an exceptional fellowship was jeopardized by impending death, so that to all human reasoning, an abrupt and tragic end appeared inevitable. The Chief Friend, however, did not think so and deliberately provided for their future fellowship. Fellowship pops up in the book of Acts: “And they continued steadfast . . . in the fellowship” (2:42). Jesus also promised those on mission, “I am with you always until the end of the age” (Matt 28:20). Even death cannot sever the fellowship. When Christians fall asleep “having been partners ‘in Christ’ on earth, they are but going to be ‘with Christ’ in his Father’s house with its many rooms (John 14:2).”

The Fellowship at Antioch Michael Green draws attention to the remarkable fellowship present in the church at Antioch. The church fellowship included both Jews and Gentiles not only side by side but also eating at the same table. These early Christians displayed generosity in supporting the poor in the church at Jerusalem and developed a missionary vision sufficient to send Barnabas and Paul on their first journey. The membership included an aristocrat like Manaen, an exPharisee like Paul, a Levite and landowner like Barnabas, a Hellenistic Jew from Cyrene like Lucius, and an African like Simeon. Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 180–81.

A. M. Hunter, Probing the New Testament (Richmond: John Knox, 1972), 143.

Master of the Housebook (1475-1500). The Last Supper. Gemäldegalerie, Berlin, Germany.[Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PD-old-100)].

Antioch from south (Credit: Todd Bolen/BiblePlaces.com)

26

1 John 1:1-4

Koinonia a Long Way from Home Cindy Swearingen shared her experience of koinonia on a church retreat: We had gathered for worship at the end of a weekend retreat together . . . . My friends knew that I had received word early that evening that my mother lay critically ill, and that it was a difficult time for me . . . . Near the end of the worship, a very sensitive and rather shy young man with a guitar introduced a hymn called “Free at Last.” Although it was more timely than he knew, somehow he must have felt the need to allow for my feelings, for he turned to me and said, “That might not be the best song for right now, but maybe I can sing another song for you later.” I thanked him with a tight throat and listened hard as the music filtered softly around the room . . . . After the service I was enfolded by various expressions of caring, some with words, some with eyes, and some

with warm arms. Later in the evening, I realized I was being sung to once again. That same young man with a guitar was indeed playing “another song.” At first I smiled and continued visiting, but then I really heard what he was playing—“Sometimes I feel like a motherless child, a long way from home.” How could he have known by that dawn I would be motherless and seven hundred miles from my home? As I flew home to say good-by to mother and to be with my father, I carried with me the affirmation and love of a roomful of beautiful people, and through the pain of those next few days came the confidence I never thought I’d have . . . to say to those supporting me . . . “It’s all right; it’s OK” . . . and to myself, “This is the day the Lord has made. Let us be glad and rejoice in it.” Reported in Robert Raines, To Kiss the Joy (Waco: Word, 1973), 132–33.

Billy Graham to great effect. Our text, however, invites a second, interrelated option. Allison Trites picked up on the insight of E. G. Selwyn that the occurrences of the verb “witness” actually outThe Preacher as Herald number “proclaim” in the New Testament, and It was the announcement of certain conthe noun “witness” outnumbers the noun crete facts of history, the heralding of “preaching” by more than six to one. Trites disreal, objective events . . . . Its keynote was, ‘That which we have seen and heard declare we unto covered that the noun in John usually carries the you.’ Declaration, not debate, was its characterspecific sense of evangelistic witness regarding istic attitude. the significance of Christ, aiming at faith. Such James Stewart, Preaching (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1955), witness is given by the Baptizer (1:19), by Jesus 56. See also his A Faith to Proclaim (London: Hodder and himself (3:11, 32-33), by God through the Stoughton, 1953). works he enables Jesus to do (5:32, 36), and by the Evangelist whose whole gospel is called a witness (21:24). This witness is not only about historical attestation but also what faith has come to know about Jesus.18 Tom Long in his influential text on homiletics advocates the model of witness (as Acts 20:24). Believing that the authority of the preacher finds fresh impetus in the witness image, he says, “The preacher is not authoritative because of rank or power but rather because of what the preacher has seen and heard.”19 Long sees the preacher listening for a voice from what has been seen and heard in Scripture. The church assigns the preacher the crucial role of going to the Scripture to listen for the truth. This model of preaching may lead to narrative or storytelling, fitting the character of the testimony.20 Barbara Brown Taylor bears witness as a “detective of divinity” of what she has seen and heard and perhaps touched. She approaches

1 John 1:1-4

the world as “the realm of God’s activity,” “gleaning God’s presence there,” believing that “all the things in the world are good enough to bear the presence of God.”21 She exercises an awesome sensibility to listen and see. Sue Monk Kidd shares her gift of opening eyes to the grace of God. She tells about a midnight when she rose, sleepless, from the tiny cot in the corner of her husband’s hospital room. He lay terribly ill. It was a moonless night and not even a street lamp pierced her darkness. It seemed the night conspired with the darkness in her own soul as she felt a churning anguish over her husband’s dangerous condition. As her fears blackened she managed to pull on her shoes and flee out into the hospital corridor. Artificial light laced the hallway wall with shadows. A sob crowding her throat, she saw the doors of the visitors’ elevator open. She ducked inside and fumbled with the buttons. As the elevator swept her up, her sobs gave way, echoing anonymously along the silent pathway of the shaft. She did not know how many times she rode up and down while her despair poured out. But it was the middle of the night, and who would notice? Suddenly she heard a soft ping. The elevator stopped. The doors opened. Inside stepped an elderly man with thinning white hair who searched her face streaming with tears. He pushed a button, then dug in his pocket. As they lurched upward he handed her a neatly folded handkerchief. She wiped her eyes, staring into his kind, steady gaze. His compassion reached out to her heart like the first fingers of morning sun dispelling the night. God seemed strangely present in that elevator, as if there in the old man’s face. The door swished open. She thanked the stranger and handed back his handkerchief, dampened and soiled by her tears. Then the stranger nodded a gentle smile and slipped away. As she made her way back to her husband’s room she was quite sure that God does not fail us in our distress. God’s compassion is everywhere.22 She opened her eyes and the eyes of others to the grace of God and bore witness of what she herself had seen and heard. The witnessing preacher does well to share what she or he has seen and heard as well as to proclaim the normative witness of the apostles. The alert preacher keeps looking for the Presence and records such instances for future use, allowing some of the proclamation to be from experience—hearing and seeing and touching and thus connecting with an increasingly postmodern world. Furthermore, the witnessing preacher may preach with passion as does the epistolary writer, motivated by a desire to include others in the fellowship of the Father and the Son. Those who have introduced others to Christ or gone as missionaries and incorporated

27

28

1 John 1:1-4

special people groups into the life of the international Christian community often speak of a certain joy. In this Johannine model of witnessing announcement, we find a model of homiletics that questions preaching that is not directed toward the Christ event, that invites passion in preaching, that has something to offer (eternal life, fellowship with God, meaningful community), that bears witness to things heard and seen and touched, that knows a rather unselfish satisfaction. Does anyone feel called?

Notes 1. Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982). 2. C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932). 3. A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948); Brooke Foss Westcott, The Epistles of St. John (London: Macmillan, 1892). 4. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992), 57. 5. Brown, Epistles, 158. 6. Charles Talbert, Reading John: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles (Reading the New Testament Series; New York: Crossroad, 1994). 7. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles, 2–4; Schnackenburg, Epistles, 51–56. 8. Westcott, The Epistles of St. John; Alfred Plummer, Epistles of S. John (The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges; ed. F. H. Chase and A. F. Kirkpatrick; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1906). 9. A. T. Robertson, General Epistles and Revelation of John (Word Pictures in the New Testament; vol. 6; Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933). 10. Westcott, The Epistles of St. John. 11. R. Bauckham, ed., The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998). 12. Alan Culpepper, The Johannine School (SBLDS 26; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1975); Brown, Epistles of John, 94–97; Raymond Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple (New York: Paulist Press,1979), 99–102. 13. A. N. Wilder, “Introduction and Exegesis of the First, Second, and Third Epistles of John,” in The Interpreter’s Bible (ed. G. A. Buttrick; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1957), 207–313; Dodd, Epistle to the Romans, 9–11. 14. Dodd, Epistle to the Romans. 15. Judith M. Lieu, The Second and Third Epistles of John: History and Background (Studies of the New Testament and Its World; ed. John Riches; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1986).

1 John 1:1-4 16. Kysar, “John, Epistles of,” ABD 3:911. 17. Gerald Kennedy, “One Thorn of Experience,” 20 Centuries of Great Preaching (ed. Clyde E. Fant, Jr., and William M. Pinson, Jr.; Waco: Word, 1971), 12:162. 18. Allison Trites, The New Testament Concept of Witness (Cambridge: University, 1977), 78–117. 19. Tom Long, The Witness of Preaching (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1989), 44. 20. Ibid., 44–46. 21. Barbara Brown Taylor, The Preaching Life (Cambridge: Cowley, 1993), 32. 22. Sue Monk Kidd, Love’s Hidden Blessings (Ann Arbor: Servant, 1990), 48–49.

29

The First Movement: God Is Light 1 John 1:5–2:27

Each movement of 1 John begins with a primary characteristic of God and ends with crucial aspects of Christology, especially the incarnational. In the first movement, in which the regional church leader will take on the blustery claims of the alternative version of the faith, the thoughtful polemicist will begin with God as light and draw corollaries about one’s walk that will either confirm a relationship with God or discredit it. The final segment of the movement poses the christological test, the Son confessed or denied (2:18-27), while the intervening section encourages and warns. Of seven classic boasts in the entire Epistle,1 remarkably no fewer than six are addressed in the first paragraphs after the exordium. It is imperative to read 1:5–2:11 at once. It should be seen as a unified section governed by the imagery of light and darkness and by two distinctive sets of boasts. In the first group (1:6, 8, 10) the message of 1:5 calls the tune, and in the second group (2:4, 6, 9) the commandments, of no little prominence in the Epistle, govern the spiritual assessment. Love and hate (2:9-11), as in the other movements as well, disclose a test likely not considered by those who separated from the group. Acrimony, as well as christological controversy, either contributed to the schism or characterized the exiting group afterwards. So far as the epistolary writer is concerned, loving one another and believing in the incarnate Son define the real Johannine believer. The opponents boast of a privileged fellowship with God, especially in 2:3-11, and a complete absence of personal sin, presumably discounting their own hostility. They were apparently oblivious to the place of interpersonal relationships in true and genuine religion. The opponents and anyone else are exposed for their claim to be without sin and criticized by their absence of love. These six claims are tested negatively and positively. Light and darkness go back to a Palestinian background, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, but the attitudes of the opposition suggest definite influence from Docetic and

32

The First Movement: God Is Light (1 John 1:5–2:27)

Gnostic mindsets, not just a slightly different interpretation of the Johannine tradition. The terminology of sin, knowing God, abiding, and being in the light were held in common but with different nuances. The rhetorical strategy of the author shows itself in its immediate confrontation with the impressive and influential boasts that have gained a hearing. With no little aggressiveness, the Elder crafts strong counter claims for the tradition he represents (1:1-4) and the criteria for the true believer. The first series (1:6-10), expressed in the language of conditionality, is a little less direct and offensive. The second series (2:3-11) takes a stronger step toward accusation, though still leaving it to apply to whomever. In context, the forceful author has affirmed the special fellowship his group enjoys (1:1-3) but implicitly has denied the claims of fellowship espoused by the others. In effect, he clears the underbrush, discredits the phony false prophets, and opens eyes in 1:5–2:11, eventually moving on to the christological side of the controversy at 2:18-27. The recipients are left to choose. This relentless opening thrust should not prejudice the reader since the insistent presence of the pastoral in 2:12-14 deserves equal billing or more. Though I am unable to embrace the recent assessment of 1:5–2:11 as simply rhetorical,2 this literary corrective to the historical approach to 1 John is on the right track. Sandwiched between the testing of the boasts (1:5–2:11) and the customary christological segment at the close of the movement (2:18-27) are three related verses (2:12-14) indirectly related to the light and the darkness. At 2:12 an important shift takes place that must not be missed—a rather singular aspect of this portion of the Epistle. The considerable spiritual assets already possessed by the letter’s original readers are marshaled in fortifying fashion. The attentive reader discovers the spectacular array of spiritual advantages accruing to the genuine believers. Indeed, it is not too much to say that the things claimed for them by the Elder are astonishing. Whereas the church leader has just invalidated false claims advanced by adversaries, he validates the faithful in a way that affirms some of the things implicitly denied to the false teachers. The writer addresses his readers personally, directly, in the second person “you.” A close reading of 1:5–2:11 also turns up implicit encouragement (1:7, 9: 2:1, 3, 5, 10), but the affirmations become explicit as the movement unfolds (2:12-14, 20, 21, 23, 25, 27), exposing an underlying connection of 1:12-17 to 1:18-27. We are beginning to see the pastoral side come into full bloom.

The First Movement: God Is Light (1 John 1:5–2:27)

At 2:15-17 the reader encounters a warning of invalid love of the ephemeral (belonging to the Epistle’s critique of the world [5:19]) and likely pointing beyond the immediate argument in the group. In strong polemical terms, the author fearlessly raises the christological test (2:18-27), anticipated by the exordium (1:1-3), to complement the ethical test. The writer addresses the christological controversy at the end of each movement.

Notes 1. Robert Law, The Tests of Life (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909); A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles, (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948); Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary, (trans. by Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992); John Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John (SP; ed. Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002); Raymond Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982). 2. Ruth B. Edwards, The Johannine Epistles (NT Guides; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996).

33

Fellowship with God 1 John 1:5–2:2

COMMENTARY Having established grounds for authoritative speech, the Elder begins sharing a revelation about the nature of God as light. He inaugurates a strategy of guidelines for sifting real from bogus faith in the first movement in the Epistle. He will pursue this agenda with unusual persistence to the final chapter. 1 John The reader need not be surprised to find the treatise moving from premises to deductions, from an understanding of God to a theologically predictable detection of inauthentic as well as authentic faith. The author thinks theologically and logically, drawing conclusive applications for everyone, including himself. He unfurls a theological ethic, though also a christological model based on Jesus (2:6). Here he will test by the theological belief that God is light, a congenial idea in the Johannine community. Of course, the commentator and readers are obliged to study the theology and ethic of such a thinker with particular atten(Credit: Courtesy of the Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, tion. Emory University) That “message” (angelia) comes first in the body of the Scenes from 1 John appear as John receives inspiration from letter, after the introduction of the Holy Spirit.

36

1 John 1:5–2:2

the Word of Life (1:1-3), and tends to favor the implicit presence of the idea as early as 1:1. In the Gospel of John Jesus certainly proclaims a message or word. The term “message” most likely meant about the same as gospel elsewhere. Indeed, that which was heard at 1:1, 3 was the message that included the revelation of God as light. The “hearing from him” of this message regarding light carries the same authority and is equally assured as the claims of 1:1-4; indeed, it begins to spell out what was heard (1:1b, 3a).The same two stages, hearing and announcing, appear here as they do at 1:1-3. Both the apostolic authority and authentic witness (hearing) and the responsibility to pass them on (announcing) are presumed. Both are part of the process. Those the author represents claim to have heard this revelation about God from Jesus himself. The “from him” could possibly refer to God or even to the founder of the Johannine movement, but more likely intends the Son, mentioned in1:3, who mediates the revelation of the nature of God. Whereas in the prologue of John the evangelist identifies the light with the Word (logos) at 1:4, 9, our Epistle moves in a somewhat more theocentric fashion. In Johannine thought, light can be revelation, salvation, judgment, or ethical category. Here the professing Christian will be tested by conditions growing out of the grand premise of God as light. Both original readers and those since encounter the Johannine gospel but likely also overhear typical gospel proclamation of the Johannine sort—a message from Jesus about God. Of immense theological and ethical importance, but also as beginnings for movements in the Epistle, are those crucial declarations that God is light (1:5), is righteous (2:29), and is love (4:8, 16). Not only do these teachings imply telling qualities about the kind of deity pictured by the community, the writer, and probably the Johannine school, but one might be more daring and suggest that these insights reveal something of the very essence of God. One might then add from John the revelation that God is Spirit (4:24). The English word is, the Greek estin, more than allows it. If so, this is nothing less than a disclosure of ontological reality, that is, reality as it is and not as it appears. We face a problem: we have no saying of the Johannine Christ that declares God is light, though the light imagery abounds (John 1:4-9; 3:19-21; 12:35, 36, 46). While the community may have known of such a saying, it appears that the writer is drawing upon the light imagery in the prologue of John in particular, though here at 1 John the light image is applied to God and derives from the Son. Raymond Brown astutely observed, “That the Johannine writers call both God and Jesus ‘light’ helps to explain the Nicene

1 John 1:5–2:2

formula, ‘Light from light, even as the designation of the Word as ‘God’ helps to explain the formula ‘God from God.’”1 The Elder does not claim to reveal a new truth about the ”lightness” of God, but one from which he will deduce important corollaries, a theological warrant for what follows. [Dualism in Qumran]

37

Dualism in Qumran The dualism of Qumran appears early on in The Rule of the Community (1 QS), both in the liturgy and also in the sermon on the two spirits. Two opposing groups of humanity are envisioned, one of light and the other of darkness. In the perspective of the Rule, God puts people into one of these categories. In the pledge members signed, they promised both to love the sons of light and to hate the sons of darkness. In the sermon are these suggestive words: “Those born of truth spring from a fountain of light, but those born of injustice spring from a source of darkness. All the children of righteousness are ruled by the Prince of Light and walk in the ways of light, but all the children of injustice are ruled by the Angel of Darkness and walk in the ways of darkness.”

The symbolism of light in relation to God finds parallel in the Psalms (4:7; 27:1; 36:9; 80:1-3), but this dualism of light and darkness in 1 John 1:5–2:9 finds extensive prior expression in the Dead Sea Scrolls (1 QS 1:9-10; 3:13–4:26; 1 QM), a particular background for the Johannine tradition. This common symbolism can be found in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (as T. Levi 14:3-5; T. Gad 5:7) and in 1 and 2 Enoch; nor is the symbolism Qumran limited to purely Jewish sources. (Credit: Jim Pitts) See Philo and The Odes of Solomon and the Corpus Hermeticum. The duality of darkness and light in Isaiah 60:1-3 should not be overlooked. In 1 John light is related to the ethical categories of love and to the absence of sin (cf. John 3:19-21; cf. Eph 5:8-14), while darkness conjures up inappropriate love of the world (2:15-16) and hate (2:9-11) in particular. [Resources on Light and Darkness] The opening expression “this is” (1:5a) represents the first of many assertive identifications typical of the author (2:25; 3:23; 5:3, 4, 9, 11, 14; and 2 John 6). That some utilize the feminine demonstrative and others the masculine represents no distinction other than gender agreement in context. The important and repeated usage turns rather on identifying with certainty. One thing striking in v. 5, that seems superfluous initially, concerns the strong assertion of the total absence of darkness in the deity. The NRSV renders, “there is no darkness at all.” In the Greek the word translated “not at all” (oudemia) closes all loopholes, its usage a clue to the writer’s intent. This double negative is

38

1 John 1:5–2:2

apparently included because it sets up walking in the darkness as a contradiction of anyone’s claim to have fellowship with a God of light. The Son, who reflected the nature of God, was himself altogether sinless (3:5). Of course, the strong denial of the slightest shadowy presence in the divine becomes an absolute claim about God. The author appears unusually sensitive to the notion that one’s concept of God determines one’s perspective, producing in his distinctive fashion a case in point. Three claims are examined and cross-examined in 1:5–2:2, most likely those of the opponents, though they are not yet explicitly mentioned. The three claims are (1) we have fellowship with God (v. 6); (2) we have no sin (v. 8); (3) we have not sinned (v. 10). While the three claims are brought forward primarily to confront and disavow those seen as false prophets (4:20), they were also intended pastorally for the immediate readers. The second and third of these boasts reflect a rather shocking claim to spiritual superiority possibly parallel to tendencies of the Gnostics. The three claims, furthermore, are not to be counted merely as the first three of the six found in the first movement of the Epistle. In fact, the three are interrelated, perhaps from the boasters themselves. For the Elder, sin is walking in the darkness, and sin creates a barrier to fellowship with God. The Johannine Christ had laid it down already that a true disciple of his did not walk or abide in the darkness (8:12; 12:46). Those walking in darkness do not know where they are going (12:35). First John remains faithful to this tradition. The rhetorical strategy of quoting the position of your opponents and then unveiling its inaccuracy goes to the Johannine Christ. In controversy Jesus quotes those who say, “He is our God,” who in spiritual reality do not know God (8:54-55). The conditionality of vv. 6-10 (6a, 7a, 8a, 9a, 10a), the word “if ” (ean) appearing five times in six verses, characterizes the paragraph and cleverly relates to the community crisis. Early on and with rhetorical force, our author forges a vital spiritual connection between fellowship with God and the moral life. Those claiming a privileged relationship to God yet denying their own boast through consorting with the shadows of sin actually are lying. They fail to do the truth, a distinctively Jewish way of thinking. It is not merely that Jewish theology habitually thinks of

Resources on Light and Darkness Brown, R. E. “The Qumran Scrolls and the Johannine Gospel and Epistles.” CBQ 17 (1955): 403–19; 559–74. Bultmann, Rudolf. The Gospel of John. Oxford: Blackwell, 1971. 40-45. Goodenough, E. R. By Light, Light. New Haven: Yale, 1935. Painter, John. 1, 2, 3 John. SP. Edited by Daniel J. Harrington, S.J. Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002. 138–40.

1 John 1:5–2:2

39

doing the truth or falsehood. Here in immediate context the active sin of walking in darkness while claiming fellowship with God amounts to a hypocritical combination, a denial of truth not merely in word but in deed, which is not unexpected in false prophets. In John Jesus reveals the truth (1:14, 17; 8:40, 45; 16:7; 18:37), in 2 John 1-3 truth includes the testimony about Jesus as at 1 John 1:1-3, but the ethical aspect of truth is addressed here at 1:6 and 8, with both lines of thought intersecting at 2:4. “Doing the truth,” Conzelmann points out, “takes place in brotherhood, 1 John 1:6; 2:4; 4:20.”2 Lying and being a liar, strong language, are sprinkled throughout the Epistle, whether saying (2:21; cf. John 8:55), doing (2:4; 4:20), or believing (2:22; 5:10). Anyone claiming to have fellowship with a God of light while living a life of darkness lies and gives away actual spiritual parentage. The author tactfully prefers the first person plural “we lie,” which is applicable across the board. At v. 7 the writer presses a positive thesis followed by its antithesis at v. 8, both arising from the same truth of walking in the light. Both demand (7a) and grace (7c) appear. Not content to countervail false teachers, still in the mode of conditionality, the pastor promises and certifies genuine fellowship with one another for those walking in the light (2:7). The reader fully expects assurance of fellowship with God, which would have been the obvious antithesis, but the problem for divided Johannine communities was more horizontal and relational. The writer’s passion for fellowship with one another, here a reciprocal expression, goes back to 1:3-4. The basis for fellowship depends upon receiving the original witness (1:1-4) and walking in the light in order to share the fellowship, accept the witness (1:1-3), eschew the dark, and confess your sins (1:9). Presumably those who walk in the light find themselves in community with others who also walk Social Context of Division in the light. The writer probably had disSeeing a fragmentation into as many as liking/hating fellow Christians in mind when he three groups, Pheme Perkins interprets spoke of walking in the darkness at v. 6. Verses 7 koinonia or fellowship as a technical term within and 8 represent not merely a general truth but the early Christian mission. The letters themselves represent the central group, but the the vital possibility that the apostolic witness opponents claim an alternative koinonia and group and the recipients can indeed forge or command a following (4:5). The model of a socicontinue a fellowship. The author was not interetas that involves a legally binding association of ested merely in unveiling the hypocrisy of some equal partners based on common purpose has dissident claimants but in forging a fellowship been broken (2:19). with the recipients. Some see here the model of Pheme Perkins, “Koinonia in 1 John 1:3-7; The Social Context of Division in the Johannine Letters,” CBQ 45 (1983): 631–41. a societas. [Social Context of Division ]

40

1 John 1:5–2:2

Thinking theologically, the apostolic writer qualifies the lifestyle as the realm of light God inhabits. Not only does the inspired writer insist upon a moral lifestyle, but he also assures that the atoning death of Jesus actually cleanses all sin, with “blood” clearly pointing to Jesus’ death. Implicitly and perhaps explicitly, the opponents deny the salvific significance of the death of Jesus. The blood of Jesus was often associated with atonement by the early church (Rom 3:25; 5:9; 1 Cor 11:25, 27; Eph 1:7; Heb 9:14). Other references to blood in the Gospel and Epistle of John are interesting but obscure (John 6:53-56; 1 John 5:6-8). While blood conjures up the language of sacrifice, it functions here primarily in a human direction of removing guilt, probably assuming the blood of the covenant (Exod 24:8-11). The image of cleansing is prominent in this paragraph, reiterated at 1:9. Cleansing in the Gospel appears in relation to the washing of feet by Jesus (13:10) with its double entendre and by the word of Jesus (15:3). In Hebrews, by way of early church parallel, one does find (1) the cleansing efficacy of blood (9:22) for the conscience (9:14), (2) cleansing from sin by the death of Christ (1:3), and (3) liberation from sinful impulses (9:14). It is important to recognize the present tense “cleanses” since blood is “an active agent that continues to cleanse from sin.”3 In 1 John the full purity of true believers is “affirmed absolutely in theory (1 John 2:10; 3:6; cf. John 15:3), but it is denied in relative and practical reality (1 John 1:7ff; 2:1f; John 13:10f ).”4 Here at v. 7 we do see a certain “at-onement” or fellowship that takes place through the blood of Christ, walking in the light, and confessing sin. Moving to a second but related boast, but again in polite hypothetical terms with “if,” the author references the audacious claim of having no sin (1:8). The Greek expression “we have” (echomen) seems to suggest a character, personhood, without the flaw of sinful inclinations. This presumably originates from those who do not do the truth. The unusual expression “to have sin,” found only here in 1 John but several times in John (9:41; 15:22, 24; 19:11), means guilty of sin.5 Still adopting a universe of discourse that includes himself and the recipients (“we”) and not just the opponents, he warns with passion about self-deception (v. 8b). Indeed, believes the pastor, one does not know oneself if one imagines an entire absence of sinfulness. Self-understanding is so pitifully blind as to be deluded. The author, including himself and recipients as well as opponents, has apparently confronted his own moral frailty realistically as well as that of others. One operates apart from self-understanding when conveniently imagining an absence of sin.

1 John 1:5–2:2

41

Failing to love while claiming to be sinless lies in the immediate background (1:9, 11). A virtual irony, not lost on our writer, turns on the fact that the very ones boasting of the absence of sin actually sin blatantly. Conversely, those who confess their sins do not deceive themselves. The humble act of confession of sins represents a dramatic antithesis to the claim of having no sin! The claim obscures moral reality, whereas the confession comprehends the true situation. Confession keeps one from self-deception and fictive claims. The conclusion that those so boasting Sin in the Fourth Gospel Sin in John includes (1) ignorance do not have the truth residing in them implies (1:9–10), (2) an inability to confess Jesus a certain discrediting of false proponents of (5:14), (3) a failure to abide in Jesus’ word (8:31), apostolic faith. [Sin in the Fourth Gospel] (4) slavery (8:34), (5) a denial of the origin of Jesus The antidote for superficial and haughty (8:55–58),( 6) blindness (9:41), (7) and hatred denial of personal sinfulness comes from the (15:23–24). Timothy Owings, “The Concept of Sin in the Fourth Gospel,” unpubpastoral theologian with the truthfulness and lished dissertation, Southern Seminary, Louisville KY, 1983, 170. humility of confession (3:9a), one of the striking contributions of the Epistle. The initiative falls with the confessor who admits her or his sinfulness to God. The plural “we” may imply that confession is a matter of congregation-in-worship and not just the individual. Since the word “sins” comes in the plural (hamartias), Schnackenburg may be right that the readers are requested “not to confess their sinfulness in general terms but to confess each specific sin (“past sins”).”6 Promises, which abound in Gospel and Epistle and grow out of the community’s concept of God, appear here, both cleansing and forgiveness (1:9c). Confession itself plays a Confession of Sin in the New Testament considerable role in the Epistle as it relates to Not so prevalent as one might imagine, we faith in Jesus (1 John 2:23; 4:2, 15; 2 John; find an account of (1) people responding to also John 9:22; 12:42; cf. Rom 10:9-10), but the preaching of the Baptizer by confessing their only here regarding sin. [Confession of Sin in the New sins (Mark 1:4, 5), (2) people in Ephesus confessing Testament ]

in response to the Pauline mission (Acts 19:18), and (3) in the context of healing, James admonishing Christians to confess their sins but to one another (Jas 5:16). The confessing of Christ appears rather often in the New Testament and also in 1 John (2:23; 4:2, 15).

The deity of 1 John emerges as both faithful and just/righteous, coordinate adjectives. The latter will be developed in the second major movement (2:28–3:10, especially). Exodus 34:7 portrays the Lord abounding in faithfulness, “forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin . . . ” (NRSV). The Apostle Paul stressed the faithfulness of God in relation to believers (1 Cor 1:9; 10:13; 2 Cor 1:18; 1 Thess 5:24; 2 Thess 3:3). God’s faithfulness also appears in Hebrews (10:23; 11:11) and 1 Peter (4:19) but only here in Epistle or Gospel. The faithfulness (pistos) evidently spoke to the assurance of pardon to those confessing, the faithfulness of God who responds to prayer, and in

42

1 John 1:5–2:2

Faithful and Righteous In Isa 49:7 the prophet reveals the faithfulness of God in promises made to the people (cf. Deut 7:9). Elsewhere in the NT God is portrayed as faithful to his promise (Rom 3:3–4; Heb 10:23). Furthermore, in the OT God appears as righteous judge (Ps 7:11), also in the NT (Rom 3:26; 2 Tim 4:8). Actually the combination of faithful and just occurs in the OT (Deut 32:4). See also 1 Clem. 27:1 where he connects faithful with promises and righteous with judgment, also 60:1.

particular faithfulness in fulfilling promises. [Faithful and Righteous ] The significant promise includes forgiveness and cleansing, which could be combined as roughly synonymous but could offer two distinct outcomes. That is, not only does the one confessing know that she is forgiven by God, but she also experiences an actual cleansing from unrighteousness. Does the writer claim the cleansing removes the stain of guilt, or that it simply effects a change in conduct? Do we have a conscience no longer upset by guilt (cf. Acts 18:6; 20:26)? Since the claim may have had to do with character or being, could the cleansing take away one’s sinfulness (cf. Rom 6:2)? (Strikingly, the text of Jeremiah 40:8 [LXX] speaks of cleansing from all unrighteousness [adikia] and in the same sentence mentions sin [hamartia] like 1:9.) Adding things up as it were, those walking in the light and confessing their sin are blessed with cleansing (1:7, 9) and forgiveness (v. 9) and fellowship with fellow believers (v. 7), a not inconsiderable outcome! Also fellowship with God is strongly implied. Herein lies quite an offer to the recipients of community—a communion with God, a sense of acceptance and inclusion. Returning to conditionality and addressing sinlessness, the letter pursues the options (1:10a). Here the perfect tense appears (“have not sinned”), a past action with continuing result. If the writer does not merely repeat v. 8a, he may have in mind specific acts while the earlier boast goes to sinful character. So the claimants believe they have committed an act of sin for which the consequences remain. 7 This could refer to post-baptismal sin. Maintaining “we” admirably, the author sternly brings up the harsh reality by implication of making God a liar (1:10b; cf. 5:10). The Old Testament bears witness to the universality of sinfulness (1 Kgs 8:46; Job 15:14-16; Pss 14:1-3; 53:1-3; cf. Rom 3:9-20). The sending of Jesus, however, creates a new situation in the perspective of the Fourth Gospel (1:11; 15:24), what Moody Smith aptly called “the givenness of the human situation characterized essentially by death, darkness, falsehood, and sin . . . .”8 The epistolary writer assumes both from the Old Testament and from the Johannine tradition the commonality of sin. To deny one’s sin imputes falsehood on God because it challenges the divine judgment (cf. John 16:8-9). We recognize the parallelism with “we lie”(2:6b) and “we deceive ourselves” (8b). Lying is (1) hypocrisy,

1 John 1:5–2:2

(2) self-deception, and (3) blasphemy. The criticism that “his word is not in us,” parallel to the earlier “truth is not in us” (1:8), could refer to the message of the gospel (1:1). While some scholars prefer to bracket 2:1-2 with 2:3-6, it is much better to combine 2:1-2 with 1:5-10. “These things I write to you that you may not sin” do not concern the Epistle as a whole but the immediately preceding understanding of God as light and the authentic Christian as one who walks in the light. Further, the contingency if anyone may fail is certainly anticipated by the argument for the necessity of confession and the promise of forgiveness. Jesus as the “atoning sacrifice” connects with the assurance about the cleansing power of the blood of Jesus (1:7, 9). On the other hand, 2:3ff begins the related theme of knowing God, and the disclosure formula, “By this we know,” points to the preceding verses. Clearly it is important not to sin, not only in this context but elsewhere (3:4-10). After all, Jesus the model did not sin (3:5). This passage, which goes to intent, reflects an effort to keep the recipients from the kinds of sins induced by the influence of the false teachers. Furthermore, sin could create such unthinkable divisiveness as hating one’s brothers and sisters (3:15) and refusing to confess Jesus (4:3). Sin involves hypocritical lying. The understanding of sin here and elsewhere relates to the character and commandments of God. God is righteous, sin is unrighteous; God is light, sin includes walking in the darkness; God is love, sin is the failure to love one another. Though the writer has pressed his argument about the integrity of honest confession of sin, he does not want his readers to misunderstand or take advantage of confession and forgiveness. Assigning Jesus an additional role in dealing with sin, the author names him “advocate” with the Father (2:1c), a continuation of his atoning work. Jesus can advocate because of his personal obedience and righteousness vis-à-vis a righteous God (2:29). The ascended Lord intercedes on behalf of sinners (cf. Rom 8:34; Heb 7:25; 9:24). The identifying of Jesus with the role of Paraclete seems to be a disconnect with the Gospel since the Spirit functions in this role, continuing revelatory work in the absence of Jesus (14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7). However, Jesus functions in an advocacy role for disciples at John 17, a role that even in John has to do with more than just the earthly Jesus. At John 17, Jesus speaks up for his followers who received and kept the divine word (17:6, 8), believed that God sent Jesus (v. 9), and endured hostility (v. 14). Jesus prays for the unity of his followers (17:20), imperiled in 1 John, and urges the Father to protect and sanctify them (11, 15). This parallel comes

43

44

1 John 1:5–2:2

Christological Profile Jesus has been portrayed as the manifestation of life (1:2), the Son of the Father (1:3, 7), the atoning sacrifice (2:2), and the righteous advocate (2:1). These categories lay a theological foundation for the efficacy of his death.

nearer the crisis of 1 John.

[Christological

Profile] [Concept of God]

The great declaration of 2:2 became something of an interpretive standoff between propitiation (appeasing divine wrath called forth by sin) (KJV) and expiation (obliteration of sin by the atoning death of Christ) (RSV). Significantly, more recently, both the NIV and the NRSV have converged upon the translation “atoning sacrifice.” Some individual scholars favor propitiation,9 others expiation,10 but still others favor an admixture,11 the Greek word in question, hilasmos, generally rendered by either (BAG). It can have the usage of “covered” or “washed away” (Jer 18:23). The word conjures up the language of sacrifice in the LXX, with some texts that suggest propitiation (Num 5:8; Sir 32:3; cf. 45:23; Ps 106:30; Zech 8:22) and others expiation (Ps 129:4; Sir 18:20). Sin offering (Ezek 44:27) seems to have real affinity with 1 John 2:2 and (Credit: Illumination of ‘Speculum humanae salvationis’, Germany [?]. c. 4:10. The lid of the mercy seat (Exod 1400–1500. Museum Meermanno Westreenianum, The Hague. Coloured 25:17-22; Lev 16:14-15) and the Day pendrawing on paper.) of Atonement likely lurk as general backIn this 15th C. drawing, Christ appears before the Father as ground behind the usage. While “Good mediator for humanity, showing the wounds by which he Friday as the great eschatological Day of atones for sins (cf. 1 Jn 2:1-2). Atonement”12 may be indirectly present (cf. Heb 9–10), the verse as stated can encompass the entire mission of the Son (but cf. 1:8). It is interesting that the original readers must have understood the technical term. No explicit sense of the appeasement of an angry God appears in 1 John itself, but rather the action of a loving (4:8, 16) and forgiving God (1:9) who takes the initiative in sending his Son, hardly a reluctant or remote deity. Outcome and initiative both lean toward expiation. The blood (1:8) cleanses, not appeases. Outcomes include forgiveness (1:9), confidence Concept of God (2:28; 4:17), and love (4:7, 11, 20). First John God appears quite prominently so 1:7-10 tilts toward the subjective side associated far in 1 John in terms of Father, with expiation, but 2:1, with its recognition of the light, faithful, just, and forgiving, a divinity with whom the believer can have a personal need for an advocate directed toward the Father, relationship of fellowship.

1 John 1:5–2:2

moves toward God as object, though even here the advocate is divinely provided. Hilasmos (2:2), which carries possible connotations of both, may have a Godward aspect in mind as also the advocate. The overarching theology of 1 John 4:10 with its picture of divine love taking the initiative in sending the Son is a tiebreaker. Much of 1:5–2:2 favors expiation, but propitiation cannot be totally denied. Thus, if forced to a single term, we are thrown back upon atonement (Brown) or atoning sacrifice. Some critical scholars find even the idea of Jesus’ expiation for sin at 1 John 2:2 foreign to the Gospel of John ,13 but John 1:29 and 36 are not uncongenial to this universe of discourse. Not only was this presently effective work of Christ reflected in the cleansing at 1:7, but in this role as advocate at 2:1, it was reassuring to the recipients. In a sweeping further declaration, the author extends the atonement to the whole world, bespeaking the magnitude of the act as well as the universal vision (cf. Rom 11:15; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tim 1:15). The Christ event had cosmic significance (cf. 1 Clem. 7:4). This theological claim, not in keeping with limited atonement, chimes in with the sentiments of John 3:16-17.

CONNECTIONS 1. The Crucible of Doing

Profoundly for 1 John, truth is something you do (1:6), sin is something you do (1:6; 2:1), and love is something you do (3:16-18). 2. A Darkened Stage, 1:5-6

I was sitting in the nosebleed seats in the fourth ring looking down on the stage at Lincoln Center in New York. The ballet program by George Balanchine consisted of choreographic response to the music of Charles Ives. In one heavy segment titled “Unanswered Questions,” the stage remained quite dark. Dancers moved in symbolic patterns, searching for meaning. They kept finding frustrating shadows instead. One scene featuring the romance of two young people drawn to one another and responding delightfully brought a limited spotlight to the otherwise dismal darkness. Soon the lights fell again not to be brightened, and the audience could feel

45

46

1 John 1:5–2:2

the oppressive vibes in the theatre, the hopelessness of ever finding meaning. Young lovers dance briefly in the sunlight, but otherwise life offers only unanswered questions and dark shadows. Darkness hovered not only over the crucifixion of Jesus but also over his arrest. Judas, who had become a denizen of the dark, led a menacing crowd armed with swords and clubs to the private place where Jesus and disciples were sequestered. When his disciples stepped forward to defend Jesus, he resisted the darkness of violence, directing his disciples to stand back and then confronted the mob. He reminded them that when he taught openly in the daylight, they did not molest him. “Have you come out as against a robber?” The one who did not take like a robber but gave like a redeemer conceded, “But this is your hour, and the power of darkness” (Luke 22:53). His contemporary disciples must bear witness to the darkness of the dark as well as the brightness of the light. Some people seem to love the darkness. Some get rich peddling darkness. Some sell illegal drugs to make money while crippling people, damaging our children, and blackening brains. Their devotion to this darkness causes car crashes and pregnancies and murder and theft and addiction. We envisage the darkness of drive-by shootings and pornography that warps lives and increases rape. We take note of the darkness of Dachau, the darkness of demonic cults, the darkness of dives like the one in the movie A River Runs through It. The darkness of the stage and the shadows of Jesus’ arrest stir us to question whether the dark side seems stronger as it does in the film The Empire Strikes Back. Yoda warns the trainee Luke of the dark side with its anger and aggression, explaining how a choice to start down the dark path can dominate one’s destiny, consuming as it is. Frightened young Luke asks whether this dark side is stronger, and Yoda assures him that it is not stronger but easier and more seductive. 3. The Fool of Fools, 1:8, 10

The author reckoned perceptively with denial of sin and accompanying self- deception. If you think you are without sin, you are deceiving yourself—that is how you know! The distortion of denial can be seen when we rationalize our sinning as “a slight twist in human nature,” “an upward stumble in the progress of the race,” the “mere making of a mistake,” “the shadow cast by human immaturity.”14 The modern believer, with no magical immunity from sin, may further racism, engage in exploitation or greed, wreck the

1 John 1:5–2:2

environment, and use blood-soaked slogans. In the parable of the Pharisee and the toll collector at Luke 18:9-14, one of the primary characters is in a self-congratulatory mode, oblivious to his own pride and unaware of his own sinful attitude toward sinners. Others feel they have graduated from moral accountability. Some of us kid ourselves about our sins while noting the speck in the eye of the other. How do we avoid self-deception? By meditation on the life of Jesus, by critical reflection of our lives and recent relationships, by reading thoughtful prayer books that enumerate sins, by a more humble spirit, by slowing down, by returning to church, by sensitive and spiritual participation in the Lord’s Supper. First John 1:7-10 can be included as a meaningful group of directions in a Communion service that invites a genuine process rather than a rushed ritual. 4. The Catharsis of Confession, 1:9

Confession, the creative alternative to self-deception and fictive claims, is a choice (“if ” at 1:9) originating in utter personal honesty, critical self-awareness, and a sense of guilt. The biblical witness recognizes confession (Pss 32:5; 40:11-112; 41:4; 51:2-4; Neh 1:6-7; Luke 15:18-21) as the way to deal with sin. In a dynamic experience of worship before the Holy One, the prophet Isaiah saw and said that he was a person of unclean lips (6:5). Some people do not deny their sins, but neither do they confess them. Some do not deny but persist in carrying layers of guilt for long stretches. Some do not know how to confess their sins. The Presbyterian tradition does well when it includes the Confession of Sin and Pardon in its worship, and some ministers present pastoral prayers that, like certain litanies, effectively involve the congregation in actual confession. There is an old tale told of Emperor Frederick the Great when he visited the Potsdam Prison. In speaking with the prisoners, he heard one after the other protest their innocence—they were victims of the system. One prisoner sat quietly. “And you, sir, who do you blame for your situation?” asked the emperor. “No one,” he replied. “I am guilty and I deserve my punishment.” Startled, the emperor called for the warden. “Come and get this man out of here before he corrupts all these innocent people.”15 Cleansing starts with the confession, a true catharsis of the soul that requires leveling rather than lying. [Confession of Sin: From Abyss to Bridge]

47

48

1 John 1:5–2:2

On March 30, 2003, Fred Craddock delivered one of his last sermons as pastor of Cherry Log. The bulletin carried his title, “Today Is Judgment Day.” In a confessional mode, he admitted his dislike of the shadowy corners in his heart after all the years of being Frederick Buechner, Wishful Thinking (New York: Harper, 1973), 15. a Christian. He made it clear that he did not hate blacks or Hispanics, but confided that he did not like people who wear tattoos and ride motorcycles. Then he said a young man came into his Greek class in seminary. He wore tattoos of naked women, and the letters “l-o-v-e” were written on his knuckles. Someone like that is not supposed to come into a Greek class. “Didn’t he know this was a seminary?” Fred went on in his inimitable style, commenting, “But today there’s a church out in south Texas who thinks he is wonderful while I am up here in the mountains unhappy about it.” Not quite finished with his confessing, he admitted that he did not like people who had everything given to them while he had to work for everything. Confession of Sin: From Abyss to Bridge “To confess your sins to God is not to tell him anything he doesn’t already know. Until you confess them, however, they are the abyss between you. When you confess them, they become the bridge.”

5. “The Blood of Jesus Christ” (1:7)

A rather unusual man frequently attended the Manhattan Baptist Church in New York City. Members did not know what to make of him but were welcoming. During the week he walked the metro streets with a large sign displayed front and back; it read, “The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us of all sins.” He shared his life experience with his minister—how he had become an alcoholic and eventually lost a good job, his wife, and his family. He became a derelict who stayed inebriated and slept in alleys. One night a Christian left a New Testament beside him. The next morning he awoke from a stupor and found the book. As he walked along, he opened this book and his eyes fell upon the promise of 1 John that the blood of Jesus cleanses from all sins. He was awestruck. The words rang true. He accepted them. A personal transformation began. He said he spent a week in bliss, but then he made a The Expiatory Sacrifice decision. He would placard his new truth. He fashioned his We can be healed by sign and began to make his personal witness, a witness God’s solidarity, enabled about cleansing and freeing. We may not imitate his style, to begin a different way of life, and to respond in gratitude to the but we would do well to imitate his passion. [The Expiatory mercy of God. Eduard Schweizer, “An Exegestical Analysis of 1 John 1:7,” in Theology in the Service of the Church (ed. Wallace M. Alston; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 194.

Sacrifice]

1 John 1:5–2:2 6. Putting Light in People’s Eyes

One of the greatest privileges of preaching is seeing light return to people’s eyes. “If there is not a God who delights at bringing light out of night, who likes nothing better than to go one-on-one with the void,” reckoned Will Willimon, “then we are quite frankly without hope and my little words of comfort in the face of your despair are pointless.”16 7. The Healing of Forgiveness

Cleansing washes off the dull deposits of sin. Forgiveness, a persistent offer of healing restoration (Ps 103:12; Isa 1:18; 6:6; 44:21; Jer 33:8; Matt 26:28; Rom 4:7), brings a sense of relief, a sense of freedom from nagging, crippling guilt, and a renewal of fellowship with God. It includes a psychological freshness both in relationship to oneself and to God. A man came home one day and saw a sign out on the front porch that read, “Daddy, I’m sorry!” Entering the house, this father went to his son’s room and found him fast asleep. Gently the father pulled the covers up over his son and kissed him on the cheek, saying, “I forgive you, son.” As the father left his son’s room, his wife stopped him and said, “But you don’t even know what he did!” The father answered, “When it comes to forgiveness, my son has blanket coverage!” 8. A Choice between Light and Darkness

In a baseball movie The Natural, a player eventually must decide between influences portrayed in black and shadows or his finer impulses imaged in white. Though he struggles between the shadows and the light, he elects to stand with the light. In the last week of the life of Jesus, a woman unselfishly anoints him in counterpoint to Judas, who betrayed with deeds of the dark (Mark 14:1-11). Interestingly, her extravagance of costly anointing oil was worth 300 denars, while the bribe for Judas, thirty pieces of silver, was the equivalent of 120 denars. She chose to walk in the light (1:5–2:2) to do the deeds of the day, to love (2:9-10).

49

50

1 John 1:5–2:2

Notes 1. Raymond Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982), 228n. 2. Hans Conzelmann, “pseudos,” TDNT (1974) 9:602. 3. Martinus deBoer, “Jesus the Baptizer: 1 John 5:5-8 and the Gospel of John,” JBL 107/93 (March 1988): 87–106. 4. Friedrich Hauck, “katharos,” TDNT (1965) 3:426. 5. Colin G. Kruse, The Letters of John (Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 66. 6. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992), 80n. 7. A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948), 17–18. 8. Moody Smith, The Theology of the Gospel of John (New Testament Theology; ed. James Dunn; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 83. 9. D. R. Hill, Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings: Studies in Semantics of Soteriological Terms (SNTSMS; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 23–48; I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John (NIBCNT; ed. F. F. Bruce; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), 117–18. 10. Brooke Foss Westcott, The Epistles of St. John (London: Macmillan, 1892); C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932), 85–87. 11. Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC; vol. 51; Waco TX: Word Books, 1984); Charles Talbert, Reading John: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles (Reading the New Testament Series; New York: Crossroads, 1994). 12. Rudolf Bultmann, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (trans. Philip O’Hara; ed. Robert Funk; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973). 13. J. Roloff, “hilasterion,” EDNT 2:185. 14. James Leo Green, God Reigns (Nashville: Broadman, 1968), 32. 15. Cited by Gary Carver, Out from the Ordinary (Lima OH: CSS, 1999), 24. 16. Will Willimon, “Let There Be Light,” Sojourners 30 (Nov/Dec 2001): 31–32.

Keeping the Commandments 1 John 2:3-6

COMMENTARY This brief paragraph begins with “and,” a small sign of a new start within a topic. Using the disclosure formula, “by this we know,” for the first time, the writer looks forward to the proceeding condition “if ” (ean): we know that we have known him if we keep his commandments. Rhetorically and logically, this church leader sets out his premise, acknowledges its antithesis (2:4-5a), and settles it in restatement (v. 6). Verse 3a is not merely “a disclosure formula,” not merely a clarification of the reader’s relationship to the Son, not one among a miscellany of numerous tests, but a fundamental correlation. Nevertheless, the obedience to his commandments does not function as the cause of knowing but the inevitable outcome of knowing. Keeping commandments does not function as the means of salvation, because the knowing of Jesus precedes keeping the commandments. The Elder’s notion clearly is not that one comes to know Jesus initially by keeping his commandments; rather, it is a certifying sign. Furthermore, the perfect tense with its past orientation of continuing results implies a previous experience, the moment of becoming children of God, of being begotten. Also the “him” (auton, 2:3) in context clearly points to the antecedent, Jesus the righteous (2:1), especially since coupled with “commandments.” Thus the writer has assured the faithful readers pastorally that obeying Jesus’ commandments is a tangible sign not solely dependent on an emotional religious experience. Though the reader will be informed in the next paragraph (2:7-11) that the love command is in mind, the writer first presents the critical premise of the connection between claiming and doing with words like “doing” (1:6), “keeping” (2:3, 4, 5), and “walking” (1:6, 7; 2:6) [Disclosure Formulas: “by this we know”] Here is the first occasion for the writer to bring up commandments and knowing as a way to ascertain validity of faith. Although v. 3 is rather abrupt vis-à-vis vv. 1-2, perhaps reaching back to 1:6-10, there

52

1 John 2:3-6

Disclosure Formulas: “by this we know” This formula, with variations, belongs to the texture of the text of 1 John as a form of revelation. The first usage, at 2:3, assures that believers know Christ, the second that they abide in him (2:5a), in both instances with the use of “that” (hoti). The next usage relates to the revelation of the nature of love (3:16), while the next also utilizes “that” and reassures the heart (3:19). The following usage provides a criterion for the Spirit (4:2) in a warning context. The next usage, with “from” (ek), refers back and centers upon the spirit of truth and deception (4:6). The next appearance assures abidance to those having the Spirit (4:13). The final use (5:2) deciphers how believers can know they love the children of God. Of the several uses of disclosure formulas, 3:19 affirms the believer in the truth, and 4:13 assures abidance. At 5:2 we have the only direct parallel to 2:3, 5. Most of these usages utilize the disclosure formula to reassure the readers of the security of their faith (3:19; 4:13; 5:2), while others empower them with discrimination (3:16; 4:2, 6). The pastoral side predominates, but the polemical is also prominent, giving clues to the very character of the Epistle, further indications of the “tests” in the letter.

are definite connections to the preceding. Walking in the light (1:7) can now be seen implicitly as keeping Jesus’ commandments, while sinning (1:7-10) involves failure to keep the commandments. This passage (2:3-6) begins with the positive clarification of authentic discipleship (v. 3), whereas at 1:6 the disqualification is announced first. However, 2:4 works rather like 1:6, both being apparent boasts that come under immediate scrutiny. Also the issues of lying and the absence of truth appear as at 1:6-8. Of course, v. 4 flows logically from the condition of v. 3 as the condition of 1:6 derives from the assertion of 1:5, a pattern the reader gradually learns to anticipate. [Keeping Commandments in Johannine Tradition]

At v. 4 a new set of claims is countered, the first of which involves the assertion, “I have come to know him” (NRSV), having been anticipated in the previous verse. This time the controversialist (the Elder) established the universal truth connecting him with keeping Jesus’ commandments (2:4) prior to the discrediting of false claimants, laying the theological ethic in advance. His rhetorical strategy entails setting forth the principle first. Not only did logic require it, but also fairness, especially for readers who accept the truth of v. 3. Evidently How to Walk the Way of some in the community Light who claimed to have In this 17th C. Dutch-school known Christ did not work, a young woman’s face is illuminated by a candle bother to keep his comwhose light is magnified mandments. The author Image Not against the pages of an has not so far clearly Available open Bible. The painting defined what commanddue to lack of digital rights. expresses Dutch pietism’s ments are in mind, though Please view the published conviction that study of those in the tradition of commentary or perform an Scripture enables one to Internet search using the walk in the light. the Johannine Gospel may credit below. well have guessed. He will A woman with a candle or How to eventually and gradually Walk the Way of Light. Anonymous, 17th C. Oil on wood. Palais des define them in terms of Beaux Arts, Lille, France. (Credit: the signature of Christian Philipp Bernard, Réunion des Musées Nationaux / Art Resource, NY)

1 John 2:3-6

53

love. Those who violate this fundamental Keeping Commandments in Johannine commandment are not sinless (2:3-9; 3:22, Tradition The concern to keep commandments 23; 4:21; 5:2, 3). apparently stood in the Johannine tradition The insistence upon keeping the commandprior to 1 John. In John we find Jesus not only sinments of Jesus in this passage can also be gling out the keeping of his word (8:51; 14:23, 24; found in the synoptic tradition, generally of 15:20), but also speaking of those who keep his the Ten Commandments (Matt 19:17; Mark commandments (14:14, 21, 24). Indeed, the 7:9), but can refer to the solemn responsibility Johannine Christ connects the obedience of discilaid upon the disciple on mission to keep all ples with his own keeping of the Father’s the things that Jesus had commanded (Matt commandments (15:10). The notion, in the Gospel 28:20). In the Gospel of John, Jesus himself and the Epistle, is presumed that Jesus is the model for the disciple. keeps the word of God (8:55; 15:10), once more the model for the community. Indeed, the commanding word of Jesus was not his but that of the Father who sent him (14:24). Keeping commandments is associated with salvation from death (8:51, 52), the promise of the spiritual privilege of abiding (15:10), and as in 1 John the sure sign of the disciple’s love of Jesus (14:15, 21, 23, 24). Especially at 2:3-5, keeping the commandment or word (used interchangeably) becomes a certain sign of knowing God or Jesus. If 1 John draws upon the common tradition of the Gospel known by his readers, whether it was finalized or not, it is evident from the multiple statements about keeping (t∑reø) the word or commandments that our author did not “invent” his insistence merely as a handy antidote for the schism. Rather, the writer caught in conflict saw himself remaining faithful to the tradition. In fact, 1 John 2:4 takes on much of the vocabulary and tone of John 8:55. Furthermore, as already noted, it stood most likely previous in the Matthaean form of the Great Commission. The implication of not keeping the commandments while bragging about a personal religious knowledge falls into the realm of issues of truth. Aggressively the author draws the shocking but logical conclusion that the boaster commits a lie by the claim itself and the Christian truth does not reside in him or her. Is the writer castigating because of the sheer failure to tell the truth, indeed to mislead, or is it more that Christian truth has not found a home within the individual? In two associated ways, John impeaches the credibility of the claimant. The claimants are discredited and exposed. In the mind of the author, these spiritual braggarts never experienced the authentic Christ. The disconnect in the lives of the proponents incriminates on its own, since truth in the Johannine community is in the doing (1:6). The lie resided in the life. Such

54

1 John 2:3-6

people are not to be trusted. All this derives from a just principle applicable to all. What does the accusation of lying entail? If the issue is selfdeception, then is it lying? At the formal level it is. Did those accused of lying set out intentionally to mislead? Do any of the readers stand accused? Does the epistolary writer express truth extremely? The value judgment that the truth was not in those who made claims of knowledge of God that were then denied by their lives may refer to Christian truth, hence decimating the claim to have known God. Though the author may also have meant some indulged in conscious statements of a misleading order, he believed in any event that the secessionists of 2:19 were never a genuine part of the Johannine community, that Christian truth never dwelt in them. Pursuing the pastoral side with typical sensitivity and with at least equal force, joining as it does with 2:3, the pastor announces a definite basis for assurance in v. 5. The subjunctive mood and “an” maintains the conditional potentiality of v. 3, but the present tense can be rendered “who keeps on keeping.” Here “the word” seems synonymous with commandments. The word of Jesus amounts to a message of his distinctive commandments. “Truly,” the Elder says, “by this means” (the keeping of his word, commandments) the love of God has been completed, significantly the first mention of love in the Epistle. In the Johannine theology, love for one another grows out of the love of God, mentioned here, and the example and medium of love in Jesus. If so, we have insight here into how love for one another, a Johannine hallmark, happens: God is at work completing his own kind of love in the believer! “In a unique way in 2:3f. the author presents the idea that genuine knowledge of God can be recognized only in such brotherly love (cf. 4:20f. with 2:3ff.),” as one scholar put it.1 When believers love one another, the love of God becomes a happening, his intention by extension. Love for a fellow Christian does not represent merely achieving a moral plateau but loving someone else in whom the love of God abides. Or is the expression “the love of God” an objective genitive that points to the recipient’s love for God realized in objective obedience?2 The Greek construction is almost certainly a subjective genitive, the intent being love emanating from God (cf. 4:12, 17), not the idea of loving God. “Precisely in our love for one another, however,” observes H. Hübner, “does God’s love attain its goal (v. 12).”3

1 John 2:3-6

The NRSV translates the verb teteleiotai as “has reached perfection.” First John does toy with perfection, though here the perfection is that of the love of God yet accomplished in the believer. For John, God does in fact live in the believer, and by this means divine love is completed/perfected in believers (4:12). This perfected love can actually cast out fear (4:17). [Heretical and Orthodox Perfectionism]

55

Heretical and Orthodox Perfectionism John Bogart found and distinguished an orthodox perfectionism that depended upon a biblical concept of God and the realized eschatology that an authentic believer was already a child of God enjoying eternal life. On the other hand, the heretical perfectionism came from the Gnostic side that believed in a divine spark and belittled the requirement of an ethical way of life since the person was already perfect by nature. First John stood over against this latter perfection and declared the orthodox heresy at 3:6-10.

Concluding his pastoral assurance, the writer says we can know spiritual security for sure if we John Bogart, Orthodox and Heretical Perfectionism in the keep the commandments. His distinctive Johannine Community as Evident in the First Epistle of John expression “know that we are in him” sounds (Missoula: Scholars, 1976). reminiscent of the “in Christ” formula of the Paulines as well as the Johannine “abiding.” In the thought of the Epistle it certainly relates to the fellowship emphasized in the opening paragraph (1:3). This relationship goes on in the present and exists as a present knowledge. First John can use the word “know” in a reassuring fashion, a surety not based on feelings or subject to being dismissed summarily by false teachers. Verse 5 constitutes not only an assurance but a Johannine promise as well. The final verse of the segment (v. 6) on true knowledge of God/Christ with its now familiar formula, “the one saying” (2:4), reflects that the claim/boast to abide in him may not be all that different from saying “I have known him” (v. 4). Abiding and being in him and fellowshipping certainly have more than a little in common. This claim could be a duplicate, but abiding specifically is quite important in the Gospel and pervasive in this Epistle. In any event, this usage of “to abide” (menein) does not merely mean to remain or stay loyal to Christ but to relate, quite possibly mystically. This first usage of abide falls more on the side of indwelling/fellowship rather than perseverance. Thus, “we are in him” (v. 5) and the claim to abide in him, in close proximity, seem to reflect a similar relationship. One should not be content to claim a spiritual relationship but indeed “ought,” “oughtness” being fair game in the Johannine ethic. The imperative of walking just as Jesus walked, the literal “that one” (ekeinos) again most likely code for Jesus (3:3, 5, 7, 16; 4:17; John 7:11; 9:12, 28), belonged to the gospel tradition as well as the epistolary. The designation ekeinos or “that one” may have been a common designation for Jesus within the community.4 The characteristic expression “just as” (kathøs) should be taken seriously, belonging as it does to the “just as” ethic and more. “To walk” in

56

1 John 2:3-6

the present tense implies, as A. T. Robertson thought, “a continuous performance, not a spasmodic spurt.”5 Yes, here the imitatio Christi appears, Jesus as model for the authentic believer, as does the insistence upon a particular walk (cf. 1:6-7). The “just as” leaves little leeway. The sentiment that the disciple must be like the teacher seems to have stood in Q (Luke 6:40)! On the one hand, Jesus functions as model for the disciple (1 John 2:29; 3:7, 16; John 13:15, 34: 15:10, 12; 1 Pet 2:21), and, on the other hand, the true adherent cannot be merely vaguely similar in lifestyle. For Jesus this certainly included love for his friends/followers as in the Gospel. The word “thus” (houtos), enclosed in Johannine Pairing Certain Johannine texts illustrate a pairing square brackets in the Greek text to indicate of kathøs and houtos (John 3:14; 12:50; textual uncertainty, tends to reinforce or 14:31; 15:4), as well as other NT texts such as Rom heighten the “just as.” Great expectations! 2:4; 2 Cor 1:5; 10:7, Luke 11:30.

So Strecker, Johannine Letters (Hermeneia; ed. Harold Attridge, trans. Linda M. Malony; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 43n.

[Johannine Pairing]

The use of “he himself ” ought to walk—the Greek autos is rather emphatic—puts a definite responsibility on the claimant. The walking as he walked is inescapable. John Stott expressed it memorably: “We cannot claim to abide in him unless we behave like him.”6 Smalley ventures the astute implication that the writer presumes a tradition of the life of Jesus for his readers to imitate, most likely that of the Fourth Gospel.7 Verse 6 commands a particular significance because of its history of influence within Christendom. Within the Epistle it introduces the presiding metaphor of abiding in its infinitive form, in which the attentive reader must take increasing interest, and the christological model of walking as Jesus walked. Now in addition to walking in the light (1:6-7), one can add walking as Jesus did. The claims of vv. 4 and 5 could and may have been made by believers as well as braggarts, though in a different spirit. This would not be true for 1:8 or 10 but possibly for 1:6. It deserves remark that 2:3-6 appears predominantly christological, but for the writer the Father and Son are thought of in tandem, with the Son revealing and acting as the Father; the text of 1 John, including 2:3-6, is often ambiguous or intends both.

1 John 2:3-6

CONNECTIONS

57

What Would Jesus Do?

1. The Imitatio Christi, 2:6

Should we reopen the case for the imitation of Christ? Ethicists critique it and recognize its limitations, particularly in the light of its potential radicality/impossibility. Charles Sheldon’s vision (Credit: www.istockphoto.com) of asking the question, “What would Jesus do?” in the book In His Steps has been criticized Resources for Christian Ethics by the thoughtful as simplistic. [Resources for Christian Ethics]

For a careful analysis see J. M. Gustafson, Christ and the Moral Life (New York: Harper and Row, 1968), 150–87. See also R. E. O. White, Christian Ethics (Macon GA: Mercer Press, 1994), 109–23. Daniel Migliore, Princeton theologian, defines being conformed to the image of Christ as follows: “The essential mark of this Christ-likeness is that free selfgiving, other-regarding love that the NT calls agap∑. Released from the compulsive power of self-centeredness, we are enabled to love God and our neighbor.”

Yet one cannot ignore the empirical evidence of the extraordinary popularity of Sheldon’s book, that is, the inherent appeal of the idea and the implicit elevation of the life of the laity! In Sheldon’s moving story, a man drifts into the church and dies and his death awakens the congregation. Lay Daniel Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, members in their various walks of life 1991), 178. begin to ask the question, “What would Jesus do?” The day of the death, the pastor, a Dr. Henry Maxwell, had taken 1 Peter 2:21 as his text with its injunction to follow in the steps of Jesus. Copies of the Sheldon book carry haunting one-liners at the top of a chapter heading such as “How can we say we love God whom we have not seen if we do not love our brothers whom we have seen?”8 Advocates of WWJD may Being Conformed to the Image of Christ A student tells of belonging to churches as a little girl where the fail sometimes to think preachers yelled all the time. Then her family joined a church through the ambiguities of served by a grandfatherly pastor who spoke kindly to his wife. When the moral decisions as Reinhold pastor’s own son left his wife and child for another woman, this pastoral Niebuhr argued; yet again, couple took their daughter-in-law and grandchild into their home. They should one write off a biblical cared for them, providing food, housing, and money. Their daughter-in-law idea with so much appeal in started back to school to rebuild her life. She finished her training in nursing, and after four years she and her child moved into their own home. capturing the imagination of Isn’t it interesting what little girls notice and later remember about Christthe committed? Johannine likeness? discipleship can well be grasped as living like Jesus. The “just as” of 2:6 leaves little wiggle room. Those of us who claim to be Christians need to live in such a way as to remind others of Jesus. This requires thoughtful meditation on the life of Jesus [Being Conformed to the Image of Christ] [If Jesus Had Gotten the Call] [Step by Step]

58

1 John 2:3-6

If Jesus Had Gotten the Call Since I’ve been at Candler, I heard about a young man in his early twenties dying of that horrible, horrible, frightening, terrible AIDS in a hospital in Atlanta. He had no church connection, but someone said he had relatives who had been in the church, so they called a minister of that church and the minister went to the hospital. The young man was almost dead, just gasping there, and the minister came to the hospital, stood outside in the hall, and asked them to open the door. When they opened the door, he yelled in a prayer. Another minister there in south Atlanta, down around Forest Park, heard about it and rushed to the hospital, hoping that he was still alive. She got to the hospital, went into the room, went over by the bed. This minister lifted his head and cradled him in her arms. She sang. She quoted scripture. She prayed. She sang. She quoted scripture. She prayed. And he died. Some of the seminarians said, “Weren’t you scared? He had AIDS!” She said, “Of course I was scared.” “I bet you bathed sixty times. Well then, why did you do it?” And she said,” I just imagined if Jesus had gotten the call what he would’ve done. I had to go.” Fred Craddock, Craddock Stories (ed. Mike Graves and Richard Ward; St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2001), 86.

2. The Divine Imperative, 2:6

“Oughtness,” though it gets bad press from some theologians, belongs to the ethic, the divine imperative, the conditionality of 1 John. The commandments of Jesus are not optional equipment like CD players in a car. Obedience, after all, is the sign, though not the cause, of knowing God. Some of our Step by Step calls to Christian discipleship hold about as “When in a valley in the mountains much excitement as an okra sandwich, require as there is a sudden heavy fall of snow, a much backbone as a chocolate éclair. Tony child visiting his grandmother may not be able to Campolo, more than a little reminiscent of John reach home again. But when father comes home Wesley, dares to invite young adults to an abanfrom work he will fetch him, lead the way and with his strong shoulders make a way through doned life with an adventuresome God. When snowdrifts. The child follows, step by step, in the he preaches with such a passion for a kingdom footsteps of father. . . .” ethic, it gets so quiet you could hear a mouse munching on a marshmallow. Not content with Eduard Schweizer, the author of the lines the indicative, he preaches the imperative, as in, above, mused how the child was “involved in “Isn’t it about time we started living like Jesus?” what father is doing” and “yet involved step by step; so much so that he learns to see what He proclaims a summons too great to be denied. father is doing before his eyes and step by step Some of our lesser expectations are like trying to practices what he sees.” tune a master violin to a dimestore ukelele. And some of us have a long way to go to be where we Eduard Schweizer, Lordship and Discipleship (London: SCM, 1960), 11. already thought we were. 3. The Sure Sign of Love, 2:5

Some Christians by temperament and in certain religious environments worry feverishly whether they are saved, whether their faith is real, whether they need to be baptized again. They should be respected but not preyed upon in order to report more baptisms. While it can be admitted that Johannine tests for true faith are

1 John 2:3-6

challenging rather than merely assuaging, it can be pointed out in the context of this passage that an attitude of spiritual bragging from divisive people who are espousing distorted teachings is the target under assault. The sincere believer who can detect a love for fellow Christians in her life, imperfect as it may be, may be encouraged in the realization that signs of spiritual rebirth are taking place in her life. If such a person remains disturbed about his personal salvation, possibly because of some moral failure, he may be comforted by the previous text promising forgiveness upon confession of sin (1:9). 4. The Walk and the Talk, 2:3-6

Preaching on this text could follow the format “not this or that, but this.” You do not detect a genuine Christian by blustery profession but through Christ-like action. So much of our preaching is like blank cartridges fired in a conventional salute to miscellaneous piety, but our author dared to proclaim that the walk verifies the talk and the talk without the walk discredits itself. A sermon might pick up on the walking motif of chapters 1 and 2, might accentuate the negative of avoiding sin and the positive alternative of loving.

Notes 1. H. Hübner, “teleioø,” EDNT 3:345. 2. A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948), 32. 3. Hübner, EDNT 3:345. 4. Rudolf Bultmann, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (trans. Philip O’Hara; ed. Robert Funk; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973), 26. 5. A. T. Robertson, General Epistles and Revelation of John (Word Pictures in the New Testament; vol. 6; Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933), 211. 6. John Stott, The Epistles of John (TNTC; ed. R. V. G. Tasker; Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1964), 93. 7. Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC, vol. 51; Waco TX: Word Books, 1984), 52. 8. Charles Monroe Sheldon, In His Steps (Chicago: Advance Publishing Company, 1898).

59

The Condition of the New Commandment 1 John 2:7-11

COMMENTARY This, the final subsection of the sustained segment on light and darkness defining metaphoric polarities (1:5–2:11), brings forward the central Johannine commandment of mutual love. Far from being the last time, this theme swells like an early motif in a symphony as it recurs in ever enlarging fashion throughout its movements (3:14; 4:11-12, 21), eventually dominating the Epistle. Part of the kinship of 2:7-11 with the preceding paragraph about keeping the commandments of Christ lies in its continuation of the concern to keep commandments; the final paragraph (2:7-11) of the first “movement” (1:5–2:11) expounds implications of the new commandment. Verses 7 and 8 introduce the new commandment and vv. 9-11 offer hate and love as responses to it. The reader is invited to take note of the “firsts” so far in the Epistle, including “beloved” along with the love command and the entrance of the issue of hating, though the latter two were in mind earlier. Verses 7-11 emerge from 2:3-6 with its mention of commandments, but vv. 7-11 for the first time lifts up the love commandment, and it becomes immediately apparent that the writer had it in mind from the first mention of walking in light or darkness (1:6-7), interrelating the love of one another with his light and darkness universe of discourse. Indeed, the paragraph begins appropriately with the first usage of the affectionate address “beloved,” especially appropriate for a new kind of community characterized by mutual love, a reflection of its ecclesiology. The Johannine church lives or dies, as do its individuals, according to the presence of love or hate toward one another. Of course the author never quotes John 13:34-35, but he does allude to it regularly as common tradition. The warm address of “beloved” seems further to imply a previous genial relationship, supporting the pastoral side of 1 John. This typically Christian address may be found in widespread use in the New

62

1 John 2:7-11

Testament (especially 1 and 2 Peter and Paul) and in 1 Clem. (1:1; 21:1). Christians are actually called God’s beloved (Rom 1:7), as are the Jews (Rom 11:28). The readers are beloved not only by the Elder but by God, having been drawn into fellowship through love.1 Here the entire congregation is addressed corporately. Careful to distinguish his purpose for writing—not to create or introduce a new commandment but an old one (the writer uses the adversative “but,” the Greek alla, employing the negative clarification to avoid misunderstanding apparent in the Greek text [cf. 2 John 5])—John takes his readers all the way back to the beginning, a constant baseline. The recipients have had this old commandment all along, “commandment” and “word” used interchangeably (cf. 2:5). The emphasis upon “which you have had” belongs to a larger rhetorical program of assurance premised upon already existing assets. Here the key Johannine expression “from beginning” refers to their first hearing of the gospel, their conversion, confirmation, congregationalization. Perhaps the command to mutual love belonged to their earliest instruction or catechism, possibly pre-baptismal. The latter part of the verse (7c) reinforces their original experience of hearing the Christian message. They are reminded of the fundamentals of the faith, a kind of foundationalism characteristic of 1 John. In reassuring fashion, the writer takes these Christians back to their education in the determinative content of the Christian life. The author was not one to introduce new teaching but to ground the church in the teaching of Christ. It is, after all, his opponents who offer new teaching, who are going on ahead (2 John 9). For 1 John oldness does not represent liability but asset, antiquity, authenticity. Originality or novelty does not merit a weightier claim. We may well be at a disjuncture between the apostolic author, who takes things apostolic with defining significance, and his opponents. Our writer steers toward the necessity of loyalty to what his readers heard from the beginning (2:24). In both vv. 7 and 8, writing with a conscious purpose appears to reflect the passionate intentionality of the entire letter, but in particular its insistence upon the command to love one another, accentuating love’s crucial importance in order for the distinctive Johannine kind of community to happen (cf. 2 John 5-6). Thinking dialectically, the author at v. 8 says “at the same time” (palin), from a different perspective, the commandment about which the author wrote to you also can be considered quite legitimately as new. Reflecting rather obviously on John 13:34, perhaps the most influential single verse of the Gospel impacting on 1 John, the writer names it “new” not only because Jesus did but also in the christological sense—that this kind of love is the same

1 John 2:7-11

sort as the unique love of Jesus for his own disciples. In the context of the Gospel and perhaps the Last Supper, the fulfillment of the new covenant of Jeremiah 31 could be intended. In this commendation of a commandment legitimately named both new and old, the modern reader should not lose sight of the fact that the author is writing a commandment to them. The cruciality of keeping the Christian commandments was established earlier (2:3-4). This “fresh” commandment, the Greek kaine, stands realized not only in Christ but among the believers. The validation derives from the realized light that shines “already” (∑d∑ ), a conviction present in the prologue of the Gospel (1:9) and its christological claim as the light of the world (8:12).2 There were certainly signs in Jesus’ ministry of the defeat of darkness in miracles and the enthronement of the cross, the latter an interesting contrast to Luke 22:53. The metaphors of light and darkness are reappearing, unmentioned in 2:3-6, but with a progression. The author buoys his recipients with his declaration that the darkness, though not gone, is passing away. Since the Epistle declares that the world is also passing away (2:17), darkness and world were closely related. Could 2:8c include the darkness of hate? Notably the word “darkness” appears no less than five times in vv. 8-11, three times in v. 11 in its sobering warning. Since the writer declares that the new commandment is true in them as well as in Christ, the actualization of mutual love in their communities may indeed be a sign that the true light shines. This early statement of eschatology in the process of realization represents the writer’s take on what time it was. In any event, this visionary reads the eschatological signs and perceives that the true light already shines, as a prophet who helps readers to see. By designating the command to love one another as both old and new, the writer adroitly invests the imperative with considerable authority, reflecting his strategy of persuasion. Obviously the command in John 13:34 centered on disciples, making it a badge of identification of connection with Jesus: “by this all will know that you are my disciples . . . ” (13:35). Hence the acid test of mutual love among disciples did not arise in the white-hot heat of internal conflict reflected in the Epistles but presumably earlier, not only at their conversion but in the gospel tradition of the Johannine Christ. In the following three verses, 2:9-11, that draw the implication from the first two verses (2:7-8), a classic pattern of testing appears, roughly similar in pattern to 2:3-6. The potentially qualifying claim discredited by a disqualifier (v. 9) is followed by a qualification sentence verifying the actuality of abiding in the light (v. 10). This begins with the action of loving, not the verbalizing of a spir-

63

64

1 John 2:7-11

itual claim. The final sentence (v. 11), a trenchant warning (the “but,” de, in conscious contrast), parallels v. 10 in its focus on action, but regrettably the action of hating. In this impressive set of three sentences, each includes a significant “and” (kai ), testing the immediately preceding clause, and each sentence opens with a participial construction (“saying,” “loving,” and “hating”). Without apology from the writer, this is just the way things are for those who hate and love, and the entire passage is articulated with no little authority. The rhetorical pattern in vv. 9-11 includes the person saying, the person loving, the person hating. The risk of hating seems most accentuated (44 words, 15 for loving), hating coming both first and third with v. 9 looking like one of the boasts. The rhetorical strategy appears as the great love commandment is used to define, to discredit, and to encourage. Refuting those who claim to dwell in the light while hating brothers and sisters, the epistolary writer reveals that darkness and hate belong to the same failing realm (2:9). Introducing the sixth formal boast in only nineteen verses, “to be in the light,” the third with the prefix “the person saying” since 2:4, he immediately chastises the claimant. Once again there is darkness, as 1:6,3 but now we are given another piece, hating, and so we recognize further progression or unfolding. If simultaneously someone says he or she is in the light and indulges in actual hate of Christian brothers and sisters, the claim annuls itself and amounts to self-condemnation. Of course the hating also comes under the implicit condemnation of dominical authority (John 13:34). The present tense stresses the current state of affairs, suggesting that the enmity continues. While v. 9 is an extractable general truth, it is emphatically focused on the current circumstance. Quite importantly, the object of love and hate in vv. 9, 10, 11 is persistently sisters and brothers (ton adelphon autou)! This represents the first overt reference to hating in the Epistle. The verb “hate” (miseø), obvious antonym for love, connotes a despising aversion for other people, a fate awaiting disciples (Luke 6:22) but forbidden to them (Luke 6:27) in the synoptic tradition. Love and hate stand in contrast throughout the Epistle (3:13-15; 4:20), deriving from two different realms. Otto Michel went so far as to say, “Hate becomes a demonic metaphysical power.”4 Being in the light and hating one’s fellow believers are mutually exclusive. Hating one’s fellow believers is revealed as a sign of the bondage of darkness. Judgment, “in the darkness until now,” self-inflicted as it were, falls upon the braggart (2:9b), quite the opposite of the claim with its hint of self-delusion. The “until now” (heøs arti) can be rendered “still” or “to this hour.” Implicit hope as well as declaration of

1 John 2:7-11

65

present spiritual reality are inherent in the “until now.” Strecker reads this declaration in terms of urging them “to reject hatred of the brothers and sisters at the present time and to open themselves to love.”5 The judgment of v. 9b is rather stringent, but it follows from the definitions of light as a realm of loving and darkness a realm of hating. The perspective grows out of an understanding of God as righteous, light and love. For the original readers the statement of v. 9 must have been both revealing and shocking, quite possibly succeeding in causing them to see the secessionists in a different light. The readers also may have reviewed their own relationships, even with the separatists, since they would have felt, whether boastful or not, to be in the light themselves. The positive correlate (v. 10), apparently the commandment of vv. 7-8, follows typically with the assurance that anyone loving sisters and brothers actually abides in the light. The Williams translation with its sensitivity to tenses renders as follows: “whoever continues to love his brother is always in the light.” Verse 10, however, functions as more than a positive assurance. Since the Elder did not consider mutual love an abstract and unattainable goal, he likely implies the actual presence of such love within the remaining community. The reader who sees love for others in her life can be assured of progress in Christian salvation. It defines unambiguously what abiding in the light looks like. While the judgment of still being in the condition of darkness obtained in v. 9, for those loving no cause of stumbling arises. Used only here in 1 John, the word often translated “stumbling block” (skandalon) can refer to temptations, bad examples or even to the cross (Matt 13:41; 16:23; 18:7; Rom 9:33; Rev 2:14). “Falling into Sin” It suggests giving offense or hindrance, especially as The noun skandalon shows up relates to belief. [“Falling into Sin”] 15 times in the NT, and the verb The potential scandal of stumbling in this context is 29 times. It can mean falling into sin. The hate! The loving disciple learns that she does not scannoun is used 21 times in the LXX, transdalize the faith and should serve not as a stop sign but lating 4 different Hebrew words. Note as a green light. The emphasis on love in 1 John Lev 19:14. appears in no small measure because of the presence of divisive hate, implied at v. 9. The connection of hating and end times may be influenced by Matthew 24:10. The epistolary writer holds a high standard for mutual love (3:16-17), and for him light and love go together. The loving person actually abides in the light, is a light person, knows the God of light who is the God of love. [Loving One Another in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs]

The final verse (11) of the entire section on light and darkness punctuates the utter seriousness of walking in darkness, which is sobering to the readers. The postpositive de (“but”), likely an

66

1 John 2:7-11

adversative conjunction here, certainly signals a difference from v. 10; the two verses stand in antithetical parallel. Hating brothers and sisters is particularly contrary to Johannine Christianity, a way of belief centered in a God of love, a revelation of love in Jesus, and his primary command (John 13:34). Verse 11 amounts to “an extended negative antithesis.”6 Once again the Epistle emphasizes that hating represents a sure sign of darkness walking as in v. 10 but adds now that such a person does not even know where she or he goes! The Gospel of John already associated darkness and light with the word picture of a Cosmic Forces traveler at sunset (12:35-36). [Cosmic Forces] Lindars, commenting on the gospel passage, wrote, On the sons of darkness and light see 1 QS 3:13–4:26, “The light and the darkness are the 1 Thessalonians 5:5, Ephesians 5:8. Once darkness falls, cosmic forces which contend for the one does not know where he or she is going. A similar possession of mankind. The people picture appears in John 12:35. The Epistle itself does not must either open themselves to the underestimate the danger of darkness. Those in the darklight identified with Jesus or else be ness cannot be in fellowship with God. overwhelmed by the darkness.” Lindars, Gospel of John, The New Century The causal clause (2:11d) explains why they do not Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, know where they are going, reminding the readers starkly 1986), 435. that hate should not be underestimated. The NRSV translates suggestively “because the darkness has brought on darkness.” They are blinded, it would seem, by the darkness of hate. John is convinced and convinces his readers that hatred can blind and in fact has. Of course, at a prosaic level the metaphor means you cannot see as well at night. One wonders about the precipitant of the hate. The verb “blinded” (etyphløsen), in the aorist tense probably in a constative sense, could refer to a “conclusive result of an action spread over a longer period of time.”7 It means “to blunt the mental discernment, darken the mind” (so Grimm, Lexicon, 633).8 What distinction, if any, does the author intend between being in the darkness and walking in the darkness? Jesus threatened the possibility of darkness, whereas at 2:11 it has taken place.9 Those inhabiting the darkness are cut off from God, hearkening back to 1:6. Hatred of brothers and sisters cuts one off from God. To hate one’s sister or brother is a heinous thing for a community whose core value is agap∑. The way the writer shapes his argument (2:7-11) leaves then the impression of an enduring significance to the text even beyond the present crisis of departing dissidents, giving the passage an emerging meaning beyond the historical conflict. Our author writes with a considerable authority and confidence. It is worthy of Loving One Another in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs See the following sources: T. Zebulon 8:5; T. Joseph; T. Simeon 4:7; T. Gad 6:1; and Jubilees 36:8. Reported by Talbert, Reading John: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles, (rev. ed.; Macon GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2005), 32.

1 John 2:7-11

note that through the entire section (1:5–2:11) runs warning, punctuated by the last verse (cf. 3:14). Unifying 1:5–2:11 are telltale signs of walking in the light that include (1) confession of sin rather than denial of personal sin (1:8, 10), (2) keeping the commandments (2:3), (3) walking as Jesus walked (2:6), and (4) loving fellow disciples (2:10).

CONNECTIONS 1. Vision of Mutual Love, 2:10

Without mutual love, the Johannine kind of church cannot exist. With obedience to the love command, the Johannine church can become increasingly Christ-like. The disciples of Jesus knew themselves called, accepted, entrusted, included, and beloved. They experienced a new quality of love. Such a unique fellowship of friends represents a new kind of community (cf. Mark 3:31-35). Such a loving place has power to heal, a place to bloom, a fellowship of acceptance. C. K. Barrett described the Johannine life insightfully: “Love is, as it were, the bond of existence within the unity of Father, Son, and believers . . . .”10 Potential church members nearly always want to join a loving congregation. Perhaps the most attractive aspect of Johannine ecclesiology lies in its vision of love of one for another. Love in a church can be intergenerational, including respect and up-close understanding of everyone from little children to senior adults as real people with something to offer. Churchly love reaches out to new members, stitching them into the social fabric of the church. Love and acceptance of fellow Christians of different ethnic and economic groups can occur. An ecumenical love for churches of another denomination in a community can take place where they are prayed for and praised. Love can even be maintained through mutual respect for those within the same church who differ or clash. Imagine that! 2. The Many Shapes of Christian Love, 2:10

Love is a medical mission team that journeys to Liberia to immunize a pocket of the population and meet immediate health problems. Love is a church community that organizes a concerted effort to gather sweaters and socks and shoes and sheets and blankets and coats for the homeless. Love is a group of men who begin

67

68

1 John 2:7-11

Men and Women Building Together

to build a Habitat House on Saturdays only to be joined by women as well. Love is a group of women who gather in the church fellowship hall on Wednesdays to make sandwiches for a soup kitchen located in a housing project. Love is a group of youth organizing a Vacation Bible School for children in an underprivileged area. Love is a rather saintly woman who cares for her confused husband in the middle stages of Alzheimer’s. Love is a gift in a will that leaves a substantial sum so a Sunday school class of older men can be “knights of Samaria” caring for the troubled. 3. Love New and Old, 2:7-8

Of love as new and old, W. T. Conner, theologian of the Southwest, put it, “It is as old as the gospel and (Credit: George Peters, istockphoto.com) as new as each soul’s experience of the love of God in Christ Jesus. There are some things, really the best things, in life that are both old and new. Love is old but to the heart that experiences its uplifting power it is the newest thing in the world.”11 4. “Give me that old-time religion,” 2:7

Verse 7 insists upon the defining role of beginnings, particularly as related to mutual love. Christian renewal can occur by returning to earliest Christian beginnings. A rousing hymn rings out, “Give me that old-time religion, give me that old-time religion, it was good enough for Paul and Silas, it is good enough for me.”12 First John agrees with the sentiment of the song, if not all the connotations that tend to gather around it. The “old-time religion” of 1 John placed love at its center. Instruction for baptismal candidates needs to include the ethical dimension of the Christian life, particularly the love command. 5. Light Will Prevail, 2:8

First John works with the underlying conviction that light will finally prevail. As William Hull put it with his customary eloquence, “This was true in creation when the darkness fled before the word, ‘Let there be light’ (Gen. 1:3). It was true in Christ who, though rejected by many (John 1:10-11), was nevertheless the Light of the world (8:12). It is still true of the church whose

1 John 2:7-11

witness could not be extinguished by persecution (cf. 9:22; 12:42; 16:2).”13 The darkness of racial prejudice does seem in the process of receding when Martin Luther King Jr. is named as the most important Georgian of the twentieth century, ahead even of the only American president from the state. The inspired hope of 1 John envisions a new order replacing a dying order. 6. A Hating Christian? 2:9, 11

Here in our text appears the immoral anomaly of despising a fellow Christian. A hating Christian is a contradiction in terms. A Christian is by definition someone who loves his or her fellow Christian. Hate breaks apart a family or marriage or friendship or church. Christians warred against fellow Christians in the battles of the Thirty Years’ War, World Wars I and II, and in Ireland. David Mace, the great Quaker authority on marriage, came to the conclusion that how a couple deals with anger largely determines success or failure of the relationship, and believed that unresolved anger causes divorce.14 7. Hate Hurts the Hater, 2:11

Psychologists often make the point that hate hurts the hater and is even detrimental to health. Our author certainly espouses the view that hatred harms the individual hating as well as harming the community. In The Angry Christian, Andrew Lester recAdolf Hitler ognizes how anger can cut a destructive path and is a powerful emotion carrying ruinous potential. He describes how anger can cause disunity, estrangement, and alienation.15 In this unhealthy condition, vengeance can replace forgiveness, wounding rather than healing. With the loss of civility comes a wall of partition. Hate creates barriers, distorts others, distances people, and darkens vision. Hatred of the Jews so blinded Hitler that it contributed to his espousal of the superiority of the Aryan race and the infamous Final Solution. Furthermore, racism is blinded but not colorblind. Racism is filled with such blinding prejudice that it looks selectively, screening out the good, looking past the admirable that does not fit the pre-set ideal, and caricaturing any presumed flaws. Hand-me-down hate is often Drawing of Hitler, 1923. blind because trusted parents pass it on as self-evident (Credit: George Grantham Bain Collection, truth. In Joseph Conrad’s short novel The Heart of Library of Congress)

69

70

1 John 2:7-11

Darkness, the character Kurtz begins quite high minded, yet the darkness eventually blinds him. Hand-me-down hate represents one of the primary sources of hating, a startling fact that should alert parents to the importance of their attitudes. 8. Is You Is, or Is You Ain’t?

In a Greek class studying 1 John in which the tests of true Christianity were emphasized, one student gathered it up in the question “Is You Is, or Is You Ain’t?” This student found the tests of (1) obeying Jesus’ commandments (2:3-4), (2) loving the brothers and sisters (2:10), (3) living like Christ (2:6), and (4) naming the name of Christ (3:23).

Notes 1. Georg Strecker, Johannine Letters (Hermeneia; ed. Harold Attridge; trans. Linda M. Malony; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 49. 2. Strecker, Letters, 106, points out that 2:8 and John 1:5 are not true parallels, and they certainly are not entirely so. However, you do find phøs, skotia, and phainei in John 1:5. In both passages a note of triumph over darkness appears as well. 3. Hans Conzelmann, “skotos,” TDNT 7:444, pointed out that darkness is reason for a breach of fellowship with God while in 2:8-11 it is a result. 4. Otto Michel, “miseø,” TDNT 4:692. 5. Strecker, Letters, 52. 6. Ibid. 7. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992), 109. See BDF, section 332; also John 8:12; 11:9f; 12:35. 8. C. L. W. Grimm, Lexicon Graeco-Latinum in libros Novi Testamenti (Leipzig: 1862). 9. Schnackenburg, Epistles, 109. 10. C. Kingsley Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text (London: SPCK, 1958), 397. 11. W. T. Conner, The Epistles of John (New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1929), 41. 12. African spiritual, adapted by Charles Tillman, late 1890s. 13. William Hull, “John,” in Luke-John (Broadman Bible Commentary; vol. 9; ed. C. J. Allen; Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970), 215. 14. David Mace, Close Companions (New York: Continuum, 1987), 90–99. 15. Andrew D. Lester, The Angry Christian: A Theology for Care and Counseling (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003).

Pastoral Empowerment 1 John 2:12-14

COMMENTARY Though the explicit imagery falls away not to reappear after 2:11, issues of light (2:12-14) and darkness (2:15-17) persist. Thumbing through the pages of 1 John in the Greek testament or NRSV, the reader discovers the exceptionality of 2:12-14 because of the manner of its presentation on the page. No other passage in the letter is set apart in this manner by modern editors, which signals uniqueness. A rapid reading of this singular text reveals several patterns of impressive, mysterious repetition that can be treated as a problem or responded to in the light of its dramatic format and purpose. Six times in the course of these verses, the author self-consciously calls attention to the motivation for his taking the initiative to write. An overview of the letter actually turns up numerous scattered texts where the writer calls attention to the conscious purposes of his writing. Several of these texts intend clarification of purpose and avoidance of a misconception (2:7, 8, 21; also 2 John 5). Explicit statements of writing with design appear both at the outset of the letter (1:4) and near its end (5:13), as one might expect. What is stunning in the larger canvas of the Epistle is the concentration of eight verses in chapter 2 alone where “I write” or “I wrote” appears (2:1, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 21, 26), leaving the remaining two instances to the first and last chapters. These texts not only brought to consciousness the interrelated intentions of the writer but alerted the readers, leaving little to doubt, which is a successful rhetorical strategy. The writer aids the reader in understanding his own missive. It is as though this church leader took on the claims of the opponents and then turned more to the pastoral task of empowering. Possibly our writer penned 1:1–2:11 in a single sitting. Of even more note are the six usages of the three verses (2:12-14). They must be accorded a prime place in ascertaining the grand purpose of the Epistle, especially since they coordinate surprisingly well with the classic purpose statement in the final chapter (5:13). This unusual writer penned the Epistle because he wanted them to

72

1 John 2:12-14

know of their salvation, giving them six signs at 2:12-14! This tends to favor the reading of the Epistle from the pastoral side. Our author has tended to go with the collective “we” for all would be Christians along with the more formal, impersonal generalizations “the one saying” or “he or she saying” (2:4, 6, 9) with their positive counterparts (2:5, 10), both belonging to the world of “we.” What stands out is the first person “I write,” dotted with great density throughout the second chapter or first movement. Most of the instances stand alongside a personal address, like children, beloved, fathers. It would seem then that the writer self-consciously takes aim at the particular recipients in these usages. It seems to personalize, creating a dramatic, direct address. The rhetoric provides considerable impact. These singular verses (2:12-14) are introduced rather abruptly, with no transitional sentence bridging from v. 11. Furthermore, the text takes on a more direct tone. The more formal style (or comment to whomever it applies) turns into direct, personal address. We do not encounter generalized “tests.” Instead, we find highly encouraging, altogether unmodified ascriptions of empowering spiritual possessions already belonging to the believers. Even though these verses are abrupt and unusual, they are definitely not without ties to their context. Stylistically the affectionate vocatives, such as “my children” and “beloved ones,” had already begun (2:1, 7) and continue as a notable characteristic of this pastoral letter. Verses 12-14 belong to this fabric. Furthermore, the forgiveness of sins (2:12b) has been introduced and emphasized already (1:7, 9; 2:1-2). While the darkness of sin and the Evil One appear, so does the light of knowing, forgiving, and conquering. The assurance of having known Christ (2:3, 5) also preceded, then appears three times in 2:12-14 in relation to the Son or the Father. So affectionate address, explicit mention of writing, and assurance of knowing God or Christ all connect well with context, as does the key word “abiding.” Verses 12 and 13 with their present tense “I write” fit into the pattern of the previous verses (2:1, 7, 8). Verses 12-14 also construct the foundation for vv. 15-17. The indicative of grace (vv. 12-14) precedes the imperative (vv. 15-17); the experiential groundwork provides the basis for the admonition. Charles Talbert pointed out that because the community receives the gifts experientially, they can pursue the guidance given.1 Another noticeable pattern in these singular verses involves the reiterated appearance of either “that” or “because,” the Greek hoti. If translated “that,” then it introduces a declaration or proclamation. If we render it “because,” then it obviously addresses purpose, motivation for writing. In the immediate vicinity, “that” seems

1 John 2:12-14

73

called for at 2:5, but “because” is more natural at 2:8, 11, 16. At 2:8, the verb “write” appears with the causal basis. Numerous translations, such as NRSV and NIV and Williams and GNB, favor the causal understanding. Nevertheless, it remains a The Minority Report for the Declaratory hard call. Perhaps the author intended to Sense “that” encompass both, with the causal likely the While most current translations and primary meaning. In his classic commentary, commentaries favor “because,” famous Brooke agrees, asserting that the author was scholars such as Bengel and some translations of the Reformation favored “that.” More recently “trying to show them how their position as Rothe and Lindskrog adopted “that” as well. Christians enables them to meet the danger to Passages such as 2:8, 21 and 5:13 could also which they are exposed. . . . It is because they are support “that” in a declaratory sense, and this in fellowship with God and have real experience rendering comports well with 1 John written as a of the Fatherhood of God that he can appeal to proclamation (1:3). So B. Noack, “On I John II. 12them with confidence.”2 [The Minority Report for the 14,” NTS, 6:236–41. Declaratory Sense “that”]

Johann Albrecht Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, trans. W. Fletcher, ed. A. R. Fausset, 5 vols. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1858).

Essentially six signs of salvation, powers of the age to come, are realized among this faithful community. These six include (1) the forgiveness of sins, (2) knowledge of Christ, (3) conquest of evil, (4) knowledge of the Father, (5) strength, and (6) the abiding word of God. The Elder writes with specific encouragement to those who have already been redeemed, as the consistent focus by means of the past tense testifies. One other stylistic duplication often puzzles readers. Verse 14 repeats vv. 12-13 to a considerable degree. Scholars speculate a possible interruption in writing between vv. 13 and 14,3 oral teaching in two editions,4 intentional emphasis,5 a reference back to the Gospel,6 two drafts, the first triad elaborated in the second,7 or even a reference to 2 and 3 John.8 Certainly rhetorical flair portends repetition for effect, which in fact it The Role of Reiteration achieves. The repetition helps achieve the Modern narrative critics respect the intended purpose. The latter part of v. 14 funcimportant role of frequency. See Gerard tions not merely as refrain but as significant Genette, Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method (Ithaca NY: Cornell, 1975), 78–79. elaboration. [The Role of Reiteration] Are we possibly afforded a glimpse into the Johannine community at worship or study? Could 2:12-14 be a reflection or outline of a sermon or lesson in which the rhetorical strategy called for a beginning address to the entire congregation? Then other groups within the congregation found themselves singled out and addressed directly and quite positively? If so, each heading may have been elaborated on, focused in the first instance on the reality of a forgiven community, each not a minor point but a profound self-understanding for the entire community.

74

1 John 2:12-14

However that may be, the “children” (v. 12a, teknia), an already familiar and warm address (2:1, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21), meet with the first reminding affirmation and reason for confidence. The appellation “children” almost certainly refers to the entire congregation, given its widespread usage elsewhere in the Epistle, though three age groups could possibly be in mind; verse 4:4, however, seems decisive since it refers to all the recipients and speaks of conquering. The children are the “children of God,” those begotten of God. They are also Johannine children, and in our context they are the faithful ones who have not defected. The final warning of the letter (5:21) speaks to the full congregation. The Elder celebrates the basic and profound spiritual reality that the sins of the children have been forgiven. This forgiveness bespeaks a past event with continuing results (perfect passive tense) effected by divine grace. This instrumentality (dia) for the forgiveness turns out to be “his name,” earlier the cleansing of the blood (1:7). The preposition dia should be translated as “on account of ” (cf. John 15:21) or “because.” While the “name of God” is quite prominent in John (5:43; 10:25; 12:28), it makes no appearance as such in 1 John. The reference here points to the power of the name of Jesus, even possibly to baptism in his name (as Acts 2:38; 10:48). On the basis of 3:23 and 5:13, it seems most natural to interpret/understand forgiveness at 2:12 as coming in the experience of believing in his name, so characteristic of the Johannine faith (John 1:12; 2:23; 3:18; 20:30). Of course, a name could not be construed inseparably from the person since the name communicates something characteristic about the individual. Strecker strikes the right note in his observation that the name “stands for the Lord who has been preached in the community and who works in it, through whom sins are forgiven for all who believe.”9 While the forgiveness of 2:12 points to an initial and basic forgiveness, 1:9 bids the believer to persist in making confession and receiving forgiveness. Quite self-consciously, alerting another segment of personal address, the Elder states that he is writing to the fathers (2:13a), focused on older believers, not necessarily elderly, longer in the faith, likely going back to the beginnings of the Johannine church. These mature Christians with a critically important memory of earliest beginnings offered stability for the community that the author may have underlined in order to credentialize and enhance their influence. Others claim invalidly to “know” (2:4), but these revered fatherly figures had the authentic right to the assertion of knowing God not only mystically or ethically but historically. The fathers

1 John 2:12-14

75

could have been loyal confederates of the Elder, stalwarts who stayed, who likely resisted the false teachers. I tend to read this designation of fathers as one more appeal to the beginning of the movement. These fathers could claim more than duration and maturation. They could claim a memory and experience from the baseline of the first beginnings. They may have been anchors in the stormy conflict, informal local authorities, if you please. Possibly the secessionists were latter-day joiners who never grasped fully the distinctive Johannine faith and were more eclectic. These church fathers may have been spiritual fathers, founders from the beginning. The use of the word “father” (pat∑r) often refers to God in John. The plural “fathers” (pateres) may be “ancestors” (John 4:20; 6:32, 49, 58) or “patriarchs” (John 7:22). Numerous uses in the speech of Stephen (Acts 7) identify “forefathers.” The Pauline tradition, actually, may provide the best parallel (1 Cor 4:15-17). The Corinthian Christians are beloved children and Paul gladly claims that he became their father through the gospel. In turn, Timothy is characterized as a beloved and faithful child. Perhaps the fathers of 2:13a and 14c were fathers in the faith as was the Elder. On the other hand, Otto Augustine’s Early Comments: All Addressed Michel saw the fathers as the “old ones” and the to Everyone He calls them children, fathers, young young men as the bearers of the Word.10 There men—children because they are born; could be signs of early church offices appearing mothers and fathers because they acknowledge here, though the Elder probably refers to two the one who is “the Beginning”; but why young groups inside the larger congregation who were women and men? Because you have overcome more dynamic and fluid than formal office the evil one. There is birth in the children, antiqseems to suggest; clearly the Elder himself uity in the mothers and fathers, strength in the young women and men. held at least an informal office. We find familial St. Augustine, Love One Another, My Friends: Saint Augustine’s imagery for depicting the church11 and possibly Homilies on the First Letter of John, trans. John Leinenweber 12 a patriarchal perspective or situation. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989), 15. [Augustine’s Early Comments: All Addressed to Everyone] [Community Rule at Qumran ]

Community Rule at Qumran

While the father’s knowledge of Christ from The Community Council of the Dead Sea the beginning may refer to the beginnings of the sect allowed members to speak only in preaching and congregationalizing rather than accord with their rank and seniority. See the to the Eternal Word of John 1:1, it is noteQumran documents 1 QS 6:13-24; CD 13:11-13; 1 QSa 1:6-19. worthy that the author’s formal address also mentions the children having known the Father (v. 14b). This assertion may point backward to the pivotal time of conversion, of being begotten of God. Smalley speaks eloquently that “the special privilege of all ‘children’ is to know their Father.”13 The mention three times of “knowing” hints at its importance not only in 2:12-14 but in the entire Epistle, reflecting no less than his

76

1 John 2:12-14

understanding of religion, an authentic knowing of God through Jesus Christ. Our author thinks of a relational knowing of a particular God of light, righteousness, and love, a knowing not ratified by the lifestyles and beliefs of the secessionists. Turning finally to the younger men (and women?), the writer affirms their developmentally significant moral and spiritual Image Not Available victory over the Evil One. due to lack of digital rights. Please view the published He celebrates and complicommentary or perform an Internet ments decidedly and search using the credit below. emphatically. While Jesus conquered the Evil One in a cosmic sense, these young adults have done so existentially. Considering the temptations of Asia Minor as well as the misleading allure of the false teachers formerly in the church, this amounts to a considerable congratulation. Illustration of the words of the Confession of Faith. From “Hortulus Animae,” Wittenberg (1558). Library, Abbey, Kremsmuenster, Austria. (Credit: Erich Lessing / Art Resource, NY) The idea of “conquering” appears far more prominently in 1 John than in the Gospel, the verb popping up six times here while only once in John. The noun occurs at 1 John 5:4. The single usage of the verb “to conquer” at John 16:33 is strategic. The Johannine Christ announces the victor’s song of assurance that he has overcome the world. Whereas conquering of the world by Jesus is revealed in the Gospel, a conquering of the Evil One by believers appears in the Epistle. Strikingly, of the twenty-eight usages in the New Testament, twenty-four appear in the Johannine literature, with seventeen occurrences in Revelation. A cursory reading of the letters to the seven churches reveals the seven promises to the conquerors. The cross is understood in Revelation as the love of God liberating from sin, the appropriate self-understanding of a Christian life, faithfulForgiveness of the Sins The “Apostle’s Creed,” a confession of faith long-used by many churches, affirms, “I believe in . . . the forgiveness of sins.” This 16th C. illustration of this part of the creed depicts the crucified Christ as the basis for the forgiveness of sins.

1 John 2:12-14

77

This Victory over the Evil One ness even in death (2:10). Malatesta, referencing 2:13, speaks of the “eschatological triumph of all Christians by reason of their faith.”14 This victory over the Evil One points to the demonic personified. Reference to the Evil One appears in John (17:15) and quite often in 1 John. In John we have both the idea of evil works (3:19; 7:7) and the threat of the Evil One (17:15). While the word “evil” appears only these three times in the Gospel, it appears decidedly more often in 1 John, especially considering the Epistle’s comparative length. The Evil One appears prominently (2:13, 14; 3:12; 5:18, 19). In the passage at 3:12 regarding the murderous character of Cain, evil deeds appear alongside the Evil One as source. A rather remarkable commonality emerges from the two writings, though Marco da Oggiono (c.1475–1549). The Three Archangels defeating Lucifer. Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, Italy. [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PDmore accentuated in the Epistle. old-100)] We must add to the picture from this universe of discourse that the Evangelist presents the parallel figure of “the prince of this world.” This evil figure is mentioned three times in the Gospel of John (12:31; 14:30; 16:11). Connecting judgment of the world, the driving out of the Ruler of the world, with his being “lifted up,” Jesus chortles victoriously in visionary fashion. At 14:30 Jesus announces forebodingly that the Ruler of this world is coming but hastens to add that this ruler has no power over him. At 16:11, Jesus declares resolutely that the Ruler has been condemned. Interestingly, none of the other New Testament writers use this exact characterization of Satan as Ruler of the world. Nowhere in 1 John does this expression arise, though conceptually it appears in the belief that the whole world lives under the power of the Evil One (5:19). This Evil One is not only pervasively powerful but significantly limited. Jesus himself has vanquished this sinister threat so that he cannot harm (touch) his disciples. Then, far from being dismissed or even demoted in the world, the Johannine literature envisions a realm of faith where the Evil One does not reign. Believers enjoy the considerable advantage of having overcome the world through faith in Jesus as the Son of God (5:5), the

78

1 John 2:12-14

The Prince of the World and Death Interestingly, as C. K. Barrett pointed out, the prince of the world did not refer to Satan but to the Angel of Death in rabbinic writings. J. Edgar Bruins pursues the death context, finding overtones of classical mythology, especially the cult of Herakles, conqueror of death and evil; there is a statue of Herakles in Ephesus.

affirmation the Elder has in mind at 2:13. Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Son of God, everyone born of God, overcomes the world, the domain of the demonic. [The Prince of the World and Death]

In the second round of this address (v. 14), the epistolary communicator alters the previous C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction affirmation of the children, this time calling with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text (London: SPCK, 1958), 355. them by a different Greek word (paidia), but J. Edgar Bruins, “A Note on John 16, 33 and I John 2:13-14,” likely only for stylistic variety. The sheer repetiJBL 86 (1967): 453. tion makes an impact. It is said of the children, indeed the entire community, that they too have known the Father. Hence two things have been claimed for all the believers—being forgiven and having known God. This can suggest that in their first knowing of God they discovered the deity in the gracious encounter of forgiveness! Two complementary states of capital importance are attributed to the entire body: forgivenness and personal knowledge of God belong to any believer. The final address to the young men (v. 14efgh) is considerably longer, breaking the literary pattern and probably signaling its importance. In the Greek text, vv. 12-13 include twenty-seven words while thirty-three words belong to v. 14. Even more strikingly, each of the five addresses thus far contains a single assertion while the last one includes three. Could it be that the apostolic writer was most concerned about the younger members, possibly because he saw them as more vulnerable to defection, especially if most of the secessionists were drawn from the younger ranks? One could read the next passage (2:15-17) as particularly designed for the young who were tempted to love the world. If so, the warning regarding the desires of the world had this less “seasoned” generation in mind. Far more than a reprise, the writer offers an important explanation for the conquering and with it further encouragement. He tells the young people that they are strong, a characteristic often associated with youth, but likely here meaning spiritual strength related to temptation. “Is it because we are strong?” Augustine queried, answering with another question, “Or is it because he is strong in us, the One who was weak in the hands of his persecutors? The One who didn’t resist his persecutors has made us strong.”15 It was more the latter than the former in Johannine thought (as 4:4), but the former should not be excluded entirely.

1 John 2:12-14

CONNECTIONS What can you take away from this singular passage? Indeed, it is particularly significant for coping with life and empowering the Christian pilgrimage. 1. Three Generations

The church needs three generations, as John Westerhoff suggested. The church requires a generation with a memory, a generation with a commitment to action, and a generation with a vision.16 We saw in the exegesis of the passage a variety of possibilities for identifying the three groups. The fathers likely were well connected to the most pristine tradition, likely anchors in the storm, sources of stability. They were affirmed, and they made a contribution. In this multi-generational context, the author honored the fathers, which implicitly included the mothers, recognizing the value of the senior generation without being patronizing. They had an invaluable memory. Tom Brokaw opened the eyes of many Americans to the exceptional contribution of the GI Joe and Josephine generation in his well-written The Greatest Generation.17 Once a popular notion favored the idea that children are to be seen and not heard. Such an unenlightened attitude has long since vanished, but subtly ageism sneaked in during the idolization of the Simeon young until the senior adult not only lost regard but came to be shunted to the sidelines, to be seen and not heard. Image Not Available Simeon of Jerusalem, due to lack of digital rights. featured in Luke’s Please view the published infancy narrative commentary or perform an Internet (2:25-35), believed he search using the credit below. would live to see the Messiah. He appears in the narrative as an old man. We imagine him waiting on tiptoe through the springtime Benjamin Gerritz Cuyp(1612–1652). Simeon in the Temple. Oil on canvas. Gemaeldegalerie Alte Meiste, of youth, the summer Museumslandschaft Hessen Kassel, Kassel, Germany. (Credit: Bildarchiv Preussischer Kulturbesitz / Art Resource, NY) of being twenty-

79

80

1 John 2:12-14

something, the fall of his middle years, and on into the winter of old age. One day an ordinary peasant family appeared at the temple. He came out of the shadows and took their baby in his arms like a grandfather cuddling his first grandchild. He recognized in this unlikely family the Messiah. No heavenly band played “Hail to the Chief.” No medieval halo encircled the baby’s head, no legion of angels hovered overhead, no celestial Western Union representative delivered a telegram from God. Simeon was the kind of individual who so sensitized his spiritual radar that he knew when he was in the Presence. He was not deafened by the noise of downtown Jerusalem. Our particular text values the entire community and the younger men and women, seeing them as invaluable to the community life of the church. Younger Christians should be incorporated into congregational life and not treated as inconsequential members. Churches need visionaries who see not just how it is in the real world but how it could be and how it will be. These vital visionaries should not let those who have abandoned their dreams discourage their own. The church requires a generation as well that will make it happen in the present. Each generation can play a crucial role. 2. The Power of the Pastoral Compliment

A genuine affirmation when grounded in reality, which stands out in our passage, can turn things around. Affirmation, confidence, and affection play a prominent part in the Epistle. Nor is the founded compliment manipulation by fawning flattery or misleading praise. The text makes Christians aware of spiritual assets that can help cope with life, invite a sense of personal confidence and assurance in the faith. Such affirmation can equip the believer for difficult times. The presence of grace in the life of the Christian is celebrated, functioning as a ministry of reminder and selfdiscovery. The believer is invited to bring her God-given strengths to bear in cooperative endeavor with God. The observant minister or other Christian may see budding signs of spiritual growth that are obscure to the person affirmed. Christians as priests to one another may not only hold one another accountable but can encourage one another with deft affirmation that rightly name signs of God at work. Some teachers and ministers throw gravel in the face of church members each week. In our text one sees considerable respect for laity empowered by God.

1 John 2:12-14 3. Six Signs of Salvation

These “Six Signs of Salvation” singled out here, which can be preached or taught to empower and encourage the laity, are laden with potential. If forgiven, for example, one need not be imprisoned by a dark past but liberated for a finer future. With the experience of forgiveness, guilt does not cling or clutter your life with its inevitable unconscious drag. You are free to live and reach far more potential and satisfaction. The church exists as a forgiven community that can be accepting and confident in facing its world. Knowing the forgiveness of sins and knowing God are complementary, opening up a communion not only with God but with fellow Christians. Christians belong to the fellowship of the forgiven. Here indeed a potential understanding of church arises as a community that knows itself forgiven and accepted, not the camaraderie of the arrived. This great sense of being forgiven is one of the best things the Christian life has to offer. A young woman came to the United States after being converted by Christian missionaries. Enrolled in a Christian college, she nevertheless got involved with a young man and became pregnant. Overwhelmed by an overriding feeling of guilt, she retreated into a kind of catatonic withdrawal. She communicated with no one but struggled in great depression. A minister was called in to try to open conversation with her, being informed by a nurse in the hospital that she would not share her anguish with anyone. The minister made several personal visits seeking to show warmth and acceptance and loving understanding. He would talk to her even though she made no verbal response. He spoke to her of the kind of God who forgives, and he read from 1 John. Finally, she broke her silence painfully with the repeated explanation, “I cannot forgive myself.” It was only over time that she allowed a sense of a loving God forgiving her to seep into her wounded psyche, and she began to heal. It may well be in the Johannine perspective that the first knowing of God is in the experience of forgiveness. We encounter God as forgiving even as the prodigal son experienced the embrace of his forgiving father. This is quite an introduction to God. Can we not say further that in the experience of forgiveness of sins, initially and afterward, we have an experience of God? Another of the “six signs of salvation,” quite important in Johannine thinking, has to do with conquering, overcoming. By God’s help the young men and women have known victory over evil. Jesus himself in his temptations at the outset of his ministry experienced exhilarating and empowering victory over the

81

82

1 John 2:12-14

demonic. Disciples can as well. Later the Epistle will ring the changes on the theme of “Faith is the Victory” (5:4, 5). Teachers and preachers can help people cope with life and the special challenges of the Christian life by developing a series on overcoming. Among other options, one can preach on overcoming divorce (Mal 2), grief (1 Sam 15, 16), shyness (Exod 3, 4), depression (1 Kgs 19), fear (Exod 14), temptations (Matt 4:1-11), self (Mark 8:34-38), and failure (Acts 15:36-41, 2 Tim 4:11). The famous preacher Henry Ward Beecher, in his “A Sermon to Young Men,”18 appealed in compassionate manner to the dangers of the young moving into the city, basing his message on 2:14. These young men far from home for whom he had special empathy faced temptations for which they were not prepared. He pictured them wanting to be loved and thus being easily tempted. In many instances of Beecher’s knowledge, the young men Henry Ward Beecher, c. 1855–1865. (Credit: Library of Congress Prints and went steadily downward little by little. Photographs Division, Brady-Handy Photograph Collection) They fell into dissipation, a tendency toward excess in drinking, using tobacco, an addiction of some unwholesome practice, a bad influence upon their health. Beecher pictured these young men setting up the wrong ideal of wealth, mixing up ends and means as they used the wrong means to success. He called for an “unbribable honesty.” His remedies for these illusions included greater responsibility upon employers of the young to watch and care for them and providing earlier closings of business. Today young men and women are exposed to social ugliness, to an anonymous existence in sprawling urban complexes, more extended periods before marriage, isolation, and loneliness. Henry Ward Beecher

4. The Absence of Fathers

Locales that enjoy a low rate of father absence from homes report less teen pregnancy and juvenile arrests. This factor translates into a commendation for good fathers. Absence, on the other hand,

1 John 2:12-14

drives all kinds of social ills. Fatherless children are far more likely to commit crimes. David Blankenhorn, who sees “fatherless America” as the most urgent social problem, brings considerable research to bear. He is convinced that a good society elects to celebrate the ideal of a father who puts family first. His book Fatherless America merits reading.19 The contemporary church, like 1 John, can lift up good fathers who offer spiritual leadership.

Notes 1. Charles Talbert, Reading John, A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles (Reading the New Testament Series; New York: Crossroad, 1994), 24–25. 2. A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948), 44. 3. Robert Law, The Tests of Life (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909). 4. I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John (NIBCNT; ed. F. F. Bruce; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), 135. 5. Ignace de la Potterie, “The Truth in Saint John,” in The Interpretation of John (2d ed.; ed. John Ashton; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1997), 77–81. 6. Plummer, Alfred. Epistles of St. John (The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges; ed. F. H. Chase and A. F. Kirkpatrick; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1906), 98–99. 7. F. F. Bruce, The Epistles of John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1979), 57–58. 8. Georg Strecker, Johannine Letters (Hermeneia; ed. Harold Attridge; trans. Linda M. Malony; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 55. 9. Strecker, Johannine Letters, 54n. 10. Michel, “pat∑r,” EDNT 3:57. 11. C. Clifton Black, “The First, Second, and Third Letter of John” (NIB 12; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998), 363–470. 12. Ruth B. Edwards, The Johannine (NT Guides; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996). 13. Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC 51; Waco TX: Word Books, 1984), 78. 14. Edward Malatesta, Interiority and Covenant (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978), 169. 15. Augustine, Love One Another, My Friends: Saint Augustine’s Homilies on the First Letter of John (trans. John Leinenweber; San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989), 16. 16. John Westerhoff, Tomorrow’s Church (Waco: Word, 1976), esp. 37–103. 17. Tom Brokaw, The Greatest Generation (New York: Random House, 1998).

83

84

1 John 2:12-14 18. Henry Ward Beecher, “A Sermon to Young Men,” in 20 Centuries of Great Preaching (vol. 4; ed. Clyde E. Fant, Jr., and William M. Pinson, Jr.; Waco: Word, 1971), 304–16. 19. David Blankenhorn, Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem (New York: BasicBooks, 1995).

Love of the World and Love of the Father 1 John 2:15-17

COMMENTARY With some customary abruptness, the author introduces a warning against loving the world. Abrupt in content, style, and altered tone, this text is written with authority as throughout the Epistle and may well be pre-formulated homiletical fragments or even a précis. The writer may have had the secessionists in mind (he names them in 2:19), who likely did more than offend the fellowship of mutual love by leaving. They went out into the world, seemingly preferring that world to the fellowship of the Johannine community. (If portions of the Farewell Address in John were being finalized about the same time as 1 John, one could Isis and Serapis detect a separation from Bronze coin of the city of Alexandria, reign of emperor Hadrian, AD the world at 15:18-25; 134/5. Roman. When the end of the Ptolemaic dynasty came in 30 16:20, 33.) The fact that BC the Romans, in line with their policy elsewhere, interfered as little the text announcing and as possible with the status quo. The Roman administration maininterpreting the secession tained the closed currency system within the new province of Egypt. On this example, the portrait of the emperor Hadrian (AD from the church lies in 117–38) is shown on the obverse. On the reverse are the busts of such close proximity the Egyptian gods Isis and Serapis between a figure of the god (2:19-20) should not be Harpokrates, all above an eagle. Below the gods, the date appears overlooked. The secessionin the form of the regnal year of Hadrian: year 18 (equivalent to AD ists, like Demas, may have 134/5). loved this present world (2 Tim 4:10). Whether, in Image Not Available fact, they succumbed to due to lack of digital rights. worldly desires is not clear. Please view the published The world threatened the commentary or perform an Internet fledgling Johannine comsearch using the credit below. munity, whether related to the secessionists or not. British Museum, London, Great Britain (Credit: © The Trustees of The British Museum / Assuming Asia Minor Art Resource, NY) and Ephesus as possible

86

1 John 2:15-17

provenance, the apostolic writer may have been concerned about pagan cults, especially the Egyptian religions of Isis and Serapis as well as imperial cults and activities at the stadium and theater. Furthermore, the Roman farces in theaters included burlesque revue of song and dance, nudity and obscene subjects (Dio Chrysostom, Alex. 32:4; Apulieus, Met. 10:29-34), and pantomime often involving obscenity.1 The images of light and darkness are not fully forgotten. If 2:12-14 reflects light, vv. 15-16 warn of dark things. The preceding three verses can be seen in terms of their sequence as providing the experiential foundation for the admonition of vv. 15-17. Since they have received the gift experientially, the recipients can follow the guidance given. While this text is distinctive and a departure from the direct address of vv. 12-14, it represents a return to the familiar testing and sifting of authentic Christianity (v. 17) already established earlier in the Epistle (1:5–2:11). Also the world, the domain of darkness and the demonic, may have been suggested not only because of the mention of the Evil One (2:14), but because the young conquer, a conquering conceivably of the allures of the world and youthful impulses. The reader does well to follow the four basic rhetorical movements of this important paragraph. The prophetic writer/orator begins with (1) negative command (v. 15a), moves to (2) a correlated condition (v. 15bc), on to (3) causal explanation (v. 16), and finally to (4) aphoristic antithesis (v. 17). The urgent command not to love the world brings up several issues, but it definitely abhors this alternative to loving God and fellow believers. The same word for love appears here, the famous agap∑, as used to describe characteristically Christian love. It has appeared explicitly once already in the Epistle (2:5). It is disputed whether the word has been found in literature before the LXX, though it does appear there. Ceslaus Spicq, a specialist in the study of biblical love, concluded that the most frequent meaning, “value, set great store by, hold in high esteem,” fits the command nicely.2 To love the ephemeral world is to assign it far too high a priority. Loving the world rather than God and fellow believers constitutes serious sin and should be factored in to any reconstruction of the Epistle’s conceptuality of sinfulness (cf. Jas 4:4). Sin, for the Epistle, is about loving the world and its desires. Exegesis of this passage requires us to assess the connotations of the word “world,” and to do so we need to consult its usages in the rest of the Epistle and then in John. We could and should cite 5:19.

1 John 2:15-17

Looking solely at the passage at hand (2:15-17), however, one can advance considerably toward comprehending its particular nuances, a course commended here. The world in this passage is not good, not something worthy of a believer’s love. The use of the confrontational command in the imperative form of the verb, “[d]o not love,” heightens the sense of opprobrium associated with the world. The additional reference to “the things of the world” adds an edge and leaves no room for compromise. Second Peter 1:4 offers a significant parallel with its picture of the corruption that is in the world because of lust. A sure sign that one is not a genuine believer registers in terms of loving the world. The arresting statement at v. 15c, “[t]he love of the Father is not in them . . .,” does not merely stand alone as a truism of the community but functions rhetorically as a third in a series of assaults on this world (v. 15ab). There follows at v. 16 an explanation that justifies the severe critique of the world since our writer customarily not merely criticizes but supports with justification. Verse 16 functions epexegetically to delineate “the things of the world” in the previous verse. The things that one would love if one chose to love the world do not derive from God, a damning pedigree in the dualistic perspective of the two domains and two origins typical of the letter (v. 16). The writer, who seems to think of the world and its desires quite together in alienation from God, further gives away the meaning intended for cosmos. The things believers should not love come down to desires of the flesh, the desires of the eyes, and pride in riches (2:16b). Hence to extend our understanding of the world further from this text, we must determine the significance of this trio. From the eschatological perspective, they are unmasked as less than advertised (2:17). A text warning rigorously about worldly desires is most unusual in both John and 1 John, though one expects such naming of sins elsewhere, particularly in the Pauline literature. Desires in the Old Testament are most often negative (Num 11:4; Ps 106:14), as well as in the New Testament (Gal 5:16; Eph 2:3). Houlden reads “desires of the flesh” of 1 John as the encompassing tendency to human sinfulness, the “desire of the eyes” suggesting both greed and lust and the “pride of life” implying arrogance and rash confidence toward worldly goods.3 The “things of the world” can be understood as transitory things that awaken the desires of lust and pride. These seductive desires mislead humanity and bind it to transitoriness. To take the next step that desire is “a power hostile to God” appears to be reading Paul into a

87

88

1 John 2:15-17

Johannine text. John 8, however, has quite a connection to 1 John (3:11-18), and 8:44 speaks of the desires of your father the devil, working an antithesis of divine and anti-divine duality. So 2:16 could have had something similar in mind. For a general parallel to 2:16, see the Damascus Document (CD 4:17). With this preliminary orientation of representative scholarly opinion cited, attention can now focus on the specific three categories characterizing the life of the world. The author consistently uses the genitive case to point to the source of the desires. Before attempting to sort out this mischievous trio, identified by the several scholars quoted, attention must be given to the generic “desire” regardless of whether it governs the third category or not. Hebraic thought believed that desire is the beginning of sin (Apoc. Mos. 19:3) and warned about the evil impulse, the yeser hara. Desire preceded the rebellious act in Genesis 3. Both Paul and James in the New Testament have the impressive sequence desiresin-death. We are safe to assume that desire is seen in 2:16 as an unhealthy beginning consequent to embracing the world. “Desire of the flesh” itself could certainly have included the unreasoning passion association with the eros kind of love, not actually found in the New Testament but in the LXX (Prov 7:18; 24:51). Quite remarkably, desire (epithymia) does not appear elsewhere in the Epistles and appears only once in John (8:44). These desires of the flesh encompass lust but also gluttony. The “desire of the eyes,” likely overlapping with desire of the flesh, may have called to mind the story of Eve’s finding the forbidden fruit “a delight to the eyes.” For that matter, her reaction to the tree as “good for Eve with Forbidden Fruit food” and able to “make one wise” (Gen 3:6) could be related to desires of the flesh and prideful boasting, respectively, though no direct connection is likely. The third term, rendered as “the boasting of what he has and does” (NIV) or “the pride in riches” (NRSV), stands somewhat apart. The colorful Greek word alazoneia can signify Jacopo Robusti Tintoretto (1518–1594). Adam and Eve. Commons, PD-Art (PD-old-100)].

1 John 2:15-17

89

boastful arrogance. It carries connotations of bragging, pretending, exaggerating (cf. Aristotle, Eth Nic 4:13), including those with claims to intelligence (Wis 17:7). The word does not appear in John, only this once in the Epistle, but it occurs in James (4:16), where it has been translated as boasting in your arrogance. Spicq concludes, “Alazon is thus a term of the wisdom vocabulary that associates arrogance, presumption, and above all pride.”4 For both Spicq and Schnackenburg, something more serious than riches is involved—sufficiency or pride apart from God. Schnackenburg comments on the pride that makes us forget our dependence on God and that cuts us off from God and makes the way back to God more difficult.5 It seems likely, however, that the two superb scholars mentioned above, advocating an attractive opinion theologically, are moving too far away from the core meaning of boasting. It may be nearer center to render it “boasting in possessions” since 3:17 carries the meaning worldly goods for the Greek bios, the word used here as well, and since the James 4:16 passage may point to the riches of 5:2-3 and represents a clear boasting context. At Wisdom 5:8, dual questions are asked: “What has our arrogance profited us? And what good has our boasted wealth brought us?” (RSV). Here pride in possessions leads to boasting, the more likely nuance in 2:16. Were the believers to follow these three desires, The Hostile Environment of the World they would find themselves existing in the way Elsewhere the Epistle realistically takes of the world. [The Hostile Environment of the World] notes of the hostile environment in the world for the Christian (4:1-6), and in John the It should not go unmentioned that v. 16 is evangelist announces that the Advocate will not an absolute statement. The passage does not prove the world wrong about sin and righteousmean everything in the worldly realm but everyness (16:8). Believers do not belong to the world thing belonging to the field force of an evil (17:14, 16) and should not act as they do. The world, if you please. Everything in the world epistolary writer does not expect the believers to does not include every person, certainly not the remove themselves from the world—presuming familiarity with 17:15. But he enjoins his readers faithful community, or the created order, nor to conquer (2:14), to overcome the world through does the verse undertake the issue of the ultifaith (5:4-5), sharing in the victory of Christ (cf. mate source of human impulses. 16:33). The final antithesis (2:17) is quite sweeping and aphoristic. It declares what time it is, the time when the world is passing away along with its destructive desires. This eschatological outlook, present elsewhere in the letter, constitutes a prophetic posture. The seer envisions a changing of the aeons, a transition into a new age. The New Testament elsewhere recognizes that this is true in regard to our individual lives (1 Pet 1:24; Jas 4:13-14) and that everything is left behind at death (2 Pet 3:10). The Elder means more, however, and has already given away to his readers his

90

1 John 2:15-17

apocalyptic belief that “the darkness is passing away” (2:8). These worldly desires (v. 16), so obsessively pursued, are not lasting either. Does this passage open up the possibility of annihilation, cessation of existence? Some read this verse as an assertion that the world will eventually pass away. Others think the apostolic writer merely means to speak of the temporary and the lasting, which is true enough but does not address the problem. Is it that he “sees” the present threatening world and its flimsy values already in retreat, that this kind of world is declining and another on its Alfred Rethel (1816–1859). In the midst of Turmoil and Lust, Man is Carried off by Death. way? The distinguished Kupferstichkabinett, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Dresden, Germany. [Wikimedia Commons, scholar C. H. Dodd expressed PD-Art (PD-old-100)] the problem for the modern The 19th C. German artist Alfred Rethel produced several depictions of reader when he wrote, “The death. In this work, Death brings an end to those who are caught up in the world, which seemed to him lusts of this world (cf. 1 Jn 2:16-17). to be trembling on the verge of dissolution, has had a reprieve of eighteen centuries and is still running.” Dodd went on to muse about the change of perspective in his own era to the extent that “the essential transience of the whole order of civilization is no longer a theory to be complacently entertained . . . .” 6 Rather for him our world has no inherent permanence, particularly a society with the marks of sensuality, materialism, and self-glorification. (One also muses after 9/11.) Dodd faced the issue head on and found the eternal perspective profoundly, but most readers are still left with issues. We do well to recognize that the Epistle reflects a common perspective of the New Testament generally. This heightened sense of the cruciality of the times, like that of prophets in the Old Testament, contributes an informed and intensified outlook, a more penetrating critique. The writer’s realized eschatology, equally prominent in the Epistle and even more accentuated in John, did not attenuate his future expectation but fueled it. Furthermore, his anguished distress about schism in the beloved community, espeIn the Midst of Turmoil and Lust, Man Is Carried off by Death

1 John 2:15-17

91

cially in light of the prayer of John 17 with its commitment to unity, led him to eschatological evaluations. [Two Cities] The resounding alternative offered in this same verse (17) also derives from his eschatological vantage: the one doing the will of God abides forever. Doing the will of God is set over against doing the desires of the world. Take note once more of the familiar pattern of a generalization of an alternative order or choice. Our writer does not limit his readers to a single and Two Cities There are no more than two kinds of baleful choice but offers an alternative, in this human society, which we may justly call context a decision with consequences of eternal two cities, according to the language of our life. Elsewhere in 1 John, the letter addresses Scriptures. The one consists of those who wish to eternal life, notably toward the close (5:13). live after the flesh, the other of those who wish to Take note also that once again the writing insists live after the spirit . . . . St. Augustine, “The City of God,” in Basic Writings of Saint on doing, not just believing. Augustine (ed. Whitney J. Oates; New York: Random House, Consistently in Johannine thought, the model 1948), 2:239. for the disciple is Jesus, the one in this case who came not to do his own will but to accomplish the will of God (John 6:38). The Johannine understanding of the will of God grew out of the mission of Jesus. None of the Gospel of John’s texts deals with the will of God lasting forever as does 1 John 2:17, but several texts do in fact stress doing God’s will (John 4:34; 5:30; 6:38; 7:17; 9:31). John 17:7 with its emphasis upon resolving to do the will of God addresses the situation of 1 John 2:17, emphasizing that those who make resolution will know whether a teaching is from God. Commitment to the will of God adds discernment. The will of God finds some definition at John 6:39-40 with its focus on the mission of salvation. Indeed one tends to find a vocational dimension to the will of God. In 1 John the will of God involves eschewing the lusts of the world and loving one another rather than the world. Doing the will of God here encompasses not only the avoidance of these named sins (v. 16) but the larger peril of loving the world. The immediate context seems to stress the will of God as something in sharp contradistinction to the desire of flesh and eyes. To put it into positive terms, the will of God incorporates a lifestyle of walking in the light (1:6-7) where doing is required. It involves being righteous and pure (2:29; 3:3) and loving one another rather than the world. Confessing one’s sins and obeying the commandments of Christ belong to the overall design of the will of God. Doing the will of God is something possible for those who have passed from death to life (3:14; cf. John 1:13). The will of God includes walking as Jesus walked and livng the life of love.

92

1 John 2:15-17

The will of God, quite unlike the world, will last forever. In the Old Testament God and his truth abide forever. The expression “abides forever” appears in the LXX and twenty-six times in the New Testament. It shows up twelve times in John and again at 2 John 2. John bears witness to the Son abiding forever (8:35; 12:34). In his eschatology, the will of God outlasts an ephemeral world, and the one doing this will last along with it. It is quite a choice—what the Germans might term Entweder/Oder, “either/or.”

CONNECTIONS 1. An Ugly Room, 2:15-16

Lots of us have an ugly room in our house. It may be an attic or basement room, a locked bedroom filled with the unsightly, or perhaps a garage you would not dare open to the light of day! Ours is located in the basement. I have a study in one room and a pingpong table in another, but the middle room is full of junk neither our children nor anybody else will ever want. We have half-empty paint cans, boxes of yesterday’s stuff, leaky hoses, and more boxes. This is the room we do not show guests. Any way you look, this room spells “ugly.” In our personal lives, we often hide an ugly room from others, even sometimes from ourselves. We may deny it exists and keep it out of sight as we wear our shiny, smiley masks. Here our darker motives reside, as Jung and Horney suggested. Here we may entertain secret sin. We may maintain an addiction or near addiction out of the purview of others. We may carry on a clandestine affair. We may be hooked on a pornographic website. A seminary student confessed for the rest of us that we have in ourselves our own forms of kosmos. In a poem titled “Late Flowering Lust,” the talented poet John Betjeman wrote of an older man with a bald head and bad breath. He meets an old love. They cling to each other in reunion, inflamed, he observed, with fear. The man, sensing how frail his lover is, recognizes their impending morality. He wonders how many years remain for either of them and what kind of death, having grown anything but indulgent in fantasy. “A losing fight with frightful pain,” he wonders, “Or a gasping fight for breath?”7 In his lachrymose manner Betjeman, from the vantage of later years, saw the transitory nature of lust in the context of a life that is passing away. These poetic ruminations, while morose, do not represent the dark musings of a misanthrope but the existential

1 John 2:15-17

reflections of one who did not keep from himself the reality of death or its implications. [“A Perfect Day for Banana Fish”]

2. Anatomy of Sin, James 1:14-15; 1 John 2:15-16

93

“A Perfect Day for Banana Fish” In J. D. Salinger’s short story “A Perfect Day for Banana Fish,” Seymour Glass and a little girl play on the seashore. He asks her if she has ever seen a banana fish. She confesses she never has. He tells her about the fish. It swims on the floor of the ocean looking for a banana hole until it finds it. Then the banana fish swims in and sometimes eats 78 bananas at one time. The problem is then that the fish has eaten so many bananas it cannot get out of the hole.

The anatomy of sin may be found profoundly and provocatively set out in James: “One is tempted by one’s own desires, being lured and J. D. Salinger, Nine Stories (Boston: Little, Brown, 1953), 23. enticed by it; then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin, and that sin, when it is fully grown, gives birth to death” (1:14-15, NRSV). By placing human desire at the starting place and accepting the “untemptability of God,” one takes responsibility. One cannot play victim: I am just a pawn on the chessboard, a leaf blown in the fall wind. First John also traced sin to its lair in worldly desires. 3. For Love or Money, 2:16

In a sample of reality television called For Love or Money, a handsome bachelor is slated to select one woman from a bevy of fifteen beauties. The setting is palatial and romantic. The contestants have been informed privately that the winner will be awarded a million dollars. The bachelor is left out of the loop. He goes about eliminating to reach a final selection. A young woman asked a minister what he thought about the television program. He answered that shows of this sort were “hot,” but he did not think this meat market was a good way to choose someone to marry. Then, upon deeper reflection, he responded, “This popular program seems based on two unchallenged American values, appearance and money.” Our young people live in a world where Victoria has few remaining secrets! In our time, Sex and the City sells, copulating outside of the covenant is cooler, and many Americans are mystified as to why Muslim clerics are aghast at our sexual values. Christian romantic relating, on the other hand, should include more than the urge to merge. The relationship should come also from the side of agap∑ that involves valuing another, holding that person in high esteem.

94

1 John 2:15-17

The Way of the World The gifted playwright William Congreve wrote a comedy of manners titled The Way of the World that exposes those who follow the way of the world. He satirizes a world full of affectation, including the affectation of elegance. Congreve portrays a world of unqualified materialism, his characters in dishonest pursuit of money. His classic play involves intrigue, schemes, callousness, silliness, mistresses, pretense, vanity, and folly. To an impressive degree, Mrs. Millamant, the belle of the town, reflects some sense of morality against the backdrop in which she lives. This Restoration drama in its way speaks to our times in terms of appearances and machinations.

4. Boasting in Possessions, 2:16

The “boasting in possessions” stands alongside another misuse of worldly goods. The text suggests that for some, possessing possessions produces pride. When faced with brotherly and sisterly need, some also close their hearts (3:17). Both attitude and action are askew. Some are “thingmatized.” Some fall into the love of display, the glare of the glittering. [The Way of the World]

5. Preaching Possibilities

A creative sermon or lesson could be devised on the T-A-S strategy. The thesis could center on the church against the world (2:15-17), the antithesis could feature the church loving and transforming the world, and the synthesis could offer the church as saved and saving. The first possibility works counter-culturally, refuses to mirror the world languidly, and is especially relevant in 1 John when the church is a negligible sect on the fringe of the Roman Empire. The middle option brings into play the social gospel with its passion for justice. All three models are viable, but the last of the three is quite promising.

William Congreve, The Way of the World, in The Development of English Drama: An Anthology (ed. Gerald Eades Bentley; New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1950).

6. Parallel to Demas

One easily relates 1 John 2:15-17 with Demas, associate of Paul. He is mentioned as a faithful member of the Pauline circle sending greetings to the Colossians in the good company of Luke, the beloved physician (Col 4:14). Again Demas, listed as a fellow worker, sends his greetings (Phlm 24). Distressingly, the next report finds that “Demas, in love with this present world, has deserted me and gone to Thessalonica” (2 Tim 4:10). Here he is portrayed as abandoning and deserting the imprisoned apostle. Harry Emerson Fosdick created a memorable sermon on these experiences of Demas that he titled “The Power to See It Through.” He perceived the familiar tragedy of a good beginning but a poor ending. Noting that we tend to stress “the gospel of a good start,” he pointed rather to the power to see it through. “Demas had laid hold on some of the more comfortable aspect of the Christian gospel,” Fosdick surmised, “but the Christian gospel had never laid hold on Demas.”8 Fosdick decided “what ‘got’

1 John 2:15-17

Demas—the tremendous power of Rome compared with the seeming weakness of Christ’s gospel. Who in a sober and realistic hour could have supposed that Paul would outwear Nero? But that, you see, is exactly what happened.”9 The contemporary church also suffers from an exit of alumni. The world, however, can be like a box of crackerjacks without a prize. F. W. Robertson saw that worldliness itself consisted in attachment to the outward, the transitory, and the unreal, while love related to the inward, the eternal, and the true.10 One hymn writer knew the charm of the world’s delights but resolved “no longer to linger.” He found a new allure in things higher and nobler. Another hymn writer urged worshipers to turn their eyes upon Jesus and discover that the things of earth will grow strangely dim. Yet another hymn writer, Josiah Conder, in his less familiar “My Lord, I Did Not Choose You,” was quite sensitive that had it not been for grace to open his mind, the world might have enthralled him and blinded him to the glories of heaven. In 1 John itself, the problem is not persecution but seduction. 7. Doing the Will of God, 2:17

One could do a Craddockesque sermon or lesson on the single thought of finding and doing the will of God and living forever. The preacher could start inductively, perhaps beginning with a childhood experience around a campfire singing “Kum Ba Yah.” The highly regarded Baptist preacher George W. Truett is credited with saying that the greatest search in life is to seek the will of God, and the greatest discovery is to find the will of God, but the greatest achievement in life is to do the will of God. In Johannine thought, the will of God, distinguished from one’s own, carries the idea of divine mission (John 5:30). Our passage implicitly calls for a decision against the world for God. 8. “The Expulsive Power of a New Affection”

Many Christians who have heard about the famous sermon with the above title may not be aware that it is based on 1 John 2:15. Putting forth the propensity of the human heart to love the world, Thomas Chalmers advocated the exchange of an old affection for a new one. Chalmers saw that to get the attention of the worldly person, you have to encounter the charm and the pleasure she or he feels and expose its illusiveness, yet also offer to the eye of the mind a new reality with a charm powerful enough to dispossess the first

95

96

1 John 2:15-17

and to engage a new interest and hope. In this influential sermon, Chalmers came to the following conclusion: “We know of no other way by which to keep the love of the world out of our heart, than to keep in our hearts the love of God . . . .”11

Notes 1. See J. R. C. Cousland, “Theaters,” in Dictionary of New Testament Background, (ed. Craig A. Evans and Stanley E. Porter; Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 1218–21; and James Walters, “Egyptian Religions in Ephesos,” Ephesos, Metropolis of Asia (ed. Helmut Koester; Valley Forge PA: Trinity, 1995), 281–306. 2. See Ceslaus Spicq, “agap∑,” TLNT 1:12. 3. James L. Houlden, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (BNTC; New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 74. 4. Spicq, “alazon,” TLNT 1:64. 5. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992), 123. 6. C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932), 45. 7. Betjemen, “Late Flowering Lust,” in John Betjemen’s Collected Poems (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1958), 204. 8. Harry Emerson Fosdick, “The Power to See It Through,” in The Power to See It Through (New York: Harper, 1935), 6. 9. Ibid., 9. 10. Robertson, Sermons Preached at Brighton (2d series; London: Kegan Paul, 1889), 151. 11. Chalmers, “The Expulsive Power of a New Affection,” in 20 Centuries of Great Preaching (vol. 3; ed. Clyde E. Fant, Jr., and William M. Pinson, Jr.; Waco: Word, 1971), 312.

Concerning Those Who Are Trying to Deceive You 1 John 2:18-27

COMMENTARY Here is the first of two frontal attacks on false teachers (cf. vv. 4:1-6), part of the conflict that seethes underneath the surface throughout much of the Epistle. Though this largely polemical passage becomes a mine for extracting the situation of conflict that resulted in the Epistle, it should be remembered that not only do we not possess the whole picture, but the text should be heard as more than just a historical resource for mirror reading. The gravity of the crisis felt by this church leader bleeds through in the strong language and his intense sense of the hour. It is the hour of special danger. The passage represents a topic, clearly and consciously laid out at v. 26, concerning (peri) the ones trying to deceive the church. As usual the author writes purposively, with certain things in mind that he invites his readers to do. They are asked to interpret the recent exodus of members in a particular light, realize what time it is, confess Jesus as Christ and Son, see themselves as competent in the faith, and stay the course, being faithful as they continue in abidance. He encourages them pastorally even in this edgy passage. Addressing them once more with his customary “children” (v. 18a), the Pastor announces quite dramatically, as the controlling perspective, that it is the last hour. This typical Johannine understanding, a destiny-laden turning point, conveys even more with its sense of last things. Since “last hour” does not include the article “the,” one could translate “a last hour,” but this is not the likely intent. The thought could be a progressive sense, however, rather than a culminative (as 2:17a). It certainly represents a problem for the modern reader. The Elder has interpreted his own situation eschatologically. With his “just as” kind of argument (v. 18b), the author engages the hearers’ memories regarding what they have heard about an Antichrist coming, involving them in nodding agreement. He evidently matches up with a common expectation in the community.

98

1 John 2:18-27

Teachings or Repertoire Held in Common by Author and Recipients 1. Creedal Statements 2. Theological Axioms 3. Eschatological Prophecies 4. Moral Commandments 5. Ecclesiastical Rules

Apparently referring to the teaching office of the church, he reflects a hint not only of an oral culture but of that period in the early Johannine community when the faith was received more from the ear than the eye. In the synoptic tradition, Jesus speaks of pseudo-christs and many Otto Piper, “1 John and the Didache of the Primitive Church,” deceivers (Matt 24:5, 24), though not JBL 66 (1947): 437–51. antichrists. Our writer builds upon the commonly accepted idea with his interpretation of the present (“and now”). [Teachings or Repertoire Held in Common by Author and Recipients] Many antichrists have arrived in their time, the plurality not the classic expectation but a new perspective. The author then exposes quite freely how he made a deduction from an inductive observation of many antichrists. “We know,” the Elder declares—meaning himself, those for whom he speaks, and now the readers—making clear the logical process by which he reached the conclusion and leaving it exposed to evaluation. The Greek inferential hothen (v. 18d) can be rendered not only “hence” but “from which fact.” He begins with his conclusion (v. 18a) about the time, but then in virtual syllogistic form shares the steps that led to his conclusion, allowing the readers to witness the process of discovery. This pastoral leader does not merely offer an unsubstantiated pronouncement; rather, as one devoted to the art of persuasion, he offers supporting proofs. In rhetorical terms, an enthymeme (a statement with supporting argument) is utilized. Verse 19 has been pounced upon both as a key to unlock the life situation that occasioned the letter and as a corroborative text for a Calvinistic tenet, the security of the believer. Functionally, the verse is important in the letter because it represents a strong opinion on the disruptive departure of a group often described as “secessionists” by scholars, an accurate designation for this verse. From the purview of those the author represented, however, they were schismatics. The author invites the beleaguered and confused recipients to see the recent exodus in a particular light, the “they” (v. 19a) assuming as antecedent the antichrists of v. 18. Those who left demonstrated their true colors by leaving. “They repeated the actions of Judas, who went out into the darkness (John 13:32),” Culpepper observed.1 The Greek verb translated “they went out” strongly suggests that they left voluntarily rather than being expelled. Although Schnackenburg’s title for this section suggests otherwise, he agrees that the leaving took place of their own free will, an important difference from Qumran (1QS 6:24–7:25).2 We surmise that the dissenters left because of christological controversy

1 John 2:18-27

99

(vv. 22-23; 4:2) that may have grown into acrimonious relationships. The pastoral theologian claims that those exiting never were an integral part of the community (v. 19b). Using an “if ” clause, second class conditional, the author once more reasons out loud that if they really were “of us,” they would never have strayed. The preposition “out of ” (ex) plays a prominent role in the argument in contrast to “with” us (meta). This raises the fellowship issue of 1:3 and calls up the wider notion in 1 John of belonging (ek, “out of ” or “from”), which in turn relates not only to realm but goes to being begotten of God. One German scholar portrays it as a being out of God (Aus-Gott-Sein). This text does imply rather unambiguously that the departing ones were never really begotten of God. The text may tilt toward the perseverance of the saints but does not address whether those genuinely begotten might possibly apostatize. The presiding metaphor “abide” or “remain” appears 27 times and offers the additional clue that abiding in Christ assumes staying the course. True believers should abide. Does the author mean in the final clause of v. Connection of Love with the Absence of 19 that the departure took place in order to Schism 1. “love admits no schism, love makes expose true identity? Evidently so. The leaving no sedition, love does all things in of the dissidents served the divine purpose (cf. concord” (1 Clem. 49:5) 1 Cor 11:19; John 8:35). Dodd and others 2. “that we may be found in love, without human point out the implication that not everyone who partisanship, free from blame” (1 Clem. 50:2) belongs to the visible church is a genuine (First Clement is an early Christian writing dated member of the church of Christ (cf. Rom 9:6). toward the close of the first century.) [Connection of Love with the Absence of Schism] Additionally, Vouga suggests that the Elder used The spirit of vv. 20-21 recalls 2:12-14 with its “love one another” to tighten the bonds between recognition of already possessed spiritual assets, his communities against centrifugal tendencies. an example of further empowerment of the laity. Having shifted from the secessionists of v. 19 to Vouga, ”The Johannine School: A Gnostic Tradition in Primitive Christianity?” Bib 69 (1988): 366–67. the remaining believers, the writer strongly implies that the readers do not really need these alternative teachers, not only because of the previously named assets but because of their anointing by the Spirit. The only usages of this Greek word chrisma in the New Testament appear in this passage. It can refer to an actual oil or simply an “anointing,” as in the instance of the anointing of priests (Exod 29:7). Some take it as an initiatory ritual with actual oil or ointment (cf. Mark 14:3-9), while others opt for a more figurative anointing (cf. Acts 10:38; 2 Cor 1:21-22), the latter more likely (cf. Sir 38:30; 2 Cor 1:2122). Here, significantly, it relates to all those truly begotten. An actual oil of anointing at baptism along with the laying on of

100

1 John 2:18-27

hands, and perhaps catechism as well, are not out of the question. The Gnostics emphasized an anointing as in the much later Gospel of Philip, leading some to hypothesize that 1 John borrowed terms from opponents.3 [Anointing in the Gospel of Philip] From “The Gospel of Philip,” in The Nag Hammadi Library (ed. J. Robinson; rev. The Greek text, without elaboration, ed., San Francisco: Harper & Row, 988), 139–60. says literally “from the Holy,” opening up the issue of whether the reference is to God or Jesus or possibly simply to the Holy Spirit or even the word of God. Obviously it could refer to God, as regularly in the Old Testament and in John (17:11). God is spoken of in the Gospel of John as the one sending the Holy Spirit (14:1, 6, 17, 26). On the other hand, Jesus is called the “Holy One of God” (John 6:69) who also sends the Spirit (John 15:26; 16:7). The fact that the writer saw the Father and Son as inseparable and indivisible, that he often expresses himself in ambiguous language more to the chagrin of interpreters than apparently himself, and that he assigned some of the same roles to both suggests that their roles need not be airtight compartments with no (Credit: V&A Images, Victoria and Albert Museum) overlap. This serves as a possible signal This chrismatory is made up of 3 compartments containing reminding us of the healthy holy oils used in the Catholic Church for ritual anointing: Oleum monotheism of budding triune Infirmorum used for the sick, Oleum Catechumenorum used at thought in the New Testament. baptism and Chrisma used for confirmation and ordination. A The interpreter can draw upon priest would carry a chrismatory with him when visiting a sick “from him” of 2:27, an apparent refermember of his community. ence to Jesus, and “he himself ” in v. 25 as strong pointers to Jesus as the proper identification. Though either is possible in Johannine thought, it does appear slightly more likely that v. 20 intends Jesus as the holy one responsible for the Holy Spirit. The Spirit becomes a way of knowing in Johannine thought. A rather stiff textual problem arises here as to whether the final part of v. 20 should be read “all of you have knowledge” (NRSV) or Anointing in The Gospel of Philip The chrism is described as a warm perfumed oil portrayed as fragrant (78:1-10) and as fire (57:27-28; 67:5-9). The mysterious moment of anointing is described (67:19-24) and the initiate is begotten and anointed by the Spirit (69:4-14). The chrism may play a role in conversion (67:4). This writing likely emanated from Syria in the latter third century C.E.

1 John 2:18-27

“you know everything.” The first reading enjoys the manuscript support of both Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, while the second reading is represented by Alexandrinus and the Ephraemi Rescriptus. In truth, the extensive textual support on both sides renders it impossible to make a decision based on ancient texts alone. Even the context could favor either. John Breck, in a careful sifting of the evidence, concludes that the rendering “you all know” is “unique and stylistically anomalous,” whereas the reading “you know all things” appears “in complete accord with the author’s style and with his thought.” Breck brings to the support of his argument in favor of the “you know all things” (panta, the neuter accusative) reading that it enjoys wider geographical distribution, preserves the antithesis between truth and lie, corresponds to the parallel in v. 27, matches up with John 14:26 regarding the Holy Spirit teaching everything, and does not use the verb “to know” (oida) without an object.4 On the other hand, Raymond Brown presses for the “and you all know” (pantes, masculine nominative) text. Since the intent of the overall passage suggests the author’s purpose to give confidence in the face of the knowledge claims of the secessionists, the argument that all believers possess knowledge seems logical. The fact of their knowledge rather than the extent fits the desire to reassure. The object of knowledge, explicit at v. 22 (“that Jesus is the Christ”), is curious after a claim that they know all. This textual decision readily and attractively relates to the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:34 (Jer 38:34 LXX).5 While this is definitely an instance where dogmatism about stubborn perplexities is inappropriate, it seems that the more difficult reading “you know all or everything” has the better attestation. It parallels 2:27e far better. John 14:26, with its promise that the Holy Spirit will teach you all things, strongly favors this reading. That our writer did not intend an absolute meaning of universal knowledge, on the other hand, can be implied by the fact, for the Gospel of John at least, that it is said of Jesus that he knew all things (16:30) as it is also said of God (1 John 3:20). We are allowed from the standpoint of the Gospel of John to recognize that a single spiritual fix is not exclusive, but rather that the Spirit will guide the community into all truth (16:13), hence a process of learning and an additional way of Christian knowing along with the teaching from the beginning. Wishing not to be misunderstood by his readers, the author clarifies that his purpose of writing did not have to do with the assumption on his part that they did not know the truth already.

101

102

1 John 2:18-27

Quite the contrary, he writes to remind them of what they already know and should not abandon. He encourages and empowers the believers in order to prepare them against deception. He drafts a characteristic maxim that by definition no lie derives from the truth, an assertion with which they will concur but which supplies the platform for his assault during the next verse. He answers his own rhetorical question, who is the liar (v. 22a), with an unhesitating response. He intones great solemnity in the seriousness of would-be Christians denying the identification of Jesus as the Christ (v. 22b; cf. 1:6, 10; 2:4, 21). This may or may not be a reference to messiahship as we would more readily expect in the Gospel of John. If so, the thesis of a Jewish opposition would be a natural hypothesis. Some have imagined an Ebionitic Christology promoting Jesus only as prophet, but a closer identification would be the Docetics. At John 11:27, however, “Son of God” is used as appositional to Christ or Messiah (cf. 4:42; 5:27; 6:14; 12:34). Are we here at the heart of the conflict and the cause of the exodus? Clearly the christological dimension of the controversy emerges explicitly. This evidently represented not a mere power struggle but a radical disjunction at the center. While “denial” and “confession” (agreement) are natural antonyms, and “confession” (homology) in positive form eventually appears (v. 23b), the reader must do some counting of the predominance of “the one denying” (three appearances), for it gives more than a hint as to the cause of writing. The Greek participle rendered “denying” implies the rejection of something previously confessed or acknowledged, indeed a disowning. It represents the opposite or the repudiation perhaps of a previously held confession of faith. On acknowledging and disowning, see the antithetical saying of Jesus (Matt 10:32-33). For the author of the Gospel of John, the Father and Son are indivisible because the Father sent the Son and because of their mutual indwelling (John 15). Father and Son cannot be pried apart in 1 John either, as in this text, thinking characteristically in terms of an indivisibility of the two (5:1; 2 John 9). At v. 23 the writer hammers home his conviction that anyone who denies the Son has no claim upon the Father, that neither can be co-opted. In v. 23 denial and confession are set in classic antithesis. Why does the one believing in the Son also have the Father (cf. John 5:23b; 15:23; 1 John 4:15; 5:1; 2 John 9)? Because the Son is the one sent by the Father according to the Johannine tradition? Because of the understanding of the prologue of John (1:1)? It is evident that v. 23 applies to whomever.

1 John 2:18-27

At v. 24 the pastoral warning takes the form of an appeal. The reader finds a second “you have heard” and the source clearly identified as “from beginning,” a classic baseline in 1 John. Apparently the things previously “heard” were christological and could derive from the written gospel or, more likely, from the tradition. The classic “abide” in 1 John appears in the appeal and in the sense of continuing faithfulness, remaining in the pristine teaching of the beginning. The author picks up first on abidance in a conditional construction “if ” that leads to a promise (v. 24c) that may include an implicit warning. One must abide to continue to have the Son and the Father. The abiding in the Son and in the Father recalls the fellowship with the Father and his Son at v. 1:3, probably illuminating the intended meaning of that early verse. This latter usage of abide partakes more of the mystical metaphor of indwelling at John 15. The language of promise becomes explicit at v. 25 with its bottom line of eternal life as the gift of the Son (John 17:2) and is defined in terms of knowing the Father and the Son (17:3). At John 3:15 and 6:40 eternal life links with believing, and at v. 6:40c with the promise of resurrection at the last day. Eternal life becomes a reiterated theme in 1 John (1:2; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20). The several tenses of abide (menø ) are worthy of note. The imperative “let it abide” in you includes the connotation of remaining, yet possibly with the idea of indwelling as well. The second usage in v. 24, building upon the first and still related to the message heard from beginning, appears in a third class conditional sentence in the subjunctive mood with primarily the sense of faithfulness. The third usage, as a reassuring promise dependent upon remaining faithful to the earliest word, takes the future tense “will abide.” Here the connotation may include more of the idea of indwelling or fellowship. The thought, including the necessity of keeping his word, finds parallel at John 15:7ab. Verse 26 reads like a smoking gun for the polemical theory espoused by Painter, Brown, Culpepper, and numerous others, though resisted by Lieu.6 On the other hand, other texts, with the purpose of writing format, point more in the pastoral direction (1:4; 2:1, 12-14). The “I wrote” (aorist tense) refers to the warnings just written in the previous text, “these things,” and emphasizes not only the element of deception but its ongoing effect. The author fears or realizes the dangerous progress of the deceivers. The expression “concerning the ones deceiving you” may well signal a conscious statement of the topic for the entire passage 2:18-27 as in

103

104

1 John 2:18-27

several other places, introduced by the preposition ”concerning” (peri), hence the titling of this portion of the Epistle. The author underlines their possession all along of an anointing by the Spirit that continues to abide in them (v. 27). Since this anointing, probably part and parcel of being begotten of God, has not been lost but rather endures, they have no deficit requiring them to be re-instructed. It is apparent from the context that the secessionists did in fact deign to teach and influence, to reprogram as it were. With considerable rhetorical skill, the Elder discredits his opponents and empowers his readers to think for themselves. Both the ideas in John 16:12-15 and the present tense “teaches [about all things]” invited a continued process of educating the believer but in keeping with the baseline of the beginning. The reader is assured that the teaching of the Spirit can be relied upon as true and not a lie, in contradistinction to the rival doctrine. The writer grounds his truth not merely in personal thinking but also in the original teaching and that bestowed by the Spirit. Hence it becomes a choice between that which is apostolic and of the Spirit, and the alternative teaching of the divisive secessionists who deny that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. Stay faithful to the original catechism (v. 24a).

CONNECTIONS 1. “What Time Is It?”

There are a precious few who grasp what is at stake in their time and recognize how to respond. Perhaps Winston Churchill belonged to that rare breed as he saw the gathering storm and set out to awaken his own country. Jesus spoke his parables of the changing weather signs (Matt 16:1-4; Luke 12:49-56) to emphasize recognizing the significance of the present time. Some people in a community, either from the science of sociology or intuition, are prescient, as was Mayor Hartsfield of Atlanta who kept his city “too busy to hate.” Woodrow Wilson envisioned a world where countries communicated with each other (League of Nations). He encountered the vindictive selfishness in the peace process after WWI and the recalcitrance of his own Senate. Only after a disastrous second war did some laggards catch up, figuring out belatedly the importance of their time.

1 John 2:18-27

Martin Luther sensed what time it was, as did Martin Luther King, Jr. What time is it in your community or church? 2. The Teaching of Jesus as a Defining Center, 2:27

A “just as he taught you” posture (v. 27), if taken seriously, would center Christians more definitely on the teachings of Jesus (2 John 9) and his personal example (1 John 2:6; 3:15; John 13:15). The Gospels, after all, come first in the canon, and at times in Christian history the church has found its way back to the Sermon on the Mount. Consider the sermon’s influence during the twentieth century through Jordan, King, Gandhi, and Teresa, not to mention Francis of Assisi early on. Christians who bother to read the Beatitudes meditatively might cease making fun of “peaceniks.” With Alexander Maclaren, we might begin to be concerned about the “unchristianity of war.” It is a matter of no small concern that Christians who project themselves as biblical believers actually advocate military aggression. The Elder had the nerve to warn when he must. 3. Pastoral-Polemical

In this most decidedly polemical portion of 1 John (as 4:1-6), the characterization of pastoral-polemical does service. Empowerment of the laity, indeed, reminding them of their spiritual assets, belongs to an underestimated degree as a great contribution of the Epistle, if read more assiduously. Christians can come to see themselves as stronger than they imagine and less susceptible to spiritual intimidation. The Epistle implies the dignity of the laity and the priesthood of the believer. The church could find a viable model here. Even when the church engages in the countercultural and prophetic, the pastoral can appear. For example, the church can rail against pornographic websites, but it can also offer gracious support for those addicted. The church can warn of the real dangers of alcoholism with its concomitant (1) family abuse, (2) automobile accidents, and (3) personal addiction while making space for Alcoholics Anonymous in the environs of the church.

105

106

1 John 2:18-27 4. Denying Jesus, 2:22

The denial of Jesus can take a variety of forms both academically and personally. Disciples can deny as well (as did Peter), like the young man who took a summer job logging. After a strenuous summer he returned to his college campus. Christian friends wanted to know how it went for him since he was a Christian. He confided, “No one found out that I was a Christian.” Any time anyone stands intentionally oppositional to the stance of Jesus, an element of antichrist appears. 5. Confessions of Faith, 2:23

The confession of faith in Jesus can be enhanced by churches taking conversion/baptism and church membership seriously and by teaching a good catechism or discipleship class to new Christians. Some classic statement of faith such the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Westminster Confession, or some other statement can form a starting place for educating. On occasion, free churches with no creedal tradition can recite faith statements in worship that belong to the church universal. A local congregation can review the various historical documents of the church. A preaching minister might do a series on the Apostles’ Creed with the extraordinary resources available. One can value the great confessions of faith without engaging in mind control and coercion. 6. Antichrist, 2:18

Both church and culture can be misled and often are. Indeed, antichrists like Hitler have come along and may be branded as such so long as one does not presume to name the Antichrist or to identify him or her with some figure currently in Israel. Jesus himself did not pretend to know the time or the hour (Mark 13:32), nor should any of his disciples, though some persist in doing so. 7. The Quality of Eternal Life, 2:25

The promise of eternal life involves a present as well as a future, a qualitative as well as a quantitative aspect. It is to have part in the divine life of Jesus Christ, to experience the life of the Age to Come. “It is not simply ‘everlasting life’ (as the AV has it)—a mere ‘going on for ever,’ like Tennyson’s Brook,” observed A. M. Hunter.

1 John 2:18-27

“It is a life of new quality, life lived in communion with God through Christ, life with the tang of eternity about it, life reproducing in its possessors God’s own self-giving love, life that can never die because it is God’s own life.” Hunter continued, “And to accept this gift of God by faith in Christ his Son— by putting one’s whole allegiance in him—is to be a Christian.”7 At the deaths of at least two sitting American presidents (FDR and Woodrow Wilson), “Goin’ Home” was sung. An audience filed into Symphony Hall to hear a concert by the tenor Roland Hayes. He came out on stage to applause, but he quieted the crowd with one hand and started singing a song not included on the program:

107

Paradise

Image Not Available due to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.

Carlo Saraceni (1585–1620). Paradise. Oil on copper. Theodore M. Davis Collection, Bequest of Theodore M. Davis, by exchange, 1971 (1971.93). The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY, U.S.A. (Credit: Image copyright © The Metropolitan Museum of Art / Art Resource, NY)

Goin’ home, goin’ home, I’m just goin’ home, It’s not far, just close by, through an open door. Work all done, care laid by, Goin’ to fear no more.

Not everyone in the audience had heard that Woodrow Wilson had died, but the singer bowed his head and a touch of applause broke out only to fall into silence. The Christian preacher has to offer nothing less than eternal life, not as her or his possession, but as the gift of God. Paul Scherer surfaced the uneasiness or boredom some have with the idea of merely endless extension of life: “Duration is nothing much to be excited about, or to boast of; particularly if it means that we are going on forever as we are.” He went on to add, however, “But if living is other even now than we have thought it—not mean, nor shallow . . . but great and lofty and deep; then let life let go, for Life is born!”8 When the believer through faith receives the gift of “forever living,” she can live out of the powers of the age to come and chal-

108

1 John 2:18-27

lenge unjust things as they are. He can see how our world ought to be in the light of God’s kingdom and take steps to change it.

Notes 1. Alan Culpepper, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1985), 78. 2. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992), 140. 3. See C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932), 58–64, who himself took the line that the anointing refers to the Word of God. 4. John Breck, “The Function of PAS in 1 John 2:20,” SVTQ 35 (1991): 187–206. 5. Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John, (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982), 348–49; see also Stephen Witmer, “Taught by God: Divine Instruction in Early Christianity,” unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge University, 2007. Witmer deals in detail with the textual problem, agrees with Brown on pantes, and makes a decided connection to LXX Jer 38:14 and to the biblical theme of divine instruction. 6. John Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John (SP; ed. Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002), 208; Raymond Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple (New York: Paulist Press,1979),103–44; Alan Culpepper, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, 42; Clifton Black, “The First, Second, and Third Letters of John”(NIB 9; ed. Leander Keck; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1988), 372–74, recognizes the adversarial character of all three letters, but while noting the contentious nature of the literature, he warns against over-interpreting the evidence; Judith M. Lieu, The Theology of the Johannine Epistles (New Testament Theology; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 15, is eager to say that the polemic does not control the thought of the letter. 7. A. M. Hunter, Preaching the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1982), 136. 8. Paul Scherer, “The Gospel according to St. Luke,” IB 8:424.

The Middle Movement: God Is Righteous 1 John 2:28–4:6 The proposal throughout this commentary belongs here as well, that the epistolary writer moves from a particular conception of God to a parallel christological characteristic to a theological ethic. Here God is righteous (2:29), Jesus is the righteous one (3:5, 7; 2:1), and the genuine child of God lives a life of doing righteousness (2:29). Not only does the thought cohere in this striking manner, but it also correlates with the nature of sin and the purpose of the appearance of the Son. Not surprisingly, in this moral context sin is understood in terms of lawlessness (3:4) and unrighteousness (3:8). Furthermore, the intent of the sending of Jesus is depicted in terms of taking away sin (3:5) and destroying the sinful works of the demonic (3:8). Do the theological and ethical credentials of this writer to think holistically need further demonstration? We would do well to emulate. We have accorded also in this study a rather pivotal role to presumed false claims in the community. The first movement, God is light (1:5–2:27), addresses no less than six claims or boasts, while the third movement, God is love (4:7–5:12), owes much of its development to its creative reaction to the seventh claim, that of loving God (5:20). The middle movement of 1 John, distinctive in this way, does not contain one of the seven commonly isolated claims made by the false teachers, though like the first movement (2:18-27) it ends with an attack on the spirit of antichrist (4:1-6). The stress on critical discernment does continue aggressively in the middle movement. It will become clear at 3:7 (cf. 1:10), however, that the Elder combats a potentially deceptive notion concerning the lack of necessity for actual righteousness in the life of regenerated believers, reflecting a possible antinomian tendency among the secessionists. Furthermore, in the second segment of the middle movement (3:11-18), the ugly appearance of hatred in the community inspires the author to draw upon the Old Testament model of Cain and Abel, significantly one brother hateful toward his righteous sibling (3:12). Orthopraxy (right practice) in the middle movement includes righteous living apart from sin as well as reciprocal love, the latter becoming paramount in the final movement (4:7–5:12). Hence Robert Law had it right insisting on the category of righteous living

110

The Middle Movement: God Is Righteous (1 John 2:28–4:6)

alongside belief in Jesus and mutual love.1 Righteous living involves the absence of sin and the presence of love. The final two segments of the middle movement focus on a confidence before God growing out of an assurance of abiding in God (3:19-24), and the discernment of the spirit of truth and the spirit of deception (4:1-6).

Note 1. Robert Law, The Tests of Life (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909), 5–24; A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles, (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948), xxxviii.

The Children of God and the Children of the Demonic 1 John 2:28–3:10

COMMENTARY Another clear topic or topos, a frequent pattern in the Epistle, centers from the positive side on the important Johannine theme of the children of God, identifying them as those doing righteousness and identifying heavily with the Epistle’s Profile of the Children of God audience through the first person plural 1. We are called children of God (3:1b) “we.” The second paragraph (3:4-10) 2. We are children of God (3:1c) also profiles the children of the demonic 3. We are children of God now (3:2a) in terms of unrighteousness in relation 4. What we will be has not yet been revealed to the children of God. [Profile of the (3:2b) Children of God]

5. We will be like him (3:2d)

6. We will see him just as he is (3:2e) A remarkable aspect of this topoi that the reader must not miss has to do with doing, a characteristically Johannine trait likely stressed in the Johannine school. In the Epistle, one does truth (1:6; cf. John 3:21), does the will of God (2:17; cf. John 9:31), and does his commands (5:2; cf. John 7:19; 14:31; 15:14). In 2:28–3:10, righteousness (2:29; 3:7; 10) and sin (3:4, 8) are defined in terms of doing. While this insistence appears throughout the letter the greatest concentration appears here. Out of one’s life the truth emerges. In terms of striking rhetorical strategy, the reader should take special note of the manner of persuasion (1) through the pattern of thesis and corresponding corollary (2:29ab; 3:1bc and de; 6ab), (2) the progression of thesis, corollary, and corroboration (3:2cde; 3ab; 5ab; 7bc; 9ab and cd), and (3) the related sequence of thesis and corroboration (3:8ab; 9ab, cd). Verse 10b, everyone not doing righteousness, stands at the conclusion without corollary or corroboration, those being previously offered. Verse 10c, “everyone not loving,” awaits development in the next section. This astute writer engages the reader with his characteristic use of reason or logos,

112

1 John 2:28–3:10

presenting a series of theses with cumulative force. He appeals to what the readers already know as common belief in the community and then draws implications (corollaries) relevant to the immediate situation (2:29a; 3:2c; and 5a), moving from the unfamiliar to the less familiar, starting where they were and continuing to ground the community baseline in what was heard from the beginning (1:1-3) and what belongs to the Johannine tradition. Furthermore, the classic use of antithesis alongside thesis to distinguish the children of God from the children of the demonic plays a major rhetorical role (2:29b and 3:4a; 6ab; 7b and 8a; 9a and 10bc). Effectively and passionately, the apostolic Eight Theses writer persuades during 2:28–3:3 by taking E. von Dobschütz early advocated the away anxiety about the final judgment (2:28), hypothesis that 2:28–3:10 contained the appealing to commonly held beliefs in the comoriginal source (Grundschrift) for the Epistle distinmunity (2:29b), and deducing in such a manner guished on the basis of its thetical character and its LXX, lapidary style. He isolated eight theses that readers can also know the self-evident truth (2:29; 3:4, 6, 7, 8, 10). His reconstruction centhrough their own cognitive process. The writer tered upon the pas ho sayings and two persuades by heightening awareness of the spiriconstructions with ho and the participle. He found tual status and identity of being children of God a more Hellenistic style beginning at 3:12. The rel(3:1-2). He makes an appeal for the believers to ative prominence of pas ho statements elsewhere become like Jesus (3:2) and proffers the power in the Epistle and John puts in question the merits of his source theory, but he rightly grasped the of hope (3:3). [Eight Theses] thetical character of the passage. The density of the language of general truth See “Johanneische Studien,” Zeitschrift für die and the “everyone who” statements in particular Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 8 (1907): 1–8. stand out so far as the intent of the passage is concerned. The “everyone who” statements (pas ho) appear in John no less than thirteen times as generally strong christological statements, but even more preponderantly in the Epistle since thirteen usages show up there as well. Of the thirteen in the Epistle, the concentration of no less than seven in 2:28–3:10 is most remarkable, since it is not used at all in the following The “Everyone who” (pas ho) Sayings (with passage. A strategy for reading 2:28–3:10 must a participle) focus upon the four positive statements (2:29; While these sayings in 1 John are crafted for the crisis the Elder faced, 3:3, 6a, 9) and the three that function as negathey do find a rough parallel in the Gospel of John, tive warning (3:4, 6b, 10b). [The “Everyone who” (pas especially 8:34 and 1 John 3:8a. The similar sayings in John deal primarily with believing, a prime concern in that Gospel. It should also be noted that a similar construction is found regularly in Matthew and Luke on the lips of the synoptic Jesus (Q, M, and L), strongly suggesting a dominical root. One also finds such sayings in the LXX. In 1 John they provide a sweeping dualistic qualification (Brown).

ho) Sayings (with a participle)]

These sayings connect with the guidelines on how to identify the children of God and the children of the demonic, a primary concern at 3:10a. At v. 10bc, the author deftly names the primary test of righteousness; also, 2:28–3:10 anticipates the primary criterion of loving one’s brother or sister for the ensuing passage

1 John 2:28–3:10

(3:11-18). Of the eight tests, six are about “doing” righteousness and sin (2:29; 3:6, 7, 8, 9, 10). Verses 28-29, concerning doing righteousness, open the middle movement, v. 28 being a kind of transitional or hinge sentence between 2:27 and 29. An enduring difference of scholarly opinion whether to assign v. 28 to v. 27 or to the present section alerts the reader to a lack of consensus on a downright ambiguous call. The NRSV and NIV did well to present v. 28 as a separate paragraph. The “and now” does read like the opening of a new paragraph (cf. 2:18c) and, along with “little children,” reflects the style of one who frequently teaches and preaches and offers a certain immediacy. Clearly the address “little children” becomes a striking development on the children of God (3:1-3). The “now” (nyn) connects with the “now” at 3:2a. Furthermore, the “if ” (ean) matches the “if ” at v. 29 and 3:2. The presence of appearance/revelation in v. 28 parallels 3:2d and connects snugly with 3:5 and 8. Of course, the call to “abide in him” echoes the “abide in him” at the close of v. 27, with a slightly different nuance in each instance. Whatever else the expression intends, its probable use of the imperative voice suggests an urgent appeal that includes not only spiritual union with God but a call to perseverance in commitment and conduct until the arrival. The writer adds the sanction of last things (v. 28b), an emotional appeal recalling the rhetorical category of pathos, the embarrassment of being ashamed on the one hand and the deep satisfaction of being confident in the consummation on the other. The writer brings forward to his argument the expectation of a further appearance of Jesus in the future. He does not indulge in prediction of a specific time but handles it as a given belief of the community. Nevertheless, a sense of immediacy and urgency pervades this portion of the Epistle. Those who remain faithful will experience “confidence” in the coming event, an antonym to shame. Interestingly, the Epistle’s use of the term “confidence” (parr∑sia) is unlike that of John (7:13, 26; 11:14; 16:25, 29), where it represents a freedom of speech on the part of Jesus. Here it becomes an incentive to abide. This complete confidence clearly relates to salvation at the coming of the Son of God along with final judgment. The word carries suggestive connotations such as courage and boldness, here also fearlessness in the presence of people of high rank, even a citizen speaking up to a tyrant (BAG). It can imply freedom in the presence of God (Job 22:23-27; 27:9-10). The alternative of being ashamed at the appearance of Christ carries with it the picture of shrinking back

113

114

1 John 2:28–3:10

(as Peter at Luke 22:61-62; cf. Rev 6:16-17). Here, as John Painter suggests, it may have “the sense of being sent from Jesus’ presence in shame . . . ,” as in Proverbs 13:5 (cf. Mark 8:38; Matt 25:41-46).1 On shame see also Isaiah 1:29 and Jeremiah 2:36. The suggestion that this may not refer to another advent of Jesus seems excessively skeptical in the light of 3:2c with its parallel construction (ean phanerothe), though indefinite pronouns and sudden shifts of reference to Son and Father do appear here at 2:28 and 29 as throughout the letter. The Greek prepositional phrase at the end of v. 28 contains the Greek word parousia—with a basic meaning of “presence” and only here in Johannine literature—which in the New Testament often refers to the future coming of Christ in messianic glory to judge the world. Commonly this word calls up the image of a king visiting his province. The other word that seems to speak to a future advent, that whenever “he may appear” (v. 28b), can also be translated when “he is revealed” (NRSV). The verb (here phanerøth∑, aorist subjunctive passive) appears in several forms throughout 2:28–3:10 in a highly significant fashion and tends to glue v. 28 to the rest of the passage more securely. At 3:2b and 10a the verb must be rendered in terms of “revealed” or “known,” but something of the idea of appearance belongs to 2:28, 3:2d, 5, and 8 (interestingly like John 21:14; cf. Heb 4:16; 10:19). The passive voice implies God as the instigator. Revelation and appearance belong to the very fabric of this first passage in the middle movement. At v. 29 the author utilizes astutely a conditional “if you know” followed by a corollary “you know,” appealing to a common set of beliefs, thus inviting a nod toward an aggressive move. If you know that God is righteous, then by extension you know that everyone doing righteousness has been begotten by this righteous God, a righteousness only possible by the regenerative act of God. The commentator Strecker expresses it pithily, “Christian existence is not founded on itself . . . .”2 What is problematic for the interpreter turns on whether the “that he is righteous” refers to Jesus or to God. The previous verse most likely points to Jesus, for Jesus has been called righteous previously (2:1), and by the latter portion of 3:1 the author once again speaks of him. Jesus, furthermore, is “that one” at 3:7 who is righteous. God, however, was characterized as righteous as early as 1:7; the Father is mentioned explicitly at 3:1. At the end of v. 29 itself, tellingly and decisively, one encounters “has been born of him,” most assuredly a reference to God, who consistently in Johannine thought functions as the begetter (1 John 3:9; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18; cf. John 1:13; 3:3, 5-8). Furthermore, the prepositional phrase “from him” has as its antecedent the

1 John 2:28–3:10

subject of v. 29a. Also, the theme of the children of God commences at 3:1b. At 3:10 it is entirely explicit that the author refers to God. While the high Christology in 1 John makes the Son and Father virtually inseparable (1:3) anyway, my contention remains that the Elder intended a reference to God. This passage splendidly illustrates his classic movement from the character of God and Jesus to the believer. The key characterization of God as righteous (2:29a, the Hebrew saddiq) points not only to moral character but activity of the divine. The Old Testament influence from the Hebrew prophets and the affirmation of covenant faithfulness belong in the background. The righteousness of Yahweh, a vindicating righteousness that includes the poor and oppressed, gains acclaim in the Psalms (22:31; 50:6). God acts to save as well as to judge (Isa 41:2, 10; 42:6; 45:8; 51:5; Jer 50:7). Josephus characterized God as righteous to vindicate his judgment (Ant. 2.108), and defined Yahweh as the only (monos) righteous God ( J.W. 7.323), as also Philo (Dreams 2.194). A favorite concept of Matthew’s as well as John’s is the judgment of Jesus standing as righteous because it coordinated with the will of God (5:30). Jesus insists upon a right judgment not dependent upon outward appearances (7:24) and calls upon God as “righteous Father” (17:25), similar to 2:29. Strikingly, in 1 John, God is characterized as faithful and righteous in forgiving, and Jesus is portrayed as righteous and a believer’s advocate (2:1). This righteous God in 1 John then does not come off as rigid and onedimensional. The writer does make the doing of righteousness a criterion of Christianity. The “everyone doing righteousness” statement (v. 29b) is constructed inclusively, and it functions as a test or sign, not just a consonance of character. Hence, if a person is doing righteousness as defined by the character of God, it stands as a sure sign of divine regeneration. Regeneration empowers and makes righteous living possible; it is not only an act of God but an imparting of the divine righteousness. Being begotten of God represents a seminal rather than marginal belief in Johannine thought. The author’s opponents may have laid claim to being begotten but did not draw the logical corollaries. When the writer interprets God as righteous, he sets the table to tag them out, to expose their invalid claims as he did in the first movement (1:5–2:27). “Doing” is the way to life, a sign of life, but it is made possible by the divine begetting. Real righteousness is envisioned here, not imputed or forensic, but it is “not the condition but the consequence of being God’s child.”3 Righteousness stands as the polar opposite of evil activity (3:4, 12) but is virtually

115

116

1 John 2:28–3:10

Background for the Idea of Being Begotten of God Raymond Brown scours the options, including the mystery religions and Gnosticism (see Bultmann), the OT (Deut 32:18; Ps 2:7), Qumran (1 QSa 2:11-12), Philo (On the Migration of Abraham 7.35), Epictetus, Discourse 4,10.16, and on analogy to eternal life (John 3:37). He also referenced the third century Corpus Hermeticum, which is about being begotten of God.

synonymous with doing the will of God (2:17). [Background for the Idea of Being Begotten of God]

First John 3:1-3 on the dignity and destiny of the children of God represents a major encouragement to the beleaguered believers. The writer does not merely emphasize the divine love at 3:1a but seems personally smitten by it and here grows rather doxological. He revels in the greatness of the love of God because of the spiritual privilege of being a child of God and being so Raymond Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982), 385–86. called. The word rendered “how great” (potap∑n) Rudolf Bultmann, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles connotes here “how wonderful” and “how glo(trans. Philip O’Hara; ed. Robert Funk; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973). rious” and in the Gospels appears in the context of amazement, as at the calming of the storm (Matt 8:27) and the reaction to the massive stones of the temple (Mark 13:1; cf. Luke 1:29; 7:39). The entire v. 1 functions as a kind of exclamation point. God’s lavish love is embodied in giving (1 John 3:16, 17; cf. John 3:16). The writer in effect celebrates the gift of being called children of God, having addressed the readers affectionately at 2:28 as “children” (cf. Jub. 1:24-25). In the Johannine tradition, the children of God are those who recognized and received Jesus Christ, the Word (John 1:12a), believed in his name (1:12c), and were begotten of God (1:13). Significantly for our passage, the prologue of John announces that they are given authority to become children of God (1:12b), utilizing the idea of gracious gift as in 1 John 3:1. Divine love ensues in giving; love by its very nature gives, hence the abhorrence in 1 John toward so-called believers seeing a brother or sister in need and refusing to share (3:17). The Elder awakens his readers to a sign of love they have missed or forgotten and assures them that in fact they are children of God. The Johannine outlook does not think in terms of all humanity as children of God automatically but by adoption. Not only are believers called children of God, but in reality they are, having been begotten of God (2:29). This pastoral writer secures the identity of the recipients as “God’s children”with the terms “are” and “now” with additional dimension in the offing (“We are God’s children now,” 3:2). (This is not prominent in John; the idea of calling is only here in 1 John.) The claim “we are” (3:1c) is omitted in some manuscripts. Here we find the signature of realized eschatology, particularly for the believer (1:7; 2:5, 9-10; 4:15). Presumably others in the community previously claimed the status for themselves as children of God.

1 John 2:28–3:10

Rather surprisingly for the modern reader, the writer suddenly turns and addresses the experience of not being recognized as children of God by the world (3:1de), Jesus suffering a parallel dilemma (John 1:10; 8:19; 14:7, 9; 15:18-21; 16:3). One must not undervalue the “just as” relation between Jesus and disciples in 1 John (2:6; 3:3, 7). The final word “him” in v. 2 could possibly refer to God,4 but likely not. The issue of being unrecognized (3:1c), indeed called forth (3:1-3), arises because (“for this reason”) of the rough ride the community has experienced. They are enduring a painful, confusing, ambiguous time (cf. 2:19); the present tense “does not know us” implies that it continues. Why does the world not know them? Because the world itself stands apart from God (5:19) and because believers are identified with Jesus, who was rejected by the world, including “his own.” Similar factors are at play in the two failures to recognize. The sensitive author explains, reveals, why the people experience disapproval and tension rather than affirmation. At this stage the Christian community is a negligible sect on the fringe of the Roman Empire. At v. 2 the recipients are addressed as actually “beloved,” which is not merely routine appellation but contextually meaningful. This address, like “children,” is gender inclusive. Once again the author declares the community’s common status of being children of God already, continuing to identify with fellow believers. Having celebrated the realized reality, he faces the future with even greater wonderment; the present gift is lavish but the one to come astounding. He opens up a wide vista of enticing possibilities of what believers will yet become: a tantalizing prospect (3:2). Belief in his future appearance (2:28; 3:2bd) concomitantly leads to grand implications in the vision of the author. At 3:2-3 we find a fine balance between realized and futuristic eschatology (“we are” and “we shall be”) and how they interrelate. Admitting a limitation of knowledge about the future character of the children of God (3:2b; cf. 1 Cor 13:12a), the epistolary writer does make bold with promise of his readers’ seeing Christ or possibly God (cf. Matt 5:8; 1 Cor 13:12; Rev 22:4) and being like the deity, looking forward to “the ultimate disclosure of the members’ true being.”5 Colossians 3:4 represents an interesting parallel. Our writer honestly admits his incomplete understanding but does turn to christological clues, the not knowing now contrasted with what we do know (3:2c). The vision of God belonged to Jewish expectation (4 Ezra 7:90, 91). It would appear that the way of knowing at 3:2c refers back to their common gospel (John), tradition explicitly (John 16:16-24); however, there is the promise

117

118

1 John 2:28–3:10

of seeing Jesus at the Easter resurrection. Colin Cruse isolates three distinct ways of seeing in 1 John: (1) seeing with the physical eyes (1:1-3), (2) failing to see with the eyes of faith (3:6), and (3) seeing the exalted Lord of heavenly glory.6 The writer most likely saw a definite continuity with the seeing of the risen Christ by the original disciples (John 21:18, 25, 29), though even more could be in mind. Hints about what “being like him” meant for the author are strewn around the Epistle (2:6; 3:5-7, 16; 4:7-11). One should read the seeing of Jesus as he is in the end time as a catalytic and transforming encounter, especially in light of “because” (causal hoti, 3:2d), and “the seeing him” has in mind especially his holy purity. This expectation becomes a potential influence upon the struggling community. The fond hope of seeing Jesus and being like him reflects what might be called a passion for sanctification, the being like him related to moral purity or holiness (3:3) rather than status or a spiritual body as in Paul (1 Cor 15:44). We see a pattern of the “pregnant now” (3:1-2a), the “not yet” (3:2b), and the “great then” (3:2cd). Pastorally the Elder transforms the considerable anxiety and confusion of the community about a future judgment from psychic pain into potential affirmation and motivating anticipation. Verse 3 injects the word “hope” into the author’s terminology, a hope in context of a coming appearance of Jesus that the believer will experience confidently. The believer will anticipate seeing him and becoming like him, the latter likely including the cessation of all sin. The noun “hope” is used only here in Johannine literature but reflects early Christian teaching. Still moving from the character of God as righteous (2:29a), asserting the purity and holiness of Jesus (3:3b), the author applies the word “hope” to the purity of the believer having the hope. “That one” at v. 3b refers to Jesus as elsewhere in the letter. The word rendered “pure” (hagnos) and characterizing the model Jesus means “holy, chaste, innocent.” In John Jesus is named the holy one of God (6:69). While purity often has cultic associations, it appears here in more of an ethical aspect (as Jas 4:8; 1 Pet 1:22). This purity on the part of Jesus includes the significant absence of sin (3:5c) and the positive presence of righteousness (3:7c). Thus the concept of purity for the disciple involves doing. This writer finds sin unusually abhorrent (3:4-10) and the righteous life compelling. With this lofty notion of the power of hope in Jesus’ coming, he works with the assumption that one’s horizon influences what one is becoming. The present tense “purifies” suggests a continuous process of becoming that is not finalized short of the second coming; no immediate or present perfection is envisioned here. The cleansing power of right-

1 John 2:28–3:10

eous hope is asserted, a sort of ancillary purifying process in addition to the cleansing of the atonement (1:9). This pastoral theologian sees change through (1) conversion, (2) the process of becoming (cf. 2 Cor 3:18) linked with hope, and (3) encounter with Jesus in the end time. The futurity of this text (3:2-3) offers horizon, presents purposeful existence, and gives life a destiny (cf. Phil 3:13-14). At 3:4-10 the second stage of the argument appears as the author, having celebrated the children of God (3:1-3), returns to 2:29 in the sense of an antithesis of doing righteousness. Here the incompatibility of sin and righteousness emerges, the contrasting lifestyles mutually exclusive. This pattern of celebration and invalidation serves as a microcosm of the rhetorical strategy of the entire letter. The “everyone who” or “doing” construction (3:4a) utilizes the present participle, so the writer describes continuous sinning, a lifestyle and an activity, not just an attitude. Here the theme of righteousness considers doing sin as a test; hence sin is understood as unrighteousness, breaking with the character of God. Certainly sin includes the love of the world, this passage bearing similarity in broad contour to 2:15-17. The author declares that the one doing sin also does lawlessness, a statement likely more mysterious to a modern reader than to the original recipients. Is this just a superficial definition of sin, the use of synonymous terms (Pss 31:1-2; 50:4; Rom 4:7-8)?7 The use of the word “and” implies the adding of an insight to the understanding of sin and the situation. The use of the article “the” four times in the Greek text defining sin and lawlessness also gets one’s attention. The author seems to be intensifying the gravity of the sin by claiming that the secessionists are also lawless, raising the possibility of the familiar theory that the opponents were libertines. The false teachers may have deluded themselves into thinking they were free from sin (1:8). Most likely lawlessness points in part to those who break the commandments (3:4). Indeed Bultmann wonders if, in their delusion that they are sinless, they have fallen prey to lawlessness.8 A more recent line of reading belongs in this mix because of the use of the article “the.”9 Perhaps “the Sin,” translating literally, points to religious alignment with the devil, especially since lawlessness appears in the apocalyptic activity of Satan in the end time. This idea fits well with the immediate context (3:8), the emphasis upon last things in this portion of the letter (2:17, 18, 28; 3:2), the realms of light and darkness, and divine and evil empires. With this thesis, antithesis to 2:29, the writer then makes another forceful move.

119

120

1 John 2:28–3:10

Appeal is made to what the community knows already about the appearance of “that one” (Jesus, 3:5a), knowledge derived from what they were taught from the beginning, that is, the tradition reflected in John and the understanding given in becoming a child of God. A purpose clause follows, introduced by “that” (hoti), which importantly asserts the rationale for the mission to take away sins (3:5b). The Greek verb airø, rendered “take away” and used only here in the Epistles, appears as an aorist subjunctive. The intent could be to reflect on the Christ event as a whole. The verb can mean “remove” or “sweep away.” Note that the purpose of Jesus’ coming serves well with the character of God as righteous and the divine desire for righteousness in his children. For John, Jesus was not a religious person who discovered God but one sent to reveal God. The verb airø shows up in the Gospel of John regularly with the meaning “to remove to another location” (John 2:16; 11:39, 41; 19:31, 38; 20:1, 13), and this nuance clearly belongs to 1 John 3:5. In the Lazarus story the verb is featured in the command to remove the stone from the sepulchre (11:39, 41) and again in the taking away of the body of Jesus (19:38). Furthermore, in one key passage on the lips of the Baptizer we have the familiar declaration, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29), hence introducing sacrificial language. It stands clear that Jesus’ coming and death deliver from sin, his blood serving as an expiation (2:2). This much holds, but some want to add the notion of the bearing of sins on the basis of Isaiah 53:4, 11, 12.10 Howard Marshall hazards the picture of a “representative bearing of sin and the consequent atoning power of his death (cf. 1 John 2:2; 4:10; 1 Pet 2:24).”11 John 5:10 does use airø to mean “carry,” but this does not represent the predominant meaning in John. While the idea of Jesus bearing sins might have been intended here, one cannot demonstrate it. One does better therefore to affirm the clear intent and leave the further possibility in abeyance. For the author sin is removed from the life of the authentic believer, as the next verse will claim, crucial for an Epistle that stresses fellowship with God (1:3, 6, 7). As part and parcel of his argument, the Elder also affirms the complete absence of sin in the one who appeared to take away sin (3:5c). He reflects a primitive conviction widely attested in different segments of the New Testament (2 Cor 5:21; 1 Pet 1:19; 2:22; 3:18; Heb 4:15; 7:26; 9:14). It certainly shows up in John (8:46; cf. 14:31). The recipients would have known this christological belief, and the author brings this argument forward since it serves well his principal thesis concerning the character of God as

1 John 2:28–3:10

righteous and the divine desire for righteousness in the children. Jesus, the righteous (2:1) and pure one (3:3), the one without sin, can be the means of forgiveness. The absence of sin belonged to his righteousness and hence to the expected righteousness of genuine believers, a clear line of thought about one who was the model or paradigm. Even as Jesus can be seen in the New Testament as liberated and liberator, for the Elder, Jesus as the sinless one could take away sin. The writer envisions not only forgiven sinners but righteous believers. Adroitly the Epistle forges a connection between the righteous God, the sinless Jesus, and the believer. At v. 6 we find the classic pattern of thesis and antithesis articulated by “everyone” and also a reintroduction of the repetitive crucial relationship of abiding (cf. John 5:37). Drawing from an argument already put in place (1 John 2:29; 3:4) the Elder asserts in seemingly absolute terms that the believer abiding in “him” (apparently Jesus but possibly God as 3 John 11) does not sin. Not only is the writer notorious about not clarifying pronouns but in my view uses the Father and Son almost interchangeably. This fits snugly into the theological thrust of this part of the Epistle with its inevitable logic that sin and being a child of God are irreconcilable, but the contention obviously raises thorny questions. To make matters even more problematic, he juxtaposes with the other side of the coin the doctrine that everyone sinning has neither seen nor known Jesus (3:6b; cf. John 8:34). Efforts to modify the seeming absoluteness of these two generalizations include (1) relating the intent to mortal sin (5:16) of a willful sort, (2) upholding the ideal for the believer, (3) seeing it as a matter of “relatively speaking,”12 (4) viewing it as paradox,13 or (5) naming the doctrine of the sinlessness of the Christian.14 Certainly the text makes abiding the conditional factor here, becoming an injunction motivating and empowering Christians and reminding of a spiritual relationship. In the polemical context, the writer intends to disqualify those who claim to know or see Jesus (2:3-4; cf. John 9:41; 14:17) yet persist arrogantly in sinful living. Could the not seeing or knowing mean that the opponents do not have the advantage of seeing Jesus in the flesh as has the author and those he represents (1:1-3; cf. John 3:11, 32)? Possibly, but it appears more likely that by “seeing” the author has in mind the Johannine mode of seeing in which one penetrates the significance of Jesus, comprehending his true and transcendent identity, a faith-related perception (cf. John 1:34, 51; 9:37; 11:40; 14:7, 9). Believing sight is promised to disciples (John 1:39, 50ff ). This seeing or beholding who Jesus ultimately is was naturally associated with coming to faith or conversion, though the uses of the perfect tense also imply a continuing experience.

121

122

1 John 2:28–3:10

Negative instances of failing to see the true identity of Jesus do show up in John (6:36; 15:24). The reference to not knowing, a damaging critique of those making issue of their special knowing (2:3-4), belongs to the writer’s accumulating case (2:13, 14; 4:2, 6, 7, 8; and 5:2). Knowing in its regular verbal sense points toward conversion (cf. John 6:69). Knowing God has to do with a relationship and a fellowship and an experience. The validity of one’s relationship with a righteous God plays out in ethical life and not just in claims of esoteric knowledge. To return now to the problematical matter of the absolute language and the various efforts at resolution, the best basic solution is found in attention to the present tenses in play at v. 6. Verse 6a is best rendered with the understanding “does not continue to sin” (cf. NIV). The Epistle does not entertain here the idea of a single sin or failing but a prevalent way of life. The Williams translation with its special sensitivity to tenses also brings out the present tense of abiding as “continues to live in union with Him,” effectively retaining the conditionality. Those persons abiding do not sin habitually as a characteristic pattern of life. Despite the problematic, the interpreter finally should move beyond the obstacle of the absolute language in order to hear the basic insistence itself. Verse 7a, though opening with a fond but direct address to the children of God, stands out as an impassioned warning against deceivers, implying the agenda of 2:28–3:10. The passion of the writer flares with this appeal, reflecting in the most luminous fashion a reason for writing. This emphatic urging not to be deceived fairly screams with concern; the deceivers are not to be underestimated, the previous and potential “inroads of propagandists” are not to be taken lightly, but rather as a lingering influence. First John here continues a campaign against deception (1:8; 2:26; cf. 2 John 7; cf. Mark 13:5), insisting on the danger and the corresponding necessity for Christians to be alert, to think critically and theologically and not be gulled. This writer is no laidback ecclesiastic. While the primary concern at 2:18-27 centered in Christology, here it focuses on moral behavior. The Elder seeks to disallow diminution of morality in the community (cf. 3:10bc). The strong use of the imperative and “nobody” (m∑deis used as a noun) is not sedate but alarming. The second sentence of v. 7 regarding the doing of righteousness is not a mere statement of the obvious but a conviction fundamental to the Epistle. Here appears nothing less than the classic theological ethic of this Epistle, one of its most winsome and

1 John 2:28–3:10

impressive dimensions. Not taken aback by the “just as” means of christological argument, Jesus as the model of discipleship, the writer grounds his seemingly simple conclusion on the definitive character of Jesus. “That one” (ekeinos, demonstrative) regularly refers to Jesus in the Epistle (3:5), but it could refer to God. The expression “doing righteously” cannot be found in John. The seemingly simplistic conclusion that the one doing righteously is righteous reflects the author’s clarification in a controverted context where some claim to know the God of light yet walk in the dark (1:6). If v. 7a leads into v. 7bc, the deception has to do with the nature of righteousness. It is not merely imputed. For 1 John the character of the Father and the Son and the bona fide believer run along a similar trajectory. Furthermore, John will insist with magnificent monotony on real righteousness, the actual doing of righteousness in one’s life, which includes but is not limited to the avoidance of sin (3:6). Positively it involves keeping the commandments (2:3-5; 3:22, 24; 5:2-3). In this context it points to a Jesus kind of righteous living. Previously in 1 John we have encountered “the one doing the will of God” (2:17) and “everyone doing righteousness” (2:29). One’s source or realm is discernible by one’s doing (3:8, 9, 10). The doing of righteousness predominates in 2:28–3:10, just as walking in light presides over 1:5–2:11, indicative of the substantive ethical edge of the Epistle. Once again we find tests grounded not in verbal claim but in ethical, empirical reality (3:7b, 8a). The one doing sin as a way of being discloses his or her demonic source (3:8a). The Johannine tradition with its notions of domains and origins works with the principle that people do the works of their spiritual parent (cf. John 8:41a). The language here at 3:8ff is reminiscent of the controversy with the “Jews” in John with its disturbing polemic, “You are from your father the devil . . .” (8:44a). The epistolary writer stands in the tradition of “you will know them by their fruits” (Matt 7:20). The preposition “out of ” or “from” (3:8a) is critically important throughout the Epistle since ek indicates origin, and the character of a person or thing is determined by origin or upbringing.15 In the Wisdom of Solomon one runs across the expression “those who belong to his party” (2:24, RSV). The Elder apparently refers to an early moment in primeval times (3:8b), probably with Cain’s fratricide in mind (3:12). The devil and sin were connected since the beginning, hence the spiritual parentage of the sinner. Sin then by its nature partakes of the demonic. The early church thought of the devil as the enemy of all righteousness (Acts 13:10).

123

124

1 John 2:28–3:10

For the Gospel at least, this sinning from the beginning has to do with murder and lying (8:44). The devil “destroys the life God creates . . . and denies the truth God reveals.”16 The devil is seen as the author of sin. The intentional mission of the Son of God (cf. John 12:31) is stated forcefully again in rough parallel to 3:5, the first passage to remove sin to another place and destroy the work of the devil (3:8). The two verbs, “take away” and “destroy,” however, do not mean precisely the same thing. Furthermore, the verb rendered “destroyed” (NIV, NRSV) can mean “undoing” or “dissolving” (cf. John 5:18; 7:23; Acts 13:43, this latter connotation fitting better with 5:19). Here the assault falls on the source of sin or the primal sinner. Something like the classic early church belief in Christ as victor (Christus Victor) appears here (cf. John 16:33; Heb 2:14). In the Johannine tradition the “work of the devil” stands in clashing contrast to the work of the Father the Son came to do according to John 4:34, 6:28, 9:3-4 and elsewhere. While the destroying or undoing presumably took place climactically at the cross, it was intended from the outset of the mission. One can say in the parlance of John that love overcomes hate in the mission and death of Jesus, in the temptation of Jesus (Matt 4:1-11), in his exorcisms (Matt 12:22-29), and in the mission of the disciples (Luke 10:18). The recipients of the letter were also recipients of the benefits of the removing and undoing, tangible signs of the successful effect of the mission St. Augustine (as 2:12-14). One then can go forward to say the result of the mission can be seen not only in the sinless life of Jesus but in the lives of the faithful children of God. Strecker had it right in his insistence that “the community is called to unite itself with this action, to allow it to be accomplished in and for the community itself, and to make it real within its own ranks . . . .”17 Michael Pacher (c.1434–1498). Panel from the Altarpiece of the Fathers of the Church: St. Augustine, detail. 1480. Oil on wood. Alte Pinakothek, Munich, Germany. [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PD-oldIn undoing the works 100)]

1 John 2:28–3:10

of the devil, Jesus replaces the mischief of malice with the miracle of love. The devil serves as the agent of hate and death while Jesus performs as the embodiment of love and life. A decisive change has taken place with enormous potential, but recessive options linger (2:15-17). While the power of the devil is broken, it remains virulent outside the community of believers. [Augustine on the Devil at 1 John 3:8]

125

Augustine on the Devil at 1 John 3:8 “As for what John says about the devil, ‘The devil sinneth from the beginning,’ they who suppose it is meant hereby that the devil was made with a sinful nature, misunderstand it; for if sin be natural, it is not sin at all . . .we must understand by this one also, ‘He abode not in the truth,’ that he was once in the truth, but he did not remain in it. And from this passage, ‘The devil sinneth from the beginning,’ it is not to be supposed that he sinned from the beginning of his created existence, but from the beginning of his sin, when by his pride he had once commenced to sin.”

As for the devil, some will take him literally as the highest sovereign of the demons, and some will take him as a symbolic figure pointing to Saint Augustine, The City of God, in Basic Writings of Saint anything that resists God; others will dismiss the Augustine (New York: Random House, 1948), 2:157. devil as a mythological figure, while some such as myself will cling to belief in a collective evil greater and more complex than individual choices, a kind of mystery of iniquity. The atrocities of war alone, including the treatment of prisoners, gives one sober pause. One need not posit an eternally dualistic universe philosophically or biblically (cf. Matt 25:41; Rev 20:10). I do not presume to possess the answers here, and I offer no glib or glossy solution about such a complex issue, but I do seek to represent faithfully the authorial intent. The role of the Son of God, so crucial to confess in the previous passage (2:22-23), functions in the Epistle not only (1) to remove and undo sin (3:5, 8), but also (2) to be sent in order that believers might live through him (4:9), (3) as the expiator for sins (2:2; 4:10), (4) as the manifestation of the love of God (4:9), (5) as the one inseparable from the Father (1:3; 2:23) With a resumption of the characteristic style of general axiom “Everyone” (pas ho), the apostolic witness presses his contention about the children of God not sinning (3:9). The modern reader experiences this strong claim as problem or as personal frustration, but the import of the sentiment should not be vitiated before it is heard. The Epistle holds an elevated evaluation of having been begotten of God. Two clauses, both beginning with “because” (hoti), reveal that an abiding divine seed (sperma) keeps the believer from doing sin. Apparently the position of the pastoral writer advances to the additional step that one is not able to sin, will not, and cannot. The rationale for the latter conviction resides in the power of being begotten of God. The image of God’s seed belongs to the imagistic system of being begotten. In John, “seed” can carry the meaning of descendants (David, 7:42; Abraham, 8:33, 37), but most likely the

126

1 John 2:28–3:10

Elder intends here the Holy Spirit (1 John 2:27). The modern reader may be excused if bewildered since the same author made provision quite early in the letter for believers who in fact do sin (2:1). The attentive reader is accustomed to encountering unambiguous generalizations throughout the letter in order to make impact. Once more, however, the present tenses are prevalent and telling: “does not continue to sin” (3:9a), “continues to abide in him” (3:9b) in a causal construction supporting 3:9a, and “is not able to continue to sin” (3:9c). It seems advisable to take the reading of habitual sinning in the whole course of one’s life, though there are criticisms of this view.18 Of course, all of 2:28–3:9 is in the service of supporting 3:10ab. The Elder makes a basic point in absolutistic language but not with an absolute point of view. Christian sin is reckoned with at 2:1, 3:20, Background and Meaning of “Seed” 1. Means offspring as John 7:42, 8:33, 37 and 5:16. One is reminded of the indicative (favored by Bengel, Moffatt) and imperative characteristic of Paul (cf. 2. Male generating seed, hence God’s seed. Two usual Rom 6:11, 12; Gal 5:24, 25; and Gal 3:27 possibilities: and Rom 13:14). a. God’s word (1 John 2:14,24; favored by Barclay, It must be admitted that the writer Malatesta) expressed himself in “the absolute language b. Holy Spirit (John 3:5; 1 John 2:27; favored by Brooke, Schnackenburg) of the prophet rather than with the circum3. A germ of the divine nature (favored by Westcott) spection of the casuist.”19 We find here an uncompromising insistence upon the living Raymond Brown favors reference to the Holy Spirit. He of the righteous life that deserves respect. also cites striking parallels from Philo and Gnostic writings. J. de Waal Dryden provides an excellent, thorough survey and spirited advocacy of children or offspring.

[Background and Meaning of “Seed”]

This expectation of doing real righteousness does not mean we have here the “Pelagian” position that one can achieve salRaymond Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30;Garden City NY: vation by individual effort. Not only do you Doubleday, 1982), 408–11. have the Johannine sentiment from the J. de Waal Dryden, “The Sense of sperma in 1 John 3:9 in Light of Lexical Evidence,” Filogia Neotestamentaria 11 (1998): 85–100. Gospel, “apart from me you can do nothing” (John 15:5), but the Epistle itself is chockfull of spiritual resources for the righteous life (as 2:12-14). At v. 10 the purpose of the entire section stands crystal clear, as he has designed a pressing topic and written to this baseline conclusion. Opening with his disclosure formula “by this means” or “this is how” along with the final use of a form of “reveal” or “manifest,” the writer prepares to announce his litmus test for discerning children of God and children of the devil. He will do so with negative clarification. Especially since 3:4, the Elder stresses a criterion for discernment as later at 4:1-6. As usual with his up front presentation of the logical case (logos), he empowers the reader to make her own discernments.

1 John 2:28–3:10

127

The author answers his own issue at v. 10bc, not surprisingly returning to his consistent use of his construction “everyone” followed by the participle, here significantly “doing” once more. Both sin and righteousness are constituted by doing persistently. Hence the manner of expression not only addresses the posture of the adversaries. Any who live unrighteously cannot claim kin to a righteous God. The choice of the double negative “not doing . . . is not . . .” suggests his primary intent within this section to expose the real identity of the children of the devil posing as superior children of God. The negative dominates at 3:10bc because of the pressing threat to the community, a problem that involved both sinful living and an unloving spirit. The Elder wishes to tag out not only bad teachers but bad theology and replace them with a sturdy theological ethic founded on a commonly held community belief in a righteous God. Unrighteousness can best be defined in context. It stands oppositional to the character of God (2:29a) and to the purity and holiness of Jesus (3:3, 4). It is then the opposite of sinlessness; it relates to doing sin and lawlessness (3:4). Going into the next passage, unrighteousness involves the taking of life (3:12) rather than the giving of one’s life (3:17), evil works rather than righteous works (3:12), not loving (3:14), hating (3:15), and not having compassion (3:17). It all adds up to quite a profile. Another telling negative sign is marked by the absence of loving one’s sister or brother (3:10c), which will be illustrated in the next and associated passage (3:11-18). Verse 10c not only affects transition but recalls earlier verses in a spiraling fashion. This reference to not loving skillfully segues to the next developLack of Love for Fellow Believers ment, arguing for a kind of unity in the Epistle, “For love they have no care, none for the whatever the prehistory. Righteous living and widow, none for the distressed, none for loving fellow believers are set aside as lasting disthe afflicted, none for the prisoner, or for him closures of authenticity. Hence the writer released from prison, none for the hungry or has warned of the sinful children of the devil thirsty” (6:2). Ign. Smyrn. 1:259, speaking of those living lives contrary to the (3:4-10) and celebrated the righteous children of mind of God. God. [Lack of Love for Fellow Believers]

CONNECTIONS 1. Spiritual Resources for the Righteous

“I can tell that you are a righteous person,” an old college friend said to Barbara Brown Taylor during a telephone conversation.

128

1 John 2:28–3:10

He was Jewish, she Episcopalian. She considers it the most unusual compliment she has received. The word “righteous” held mostly negative associations for her because of terms like “selfrighteousness” and “works righteousness.” She began to wonder why many of us have abandoned the word, remembering along the way the beatitude of Jesus blessing those hungering and thirsting after righteousness (Matt 5:6).20 We would do well to dust off the word and recover a fresh impetus. Here in 1 John we hear a robust call to the life of Christian purity and righteous living. Perhaps the holiness movement, to its credit, has heard this call better than some of the rest of us. John Wesley, who loved 1 John, certainly listened attentively with profound outcome. Richard Baxter, a leading Puritan light, did much to reform morals and wrote Saints’ Everlasting Rest. The poet Longfellow imagined a struggling humanity hearing the voice sounding after centuries this simple thought: By the great Master taught, And that remaineth still: Not he that repeateth the name, But he that doeth the will!21

With modern sensibilities we would make the “he” inclusive of “she.” On the basis of the Epistle, we would gently remind that repeating the name is rather crucial too (3:23), but otherwise recognize that the gifted poet had it right about doing the will. In our text, numerous significant spiritual resources for the believer aspiring to righteous living are mentioned. They include (1) the miracle of being begotten of God (2:29; 3:9a), (2) the divine gift of hope (3:20), (3) abidance in Christ (3:6), (4) the example of Jesus (3:7), and (5) the benefits of his atonement (3:5, 8). 2. The Unrecognized Jesus and His Disciples

At 1 John 3:1, the author faces the dilemma of believers not being understood or supported by the world, an experience parallel to that of Jesus. Such Christians are in good company. Some Christians in particular parts of the world find themselves criticized or ostracized rather than affirmed. Some Christians stay faithful in nearly invisible places of service far from any limelight. This can be a sign of one’s authentic discipleship. Clarence Jordan bore witness in his life and ministry at Koinonia farms and in his Cottonpatch

1 John 2:28–3:10

translation of most of the New Testament. He lived in such a radical and culturecontesting fashion that he found himself vilified and called a communist because of his integrated congregation. Jesus still goes unrecognized. An increasingly secular world does not fathom his values or favor his prophetic stance. Sigismund Goetze painted a contemporary portrayal of Jesus suffering on the cross in a modern city. People are portrayed scurrying on their way to appointed tasks, not taking the time to notice or empathize. Only one person on the canvas, a nurse, stops and recognizes and relates to his suffering. Some of the most dedicated servants go unappreciated, their sterling work unrecognized.

Clarence Jordan (Credit: Koinonia Partners)

3. The Art of Wrecking Ships

Sin can become incredibly evil, endanger lives for selfish purpose, involve theft, and mislead craftily. Some thieves on the Bahamian Islands in the nineteenth century learned the art of “wrecking” ships intentionally. They would set false safety beacons along dangerous reef areas, intentionally misleading the mariners. The precious cargo of many a needlessly wrecked ship was salvaged by these intrepid thieves, and innocent lives were lost. In the popular reality television show Survivor, a group is left on an island. They forge alliances and orchestrate betrayals of their fellow islanders, the object to eject everyone but themselves, ironically to wind up alone and thus win the money. The goal is not community but the survival of the fittest—or is it the “unfittest”? The goal is not community or human cooperation but competitiveness. “It’s all about me” is perhaps more a reflection of current culture than we would prefer to admit. At one county facility, an emergency girls’ shelter, pimps have been seen using the location as a recruiting center for vulnerable girls dreaming of a better life. In the popular movie about God, Bruce Almighty, the viewer is treated to a raw, crude, and hilarious story. Bruce tries to force his alienated girlfriend to love him. She steadfastly refuses unless he changes. When everything is no longer “just about him,” their relationship moves to another level.

129

130

1 John 2:28–3:10

We rightly admit that all of us sin, whether those sins are socially reputable (envy) or disreputable (robbery), but we often fail to hear the biblical call to abandon sin. Too many Christians are sinning regularly and without compunction. Many of us have not heard the appeal and potential happiness of the rightThe Dangerous Illusion of Perfection eous life. We forget the wisdom of the older The historian William Cannon reports on preachers: “Sin will take you farther than you a dangerous trend among certain sects want to go and keep you longer than you want of the fourteenth century: “The Begherds and the to stay, and it is going to cost you more than you Geguines contended that the perfect man is freed want to pay.” [The Dangerous Illusion of Perfection] from all moral obedience and can enjoy immorality without compunction of conscience.” First John clarifies (1) what sin is (lawlessness, Cannon, History of Christianity in the Middle Ages (New York: obeying oneself rather than God), (2) what sin Abingdon Press, 1960), 293. does (undoes the work of God, replenishes the reservoir of sin Jesus came to undo), (3) why sin is (failure to abide in Christ, love of the world), (4) where sin comes from (the evil influence hostile to God), and (5) how sin is conquered (by faith in the coming of Christ). 4. The Jesus Way of Defeating Sin

The praise of the faithful believer in 1 John 2:12-14 and the warning of the spiritual perils of loving the world at 2:15-17 imply personal responsibility. Yes, the believer must receive the Word, stay in community, believe in Jesus Christ, love, and abide. Redemption in 1 John, however, is not about prancing up to the heavenly cashier with a fistful of spiritual IOUs. Jesus defeats sin by his sinless life and example (3:5), by his own victory over temptation, by offering an alternative to hate by his love command (John 13:34-35), by his forgiving of sins (1:7, 9; 4:10), by his undoing of the works of the devil (3:8), and by his giving of life rather than taking of life in order that others might live (4:9). 5. “The Devil Walks”

Our text does not flinch in its inclusion of the evil influence of the demonic. It certainly seemed like demonic influence when SS officers in the Third Reich agreed to execute innocent Jews to advance themselves. In Betjeman’s poem titled “Original Sin on the Sussex Coast,” the poet reveals a moment out of his childhood when he wore “shivering shorts.” The boys in the piece come from proper places. The nine-year-old hears a whistle, a scary signal by Andrew and Willie and Jack in hot pursuit of their prey. The footrace is on,

1 John 2:28–3:10

but soon they catch their single victim. Andrew grabs him with a special grip. Willie arrives on the scene and punches the boy hard in the tummy. While two boys hold the victim in a cowardly grip, another kicks him stoutly in the spine. The nine-year-old in shivering shorts stumbles onto the asphalt as his assailants run away. “Blackness and breathlessness and sick with pain,” he lies on the hard surface. At the close of the poem he wonders, Does Mum, the Persil-user, still believe That there’s no Devil and that youth is bliss? As certain as the sun behind the Downs And quite as plain to see, the Devil walks.22

So one poet laureate put it as he saw it. On the other hand, in the perspective of our Epistle, undoing of the devil transpires when someone is born of God and does not continue a pattern of sin but does what is right (3:7, 10), a sign of spiritual progress. 6. The Power of the Anticipatory

Our pregnant passage also includes a celebration not only of being a child of God but of the great future hope (3:28–3:3). The writer revels in the “great now” (3:1), the spiritual privilege of being children of God in a realized sense. The Christian knows herself as an object of the love of God not in some far-off sense but in the pregnant present. She is begotten and entitled, all with divine help, to do the will of God in a meaningful way of living. The apostolic writer senses the “not yet” honestly and realistically. Things really are unfinished and incomplete. Everything has not yet been revealed about the destiny of the children of God; evil still wields scary clout (5:19). The poet Longfellow pictured the apostle John roaming the face of the earth. This apostle of love expressed concern about the continual existence of evil, war rather than peace, hate instead of his cherished love. The wandering apostle asked plaintively, Is Faith of no avail? Is Hope blown out like a light By a gust of wind in the night?23

131

132

1 John 2:28–3:10

Other thoughtful people mourn the eclipse of God’s will in the world. We sometimes in reflective moments come to terms with our own incompleteness. Despite the ambiguity in which the Christian community finds itself, several assignments are given. One is to continue abiding faithfully in Christ, another to do righteously, and a third to focus on the purity of the coming Lord, that concentration on purity transforming the community of believers in the interim. Not in despair, the Elder envisions the “but then” of Christian hope. He understood that a Christian is someone who infects other people with hope.24 He promises the privilege that persevering believers shall see Christ as he is, like the three privileged disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration. In the familiar hymn “Lord, Speak to Me, that I May Speak,” one comes across the sentiment, “Until Thy blessed face I see, Thy rest, Thy joy, Thy glory share.” Dottie Rambo, in the spirit of 1 John 3:6 wrote “We Shall Behold Him.” The Elder also promises faithful believers an encounter with Christ that will transform. Raymond Brown, eventually dean at Southeastern Seminary, frequently said in class with warm conviction that “He became like us so that we could become like him.” The writer of 1 John also promised the blessed experience of confidence in the second coming.

Notes 1. John Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John (SP; ed. Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002), 213. 2. Georg Strecker, Johannine Letters (Hermeneia; ed. Harold Attridge; trans. Linda M. Malony; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 83. 3. Brooke Foss Westcott, The Epistles of St. John (London: Macmillan, 1892), 67–69. 4. A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948); Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992),154. 5. Strecker, Letters. 6. Colin G. Kruse, The Letters of John (Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 116. 7. C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932), 73. 8. Rudolf Bultmann, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (trans. Philip O’Hara; ed. Robert Funk; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973), 49–50.

1 John 2:28–3:10 9. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992),172, 185–87; I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John (NIBCNT; ed. F. F. Bruce; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), 176–77; Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC, vol. 51; Waco TX: Word Books, 1984), 155; Strecker, Letters, 93–94. 10. Schnackenburg, Epistles, 172. 11. Marshall, Epistles, 177. 12. Dodd, Epistle, 78–81. 13. Werner Georg Kümmel, The Theology of the New Testament (trans. John E. Steely; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1973), 297. Kümmel does point out the caveat of the writer of no sinning while abiding. He also recognizes that the conviction that the power of sin is broken may be more pronounced in the Epistle than in the Gospel. 14. Robert Law, The Tests of Life (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909), 128–35. Law recognized that sin in 3:4-9 is ethical antagonism to the nature of God (129). Furthermore, he saw lawlessness in the context of the commandments of God (133). 15. M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek Illustrated by Examples (Rome: Scripta Pontifici Instituti Biblici, 1963), 135. 16. C. Kingsley Barrett, The Gospel according to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text (London: SPCK, 1958), 289. 17. Strecker, Letters, 101. 18. See Sakae Kubo, “I John 3:9: Absolute or Habitual?” AUSS 7 (1969): 47–56. 19. Brooke, Epistles, 90. 20. Barbara Brown Taylor, Speaking of Sin (Cambridge: Cowley, 2000), 97–101. 21. Longfellow, “Finale of Christus,” from The Chief American Poets: Selected Poems by Bryant, Poe, Emerson, Longfellow, Whittier, Holmes, Lowell, Whitman and Lanier (ed. Curtis H. Page; New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1905), 242. 22. John Betjeman, John Betjemen’s Collected Poems (New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1958), 209. 23. Longfellow,” “Finale of Christus,” 242–43. 24. See Jürgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope (London: SCM Press, 2002), who has done so remarkably in our time.

133

Love and Hate in the Community 1 John 3:11-18

COMMENTARY Quite understandably, some students of 1 John take 3:11 as the introduction of the second main division of the Epistle. The case can certainly be made with no real difficulty that some parallels in expression and construction exist with 1:5, the introductory verse to the first movement by most accounts. “This is the message which we/you have heard . . . that . . . .” The argument has even been advanced that this potential twofold division of the Epistle represents an intentional parallel to the Gospel of John (chapters 1–12, 13–20).1 This structural analysis advocated by the distinguished Raymond Brown yields the attractive outcome of the two movements of light (1 John 1:5–3:10) and love (3:11–5:12). Cain and Abel Offering Their Sacrifices This thesis stumbles on the stubborn fact that 3:11-18 is far too connected to the immediately preceding passage (2:29–3:10) to represent a major new beginning. The dualistic categories of the children of God and the children of the devil (3:10) find their analogues in Cain and Abel, one with evil works and the other righteous (3:12). Cain becomes the poster boy, as it were, for not loving one’s own brother (3:10c). Furthermore, the first word of 3:11 in the Greek text, hoti, is scarcely a signal of a new sequence but suggests an explanation (epexegetical function) of “the one not loving his brother” (3:10c). Gustave Doré (1832–1883). Cain and Abel Offering Their Sacrifices. 19th C. Engraving. (Credit: www.creationism.org/images/DoreBibleIllus/) This causal conjunction could be

136

1 John 3:11-18

rendered “for” or “because” or “since.”2 What appears to be represented at 3:11ff is a continuation of the preceding argument rather than the initiation of a new one, for there are no transitional signals. [“The Words of 3:18”] “The Words of 3:18” One does better in this writer’s opinion to conceive “let us love, not in word or of 3:11-18 as a progression upon 2:29–3:10, the theme speech, but in deed and truth” of a righteous God and righteous believers. What can be said further, drawing from Robert Law’s famous image of the spiral in which the writer of 1 John returns to a theme and enhances it, serves well for the recurring theme of love in the Epistle, though it is an imperfect model. Indeed, a significant passage on love appears as early as 2:7-11, the second then at 3:11-18, and the classic third at 4:7-11. The theme of love (and hate) is probably the primary underlying concern of the Epistle with the confession of Jesus alongside. Presumably the bad feeling in the church and the hostility toward brothers and sisters from the side of the secessionists (2:19) called forth this emphasis on the old/new commandment of reciprocal love (2:7-8). This former passage laid foundation and authority to the grand command. The writer does return to his baseline of John 13:34-35: to love one another or each other. This represents the second use of the reciprocal pronoun (cf. 1:7). Here it is not only his critique of opponents but a key to his ecclesiology, an essential definition of what it means to be Christian-in-community. He espouses a relational ethic, a disciple in community. The dimension of reciprocity, furthermore, should not be skimmed over too hurriedly. It is not merely that a believer ought to love another Christian. It is also implied that a Christian should be open to receiving the love of a fellow believer. This reciprocal love constitutes the genius of the Johannine vision of church. Those disgruntled because the focus on love is limited to other Christians in the Epistle should factor in the potentiality of the Johannine vision for relationships and ecclesiology. The message that you have heard (v. 11a) belongs to a familiar motif in 1 John (1:1, 3, 5; 2:7, 24). The letter regularly appeals to the authority of what has been heard, reflecting on both the oral situation and the implicit respect for the Johannine tradition. In this context, no real question exists concerning what is meant by the ubiquitous “from beginning.” It seems to point rather unmistakably to John 13:34-35. The second person “you,” however, is used rather than the “we” of 1:1-3 or 1:5. Since the readers presumably did not hear it directly from Jesus, it likely refers to their initial hearing of Christian preaching. If this is so, then loving one

1 John 3:11-18

another belonged integrally to the Johannine understanding of gospel. Grammatically, the clause “that we love one another” unveils the content of the message heard from the beginning. God’s love and the corresponding love for one another must have enjoyed a particularly prominent place in typical Johannine preaching. Their hearing of gospel may have been through the narrative of the Gospel of John, whether finalized in writing or not. Because of the Old Testament story of Cain and Abel, Smalley wonders if the reference went back not only to apostolic kerygma, but even to the ordinance of creation itself.3 The negative example of Cain comes forward immediately, a clue that vv. 11-18 are not merely about mutual love from a pastoral or didactic side. The characteristic “just as” (kathøs) comparison is preceded significantly by the negative “not” (cf. John 6:59; 14:27), suggesting its introduction because of the internal conflict. Even in an instance like that involving Cain, the author seems to prefer this style of argument, in this case an example not to emulate. The author moved to this antithetical example of Cain not merely because Cain was a murderer but because (1) he belonged to the other realm (from the Evil One), and because (2) he killed his brother. While the example may seem extreme, it fits the Elder’s purpose well. He also appears to introduce the example of Cain without the necessity of explanation, presuming that auditors would be familiar with the reference (cf. John 8:39-44). While our writer utilizes his rubrics of righteous and unrighteous, love and hate, Cain and Abel had been juxtaposed long before in Jewish exegesis. Philo, for example, in extensive and wandering treatises, wrote about Cain and Abel as types. He saw the two brothers as opposing principles of love of self and love of God (“The Sacrifice of Abel and Cain” 1-4, 52). The lovers of virtue and lovers of self, drawn from the Abel/Cain typology, are characterized in his “The Worse Attacks the Better” (32), with Cain portrayed as killing himself by his hateful fratricide (48). John Painter is able to show the parallel between 1 John 3:12 and the characterization of Abel as righteous and Cain as evil to Josephus (Ant. 1, 52-62) and the influence of the Adversary on Cain (Apoc. Ab., 24:5).4 Perhaps some of the recipients would be familiar already with the example the writer develops. Rhetorically the church leader asks for the motive of the murder (v. 12c). He answers crisply with the causal cause (“because,” v. 12d). The evil deeds averred do not stand in the abstract or merely as recall of Genesis 4, but emerge from Cain’s spiritual parentage from the Evil One (v. 12a). Cain belonged to the other

137

138

1 John 3:11-18

realm, the sphere of darkness and the demonic, the familiar dualism of the Epistle. In Genesis 4 the brothers are juxtaposed as a farmer and a shepherd (v. 2). Cain brought an offering to God from the ground, and Abel from the “firstlings” of his flock. God had no regard for Cain’s offering but approved Abel’s (vv. 2-5). The divine reason is not certain but may be related to a greater generosity arising from the heart. The Genesis text assigns anger as the reaction that led to the malicious murder of Cain’s own brother, which, in turn, suits well the argument of the Epistle with its antithesis of love and hate. The epistolary argument, in keeping with its theme of righteousness (“everyone who does right has been born of him,” 2:29b), explains that Abel’s deeds were righteous, as does Hebrews 11:4, which also uses the word “righteous.” From this the text moves toward the familiar Johannine argument concerning the world hating the community (John 15:18, 19; 17:14), likely including the secessionists (2:19). The perspective of vv. 13 and 14 encompasses the defensive and offensive, respectively. Evidently those of the exodus demonstrated an unsettling hostility toward the ones remaining. Since hatred from the world belonged to the self-understanding of the Johannine community, the author sees it as inevitable. His “do not be astonished,” the only usage in the Epistles, appears in the Gospel (3:7; 5:28). The verb as used in the Gospel relates in all instances to responses to Jesus, but here the imperative “stop being astonished” disabuses The World’s Hostility

Image Not Available due to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.

The siege of Prague by the Swedish troops from July to October 1648 at the end of the Thirty Years War. Merian, Matthaeus the Elder (1593–1650). (Credit: Dietmar Katz, Bildarchiv Preussischer Kulturbesitz / Art Resource, NY)

1 John 3:11-18

them of undue turmoil given the history of the world’s hostility toward Jesus and his community. Painter takes the text to mean that the world does not yet hate them but will in the future.5 While this is a possible reading, it is more likely that the author is seeking to arrest a growing paralysis within the community that results from hostile vibes. Including himself as spokesperson to the faithful and apostolic tradition, the author reassures his readers (v. 14). We can be assured, he urges, that we have been transferred from death to life precisely because we love the brothers and sisters. Rather than being intimidated by those indignant departees, he offers a powerful assurance that can counterbalance feelings of rejection. With a bit of “overagainstness,” the writer implies that the superior secessionists belie with their behavior their deathly existence (thanatø). In a singularly parallel text at John 5:24-25, the “transfer” (“passed”) represents the alternative to coming into judgment. The ideas of death and life in the Gospel passage seem to move from something like spiritual death to life (5:21) to the physically dead (v. 25). The transfer takes place by the hearing of faith, the one believing having eternal life (v. 24). Verse 14 in 1 John 3, intrinsically important, reflects not only part of the author’s immediate argument but a pivotal Johannine belief (cf. Acts 26:18; Col 1:13-14; Eph 5:7-8). This reassurance that gives confidence to those who love fellow believers (v. 14b) disqualifies those who do not (v. 14c). The Cain story, the love command, and the Johannine conception of the conversion from the realm of death to life converge in forceful fashion. A rigid determinism, furthermore, does not play here since the text presumes that one can change, be transported from the one to the other. The two realms are not fixed as is obvious at John 12:36 with its invitation to become. Bultmann, in his theology of John, makes much of the implicit call to decision.6 The Greek verb rendered “passed” (NRSV, NIV, NAS) or “left” (Williams) appears in the perfect tense suggesting a past event with continuing results. The same verb shows up five times in the Gospel of Matthew in everyday usage, depicting a decisive leaving (8:34; 11:1; 12:9; 15:29), changing locales (8:34; 11:1), especially leaving but also arriving (17:20). The more metaphorical and mystical usage in 1 John 3:14 (see John 5:24) conveys the idea of movement, transition from one realm or sphere to another, leaving and arriving. The everyday usage of John 18:1 pictures Jesus and his disciples going across the Kidron valley. The prepositions “out of ” death (ek) and “into” life (eis) in 3:14 draw out the sense of

139

140

1 John 3:11-18

movement, leaving, entering. This transfer represents the fundamental Christian experience of being begotten of God, victory over the Evil One (2:13, 14) and over the world (4:4; 5:4, 5; cf. John 16:33). “Believers are removed from the sphere of death,” Schneider pointed out. “By acceptance of the divine Word in faith they have crossed the frontier between death and life even in their earthly existence.”7 This spiritual transaction enjoys realization in the here and now. The word “death” (thanatos) suggests a loveless existence tending toward destruction, a kind of de facto spiritual death at both John 5:24 and 1 John 3:14. Believing functions as a catalyst toward the gift of eternal life at 5:24, and loving one another constitutes the reassuring outcome/sign at 1 John 3:14, both reflecting respective contexts. At John 8:51 Jesus evidently has in mind a perishing, not merely physical death (cf. Rom 8:26; 2 Cor 2:16). Of course death and the devil and hate belong in one self-destructive realm while life and God and love inhabit the life-giving order, disclosing origin. The obverse of loving is the awesome alternative reality of destructive death as the author relentlessly pursues his agenda, as he has from the opening sentence. With another generalization, “Everyone,” or “All who” (3:15), he equates hating one’s brother with murder, precisely fratricide, not merely murder of any variety. The Cain story still dominates with the anger that led ineluctably to premeditated murder. This logic, clear enough as a pattern drawn from Cain’s precedent, leaves a yawning gap between hate and murder, neither misdemeanors nor identical. The writer moves forward to assert that eternal life does not abide in a murderer (v. 15b). He has argued earlier that the secessionists never were truly begotten (2:19), that those hating have not passed from death to life (2:14) consistently enough. The probable influence and precedence of John 8 contribute to the picture and may substantiate the writer’s argument with his readers. Jesus himself tracked murder to its lair in an angry heart, related this anger to a brother or sister, and raised the specter of judgment (Matt 5:21-22), providing formidable precedence. The seeming awkwardness at 1 John 3:15a lies in the equation of hating and murder. Of course, the force of the argument impugns the secessionists and all other would-be believers who despise fellow Christians. Perhaps the author, like Jesus, lifts hatred to a far more serious level than a moral misdemeanor. Perhaps he means that to

1 John 3:11-18

hate one’s brother is to kill him or to wish to do so.8 The thought remains problematic. Returning to the heart of the gospel of love emanating from his comprehension of the hilasmos (expiatory sacrifice), the writer declares the assured way of knowing love: “that one” (ekeinos), Jesus, laid down his life for us (v. 16ab). This is the core, the starting place, the definition of agap∑ for this theologian. Agap∑, love, is the laying down of one’s life for others. God’s love is seen and understood in its distinctiveness of the Son’s laying down of his life on our behalf. An Epistle that never uses the word “cross” takes its comprehension of love from it. Indeed, the Elder is smitten by it! The death of Jesus has spoken to him, evoked faith, and defined theology. This will find classic elaboration in possibly the greatest passage in Holy Writ, 1 John 4:7-21. Note that here the idea of atonement appears to be more a dying for the church (cf. 2:2), or is it? The passage in John 10 contains the picture of the Good Shepherd laying down his life on behalf of the sheep (v. 11). Similar terminology appears in the “laying down,” “his life,” and “for,” or “on behalf of ” (vv. 11, 15). Indeed, in John 10 “the laying down” takes on quite a significant development as an important component of the understanding of the death of Jesus in the Gospel (vv. 17-19). The Greek verb “laid down” does not mean merely to risk one’s life but to offer it, and may be defined by Isaiah 53:10 (cf. Mark 10:45). Hence, in a most impressive juxtaposition between Cain and Christ, the author skillfully contrasts the taking of the life of a brother with the offering of one’s life on behalf of the brothers and sisters. Jesus, by means of his voluntary giving of his life, embodies brotherly love, the polar opposite of Cain’s hating and killing. Hence, the author confronts the community with a stark choice. In the course of such an argument he produces an exceptional understanding of the cross. Cain as foil and frightening alternative provides a backdrop for perceiving the unique act of Jesus. Did this theology of the cross owe something to the writer’s reflection on Cain? From his theology of the cross, the church leader draws a potent ethic that dares to use the conception of oughtness (as 2:6). He also marshals the implicit model of Jesus, the imitation of Christ, which he assumes throughout the book to develop his distinctively Christian ethic. Again including himself along with all worthy believers, he urges a parallel to the cross, a laying down of our lives on behalf of brothers and sisters (v. 16c). Clearly this ethic is relational and oriented to the community.

141

142

1 John 3:11-18

Here the love of one believer to another reaches a pinnacle of expectation, the stuff of martyrdom. This is definitely a matter of love, not merely the absence of hate. The writer’s passion rests not merely in impugning hate but incarnating love. This is to assign an extremely high priority to upholding the Christian community. This would be a voluntary act by the imitator of Christ, as in John 10:18, that is motivated by an activated love and by the example of Jesus. It is not merely a duty. How does this take shape in addition to sheer death for fellow believers? How does the ethical mandate of laying down our lives for one another play out? The author does not suffer from a lack of pointed application, moving from a theology of the cross to a theological ethic to a poignant application. The author poses a rhetorical question to his readers once more (v. 17), but one requiring an answer. It moves in the three stages of having, seeing, and refusing. Having not forsaken his agenda or his presiding metaphor, his argument invalidates the claim; it is the self invalidation of those who refuse. Spicq pointed out how the authenticity of the followers of Jesus will be discernible only to the extent they give proof of their mutual love.9 The expression defining the circumstances of the believer includes the second and only other use of the Greek (here ton bion) for goods or possessions. At 2:16 the same word suggests worldly goods with an attitude of pride or hubris towards one’s possessions. Here the hoarding of one’s goods only for oneself even in the face of need is entertained as one option along with the potential to share from an open heart. In both passages possessions are reserved for oneself, a limited vision of the potentiality of possessions. Hate, or lack of love if intended here, takes the shape of indifference, inaction. The refusal to help becomes the abnegation of love. A sociological clue lurks here if the situation envisioned is not merely hypothetical. At least some in the community were impoverished. They had need, evidently financial since the worldly goods of another might assuage their situation. Some were poor, while others enjoyed a superfluity within the community. Could it be that the secessionists were among those financially enhanced, that the schism involved an economic factor? In any event, various social strata were reflected in the community (cf. 1 Cor 1:26-28; Jas 2:1-7). [“Closing”] The image of closing or locking the heart conjures up the story of the compassionate Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37), not only because it features two who effectively closed their hearts but because the Samaritan became overcome with compassion, which opened his

1 John 3:11-18

143

heart. In both these texts, a form of the word lit- “Closing” erally meaning “entrails” is utilized. At 1 John The Greek verb for “closing” (v. 17c) deserves attention. Naturally, usage is 3:17 the Elder does not use the traditional word associated with a door, but it is used only this for “heart” (kardia) but rather ta splagchna, the one time in the New Testament vis-à-vis the source of feelings. Interestingly, this represents heart or compassion. In NRSV renderings the only usage in the Johannine literature. Of “closed” can suggest “locked” (John 20:19; Matt course, it characterized the synoptic Jesus (esp. 23:14; Luke 11:7, 5:23; Rev 20:3) or “shut” Matt 9:36; 14:14; 15:32; 20:34). (John 20:26; Matt 6:6; 25:10; Luke 4:25; Acts The rhetorical question “how” serves as an 21:30; Rev 3:7-8; 11:6; 21:25), both of which are awakening call replete with a theology of the suggestive for our text. The translation “lock love of God. The love “of God” appears to be a people out” (Matt 23:14) particularly offers a provocative nuance. A. T. Robertson, the gramsubjective genitive, meaning God serves as the marian, took the measure of the aorist tense, subject or origin of the love. Here the character suggesting “slamming the door of his compasof God informs the understanding of the sion.”10 Its opposite, “to open” (anoigø) at conduct of the one claiming to know God and Revelation 3:7-8, presumably implies the prebeing born of this kind of God. This theological ferred posture for a loving Christian. ethic appears impressively and persistently. The final verse of the paragraph addresses the community with an aphoristic appeal that includes the positive. By means of a hortatory subjunctive of some force, “Let us not love,” he warns against those whose “love” lives only in verbal claim but who in fact close their hearts to specific need. The “on the contrary,” adversative alla, heightens the emphatic contrast. Painter thinks he was not criticizing love in word,11 a remark that has the advantage of recognizing the potential value of loving words, but the immediate context points otherwise with consistent stress upon doing the truth (John 3:21; 1 John 1:6).

CONNECTIONS 1. Cain or Christ

Prime Minister Lloyd George, addressing the British House of Parliament after the First World War, said with no little passion, “It is Christ or chaos for the world.” A lesson or sermon could pose the alternative lifestyles of one who hates his brother or sister and may even kill in contradistinction to one who loves his sister and brother and may even die for her or him. The Cain principle reminds us that murder is no minor matter but a sin of malice. Envy and anger often invade family systems, and many murders are domestic as in the biblical example. Murder itself represents an arrogant act of willfully taking the life of another. Murder is one of

144

1 John 3:11-18

the worst pages in the book because murderers steal something that they cannot give back. The church needs to heighten consciousness regarding the profound awfulness of murder/taking life, particularly given the prevalence of domestic abuse and killing of spouses, frequently women. Our text reflects on hate in its kinship to murder, as did Jesus. Someone put it memorably: “Hate is like acid. It can damage the vessel in which it is stored as well as destroy the object on which it is poured.” Menninger took the measure of hate, writing, “[i]f one wanted to find a germinal word to link sins, perhaps hate would do it. In terms of action, however, the long term consequences of hate are self-destruction. Thus the wages of sin really are death.”12 Lewis Smedes reckoned there were two kinds of hatred: passive hatred and also aggressive hatred. “Passive hatred is the grain of malice that robs us of energy to wish a person well. With aggressive hatred, on the other hand, we are not only drained of the positive energy to wish someone well. We specifically wish them ill.” He went on to note that we are poised to attack. “When you hate passively, you lose love’s passion to bless. When you hate aggressively, you are driven by a passion to whip someone with a hurricane—or at least a stiff March wind—of hostility.”13 David Mace, storied student of marriage, concluded after much research that unresolved anger causes distance that leads to divorce. He stated realistically that the relationship of being married generates more anger in the average person than any other social situation. He reckoned with the damaging effect of the suppression of anger as well as the destructive effect of venting harsh hostility and went on to devise methods of “processing” as a far better alternative.14 The splendid alternative of the Christian community is at its best not with an exclusionary but an inclusionary love for all people. New people joining a church need to be stitched into the social fabric of the community, not merely formally received. People of other races and nationalities need to be accepted lovingly. This represents a gospel worth spreading, a vision worth espousing, a community worth living in all of its redemptiveness, worth imagining and then incarnating, even with a modest beginning in smaller groups. 2. The Needy Within

The meeting up with and meeting human needs within the church itself calls for creative sensitivity to those who may be falling

1 John 3:11-18

between the cracks. Even in a well-to-do church, a member of the church family may be struggling alone due to a divorce or death or downsizing or medical bills. In one instance, a youngish mother of several children struggled at length with cancer and then died. A surge of sympathy arose from the church. With a little creativity, a letter went out to the congregation appealing to the members to make substantial contributions. A surprisingly large amount of money resulted and was then held in an invested account to be dispersed to the children as they reached college age. Fellow Christians in a country such as Bosnia also constitute believers in need to whom others can respond. A seminary class studied the Epistles of John for an entire semester, reading the best books, writing papers, taking tests. They decided as a group, however, to make some response to these Epistles, especially 1 John 3:17. They devised several ministries, one a morning gathering with the entire class working in a shelter primarily for Hispanics, and another a campaign in which they engaged many others to collect food for the hungry. They then designed/organized a worship service in class in which they dedicated their gifts and worshiped the God of light, righteousness, and love! This Bible study did not wind up in a cul-de-sac. 3. “Tell It Out with Gladness”

Georgia Harkness, theologian and hymn writer, envisioning a gospel of what humanity through Christ could be, urged through a mighty hymn a global sharing of the message to the nations in order that the love of God could set people free. Perhaps Christians need to recover confidence in fighting evil not by bombs but by preaching the gospel and sharing with the needy (cf. Acts 2:44-47a). David Buttrick pointed out how early Christians took note of a change in their lifestyles in contrast to both their world and their previous patterns. “They were startled by newness forming in the midst of their common life; good heavens, they were being changed.”15

Georgia Harkness

(Credit: Barclay Burns)

4. Loving even after They Are Gone

An old country cemetery remains in Cades Cove in the Smoky Mountains. The adjacent white clapboard church is now long ago

145

146

1 John 3:11-18

abandoned, the area become a national park. Among the family stones are several heartfelt inscriptions. One of them prepared after a tear-soaked day at the funeral spoke with no pretense and likely little realization that others would linger over it long after their family had left the verdant valley. You are not forgotten loved one nor will you ever be As long as life and memory last, we will remember thee. No one can fill your vacant place.

Here stands lasting remembrance. The modest tombstone speaks of the value of the lost loved one, indeed of the dignity of human life. It seems to say, “You will not be forgotten. God will never forget you either. Even after death your significance lives on.” The inscription suggests that we may let go and bury, yet continue to love loved ones deceased.

Notes 1. Raymond Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982), 124. Also Daniel Akin, 1, 2, 3 John (NAC; Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2001), 46–48. Cf. James L. Houlden, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (BNTC; New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 31–32. 2. BAG, 593–94. 3. Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC, vol. 51; Waco TX: Word Books, 1984), 182. 4. John Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John (SP; ed. Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002), 233; Colin G. Kruse, The Letters of John (Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 235–42, sets out a valuable appendix of biblical and extrabiblical references to Cain. 5. Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John, 238. 6. Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1955), 2:76. 7. Johannes Schneider, “(bainø),” TDNT 1:523. 8. Bultmann, Theology, 16. 9. Spicq, “agap∑,” TLNT 1:12n. See his earlier “Notes d’exegese johannique . . .,” RB (1958): 358–70. 10. A. T. Robertson, General Epistles and Revelation of John (Word Pictures in the New Testament, vol. 6; Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933), 226. 11. Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John, 236, 243. 12. Karl Menninger, Whatever Became of Sin? (New York: Hawthorn Books, 1973), 172.

1 John 3:11-18 13. Lewis Smedes, Forgive and Forget (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1984), 20–21. 14. David Mace, Close Companions (New York: Continuum, 1987), 90–99. See also his Success in Marriage (Nashville: Abingdon, 1958); and, with Vera Mace, How to Have a Happy Marriage (Nashville: Abingdon, 1977). 15. David Buttrick, The Mystery and the Passion (repr., Eugene OR: Wipf and Stock, 2002), 4.

147

The Assurance of Abiding 1 John 3:19-24 The common disclosure formula “by this,” which opens this section, points backward, connecting the new paragraph with the preceding, to loving in active truth (v. 18). The NRSV paragraphs v. 18 with vv. 19-22, unfortunately. The use of the “our” (vv. 19, 20) includes the pastoral theologian himself as a fellow struggler, hinting or at least allowing that he too knew the experience of a condemning heart. His affirmation of the “greaterness” of God could have emerged from his relationship with this God of light and love and righteousness. Loving action observed in one’s own life allows one to know that she or he belongs to the truth, picking up further in v. 18. Not only the “we” but also the address to the community suggest a corporate as well as individual love. The usage of truth, so characteristic of Johannine thought, implies not only “belonging” to the Truth, existing in the sphere, but the Johannine doctrine of doing. In terms of John this represents an extension of the truth to which Jesus testified before Pilate (18:37), the truth he in turn heard from God (8:40), probably also the teaching of Christ of 2 John 9. Being assured of belonging on the side of Christian truth (v. 19a), “our” heart will be convinced before God, possibly at the judgment (2:28; cf. Matt 25:32; 27:1), but in this context more likely simply the presence of God. The preposition often rendered “before” him can suggest being pleasing in the presence of God (as Matt 11:26; Luke 10:21) or confession before God (Matt 10:32; Luke 12:18). This represents the only usage in the Johannine Epistles, though it appears in the Gospel of John five times, most of which are dissimilar. John 12:37, however, does refer to one’s presence. The judicial element is not decisive in several passages in which being in the presence (emprosthen) of God appears (1 Thess 1:3; 3:9). The verb rendered “reassure” (NRSV), only utilized here in the entire Johannine literature, can mean to “rely on” or “to persuade,” “to believe.” One can be convinced by proofs (3 Macc 3:24), persuaded (2 Macc 4:34; Matt 27:20; Acts 14:19), won over by persuasion (Acts 31:14; 23:21). Significantly, in the LXX it can represent a psychological turn (Esth 4:4; Prov 26:25), possibly then of similar tenor to John 14:1. The standard lexicon preferred for our passage to “conciliate, pacify, set at ease or rest,” as Matthew 28:14.

150

1 John 3:19-24

No less than three more times in our passage, “heart” (kardia) appears in vv. 19-21, the only usage in the Epistle and a clue to the pastoral problem. John recognizes the importance of the heart as a place of unbelief (12:40) and betrayal (13:2) but also a place of feeling both sorrow (16:6) and joy (16:22). Closer to the picture of persuading or assuring the heart is the familiar “do not let your heart be troubled” (14:1, 27), trusting rather in God (cf. Rom 10:9-10; Eph 6:22). In the Synoptics the heart is often troubled with doubt (Mark 11:23) and questioning (Mark 2:8; Luke 3:15; 5:22; 24, 38), relevant to 1 John 3:20. The sentiments at v. 20 “give a witness that the human heart can itself be the accuser.” B. F. Westcott, who saw this text rightly as the most remarkable passage in which John portrayed the office of the heart, recognized that the heart included the conscience, indeed “the whole conscious moral nature of man.” Likely self-doubt, feelings, passing moods, and moral conscience all play a part, and the confidence of the remaining believers is shaken. The interpreter must take into account the ongoing upset from the secessionists. They likely urged the followers of the Elder to merge with them (2:26, 3; 2 John 10-11). (2:21; 4:6; 2 John 1-4; 3 John 1-4, 8). At the least they have caused confusion and uncertainty (2:21; 4:6; 2 John 1-4; 3 John 1-4, 8). The use of “our” (vv. 19, 20) includes the pastoral theologian himself as a fellow struggler alongside the readers, hinting or at least allowing that he too knew the experience of a condemning heart. The “greaterness” of God, as suggested above, may also emerge from personal experience of the God of light and righteousness and love. The troubled recipients could have been conscious of personal failings because (1) their confidence had been shaken by the schismatics who were quick to claim much for themselves, but also because of (2) the high expectations of the Elder and community, often expressed in absolute, perfectionistic terms, and because (3) some may have neglected their fellow believers (v. 18). We have already noted that the appeal to “active love” was addressed not merely to the departed but also to the remaining faithful. It could also be that the prominence of the location of 1:5–2:2 represents a clue with its answer of confession and forgiveness. The verb “condemn” or “accuse” (kataginøsk∑ ) in context (v. 20a) can be rendered “if our hearts say we have done wrong.” In Galatians, Paul dredges up his tense encounter when Peter came to Antioch and he opposed the pillar apostle face to face because Peter was in the wrong (2:11), a helpful analogical situation. Otherwise, the verb is only used by the New Testament in 1 John 3:20-21. It

1 John 3:19-24

151

does appear, however, in the LXX to mean condemning the guilty (Deut 25:1). These usages and the context in 1 John imply selfincrimination by the conscience. “It is the disquieted and accusing heart,” points out Painter, “that is to be persuaded and reassured.”1[Significant Background Parallels to Self-accusation] The grammar of the text, especially at v. 21, leaves the meaning excruciatingly less than clear. The two usages of hoti (“for” or “that” or “because”) in close proximity create an Significant Background Parallels to Selfawkward translation situation. Should both be accusation Testament of Gad 5:3—“For the person translated? Should hoti ean be reconfigured and who is just and humble is ashamed to rendered “whatever”? Several divergent translacommit an injustice, not because someone else tions are possible for this notoriously difficult will pass judgment on him but out of his own text. Raymond Brown, leads his readers through heart . . . .” “nine infuriatingly complicated problems in three enigmatic verses.”2 “Improvements” by Sirach 14:2—“Blessed is he whose heart does not condemn him, and who has not given up ancient scribes are understandable. hope” (cf. 19:5). Perhaps the largest issue of contention to be kept in mind centers on whether the text teaches the severity or the grace of God in terms of the all knowing. Augustine, in aggressive stance, challenged, “You hide your heart from other human beings. Hide it from your God if you can!” Raymond Brown demonstrated a persistent tradition since the early church fathers and beyond the Reformation in favor of the severe reading. He cited Luther, however, who, in his 1527 lecture on 1 John, read in terms of mercy.3 While omniscience certainly contributes to comprehending the greatness of God and appears in the verse (20c), the writer apparently intends a more pastoral touch. God is a greater consideration than our presently disturbed hearts, one that can stabilize an unsettled heart. An emotional frame of mind can be misleading and should be offset by the reassurance of a God who knows far more than current finite feelings. We do well to recognize the two parallel “if ” conditional clauses (vv. 20a, 21a) about a condemning and uncondemning heart as two situations or possibly two stages. Verse 20 can be understood as “if our heart may condemn us, God is greater than our heart . . . ,” refusing to translate the second ‘that’ or ‘because’ (hoti being resumptive, v. 20). The merciful interpretation based on grace, admittedly not explicit, makes the best contextual sense and fits the spirit of Peter’s famous post-resurrection encounter with Jesus at John 21:17. Certain biblical texts suggest that God judges the good-hearted positively (1 Sam 16:7; 1 Chr 28:9; Acts 1:24-25; 15:8; 1 Cor 4:5). The context here of contrast between self-

152

1 John 3:19-24

condemnation and a very different posture by God favors the aspect of encouragement. The sense of it comes to this: the God who knows everything, very much including those who truly love him and are genuinely in union with him, overwhelms their hearts by the Listen to What God Says to the Believer divine spirit (3:24). [Listen to What God Says to the 1. You are forgiven (1:9) 2. You know God (2:4-6) 3. You know and belong to the truth (2:20-21; 3:19) 4. You are the children of God (3:1-2, 10) 5. You are loved (4:10-11)

Believer]

Verse 21 either represents another situation or mood or more likely a stage possible for recipients who accept the reassurance of v. 20, a continuation as it were. With the pastoral Thomas F. Johnson, 1, 2, and 3 John, NIBCNT (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1993), 99. “beloved,” the Elder is pleased to announce two outcomes of being before God minus a debilitating self-condemnation. First, we have boldness or confidence before God, not the shattering insecurity caused by intimidating spiritual bullies. Indeed, the epistolary writer promises the near opposite of how they are inclined to feel. The word translated “confidence” (parr∑sia), perhaps the antonym “to shame,” is quite buoyant in the Epistle in contexts of prayer (5:14) and judgment (2:28; 4:17). It suggests the elimination of hesitation and doubt (cf. Job 22:26; Heb 4:16). In this context it has to do with confidence in being heard. In John the same word characterizes the speaking of Jesus, his liberty of language (7:26; 11:14), and testifies to his divine authority. It does not appear in contexts of judgment and prayer. The second and related outcome (3:22a) not only encourages the making of requests to God but promises a corresponding divine answer. Of course and importantly, such an astounding claim does not merely belong to the Epistle but derives from the historical Jesus (Matt 7:7; Mark 11:24). The theological problem is further compounded by the possible impression that the answered prayers are earned by good works and required of God! (And you and I thought this passage had already proven difficult!) The contents of the command frequently mentioned since early on (2:3-4:7, 8) but not as often defined (see 4:21), come to classic summation at 3:23. In 3:22 the emphasis falls upon the necessity of keeping the corresponding salutary effect on prayer. Keeping commandments is certainly grounded in the Synoptic Gospels, especially Matthew. Solemn responsibility is laid upon Jesus’ disciples on mission to keep all things “which I have commanded” (28:20). In the Gospel, as Jesus keeps the Father’s word (John 2:55; 15:10), so also should the disciple keep divine commandments in order that his or her own words are kept (15:20).

1 John 3:19-24

153

If 1 John draws upon the common tradition of the Gospel, whether finalized or not, it is evident from multiple uses of the verb “to keep” (t∑reø) that our author did not invent his insistence as a handy antidote for the schism but drew it from the tradition. Furthermore, obedience belongs to the heart of Jesus’ demand upon his disciples. Keeping his commandments and doing what is pleasing to God (3:22c) are virtually synonymous, the latter certainly including loving as an active truth (3:18). Once again and impressively Jesus models. He is the one who does what is pleasing to God (John 8:29), keeps his word (8:55), does as the Father commands (12:49-50; 14:30-31). The preceding “because” (hoti ) links the receiving whatever a person asks to the doing of commandments, opening the possibility of an exchange. Obedience, after all, involves an aligning of one’s will with the will of a God (cf. John 4:34). It is not, however, simply the obedience that earns answers to prayer. The confidence of a clear conscience (v. 21b) prompts one to activate prayer. Jesus Praying in Gethsemane The “whatever” (ho ean) we ask must by all means be put alongside 5:14! A remarkably parallel text replete with the sweeping “if we ask anything” is followed by the all-important qualification “according to his will.” It stands at 5:14 in the speaking/hearing stage of prayer. Of course Jesus provided a disciples’ prayer that Image Not Available included a passionate plea for the due to lack of digital rights. coming of the kingdom (Luke Please view the published 11:2c)—God’s will be done commentary or perform an Internet (Matt 6:10c). In the crisis of search using the credit below. prayer in the Gethsemane moment we have “not what I will, but on the contrary what you will” (Mark 14:36c). It is quite likely that our author holds his readers’ qualification in his mind at 3:22, especially since he has just emphasized doing the commandments and what is pleasing to God, since he has Cavalier d’Arpino (Giuseppe Cesari) (1568–1640). Christ Praying in the Garden of stressed being in the light and Gethsemane. Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte, Naples, Italy. (Credit: Scala/Ministero per i Beni e le Attività culturali / Art Resource, NY)

154

1 John 3:19-24

being righteous. It is not then correct to call this text an unconditional promise. Furthermore, he may have been thinking particularly of a prayer of forgiveness. The prayer at 3:22 likely presupposes being spoken in the name of Jesus (5:14; cf. John 15:7, 8), indeed done in unison with Christ (1 John 3:24). It seems appropriate to add that the writer brings up the troubling issue of boldness/confidence at 2:28 only to pursue it more fully at 3:19-22. In this instance, Law’s analogy of a spiral for 1 John works.4 Here at 3:23 one would have expected the continuation of the plural “commandments” because there are two commandments. Rather intentionally, the author writes otherwise. He intends to strike the center and does so with two interrelated commandments. It is rather like Jesus stating the greatest commandment, love God and love your neighbor (Mark 12:28-34) as one, though at 1 John we have a post-Easter transposition. Wahlde calls attention to the plural at John 15:7-17 and notes the commandments given to Jesus by God (John 10:14-18; 12:44-50; 14:30-31; 15:10) and those given to the disciples (John 13:34-35; 14:15, 21-24; 15:9-17), sometimes in the singular (13:34; 15:12), sometimes plural (14:15; 15:10).5 Some scholars see vv. 23-24 as no less than an introduction to the remainder of the letter, but the verses probably play an even greater role. Verse 23 states the two commandments (not merely one), which are of the very essence of Johannine Christianity. Borrowing from the language of Shakespearean criticism, I propose we name 3:23-24 a “synthesis scene” on the analogy of King Lear on the heath where the various themes of the play merge (iv, 6). It is key because it sums up the thrust of the Epistle. The dual relationship of the believer abiding in Christ and Christ abiding in the believer is expressed. The commandments to believe in the name of Jesus (orthodoxy) and to love one another (orthopraxy) are brought together for the first time, both of which were transgressed by the opponents. Theodor Häring saw a constant alternation of love of brothers and sisters and faith in Christ throughout the Epistle, a triple presentation of an ethical and christological thesis. He also saw clearly the inseparable unity of faith and love.6 [The “essence of Christianity”] The writer of the Epistle likely aimed at the heretics who erred in both ways and separated the two (cf. 2:3, 11). One can and should speak to a bondedness of the two strophes or commands. It was, after all, the embodiment of love, Jesus, in whom one had to believe, indeed the one who gave the love command. To reject Jesus was to reject God’s overture of love.

1 John 3:19-24

155

While undoubtedly belief in the name of Jesus The “essence of Christianity” served as a public confession (homology), it func“The fundamental character of this statement is emphasized by the tions as far more here. It engages the phrasing fact that the author does not identify entol∑ regarding believing in/of Jesus. with the love commandment, but instead It is not entirely clear, on first reading, whose describes the essence of the Christian comcommand was intended in the rich Johannine mandment in two strophes (v. 23b/c).” thought regarding believing in Jesus, specifying, Georg Strecker, Johannine Letters (Hermeneia; ed. Harold “and this is his commandment” (2:23a). Does the Attridge; trans. Linda M. Malony; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 126. text infer the Father or the Son? Presumably, the previous verse features the Father, and at v. 22 we find God explicitly. However, the reference at the end of v. 23, “just as he gave commandment to us,” seems to call upon John 13:34 once more, a virtual guiding verse of 1 John. A command to believe in the name of Jesus might seem more natural from God. However, at John 6:28-29 when Jesus is asked by the crowd what they must do to be what God requires, he answers, “This is the work of God that you believe in the one he sent.” All the pronouns in the previous verses (19-22) point to God. The corresponding personal pronouns in “his” commandment and “his” Son (autou) definitely tilt the scales in favor of God as the reference. Most importantly, 3:23 enunciates the imperative of believing for the first time in the Epistle, but it will heighten into a crescendo (4:1, 16; 5:1, 5, 10, 13). What is the name one is asked to believe? Here it is explicitly “name of his Son Jesus Christ.” At 5:13 it is the name of the Son of God. Furthermore, Jesus appears as Savior of the world, as advocate (2:1), as hilasmos or expiation (2:2; 4:10), as Messiah or Christ (5:10). We do well to speak of Jesus Christ as the name and Son of God his title of identity. It is important to grasp the significance of believing in the name. One’s name enjoyed real significance in Jewish thought. A name served as an equivalent of the adult person (see 1 Sam 25:25; Gen 3:20; 4:11; 5:29). The name denotes the person, establishes identity. In the Gospel of John where the Evangelist speaks, the text refers definitely to believing in the name of Jesus (1:12; 2:23; 3:18; 20:31). In passages unrelated to chapters 14–16, when the Johannine Christ speaks, he refers constantly to God’s name (5:43; 10:25; 12:28; 17:6, 11, 12, 26), suggesting the christological role as revealer. During chapters 14–16, Jesus speaks about prayer in his own name with promise (14:13, 14; 15:16; 16:23-26). Additionally Jesus speaks of the Holy Spirit sent in his name (14:26) as well as persecution in his name (15:21).

156

1 John 3:19-24

While acknowledgment of Jesus as the Son of God (as 1 John 5:5) most likely is in mind at 3:23, public profession of faith, one ought not necessarily ignore the possible nuance of believing in his name (as 1 John 5:10, 13). The command dimension is captured by the rendering of the aorist tense subjunctive “should believe” (NRSV), natural from the perspective of the original command. This belief constitutes the conviction that Jesus Christ is the one properly identified as the Son of God. The selection of the Believing in His Name aorist tense implies the initial and decisive nature of faith, “. . . to believe in his name is to believe that God is not here a process, yet a faith one must retain at the insisknown in the human life of Jesus, tence of the Epistle. [Believing in His Name] that God acts to deal with human Since Jesus hears from heaven in John (3:27), he reveals sin in the life and death of Jesus the command to love one another as part of God’s revelaand that the human life of Jesus is tion, but the epistolary author conceives it as more the model for the life of faith.” particularly from Jesus. The mutual love for one another, John Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John, SP (ed. Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.; Collegeville MN: Liturgical once again with the reciprocal pronoun all∑lous (3:11; 4:7, Press, 2002), 250. 11, 12; cf. 2 John 5), belongs within the community as its signature. It appears here in the present, probably with the sense of continuous love. Mutual love in the context of a commandment came as no surprise in the Johannine community because of the dominical origin (John 13:34; also 15:12, 17). Perhaps at John 13 it represented a new Moses offering a covenant with the content of love or agap∑ . The special kind of love finds its distinctive characteristic in the model of Jesus’ love for his own disciples (13:34c). Hence the Christian social ethic evolves from a christological center and continues the original equality of relationship. Verse 24 speaks of faithfully keeping the commandments of God in terms of the presiding metaphor of abidance. In the keeping, believers abide in the God who gave the commandments, obedience in the form of believing and loving, the path to a relationship with God. The mutual abiding, the believer in God and God in the believer, obtains. While abiding here relates to God rather than to Jesus as at John 15:1-10, the connection between keeping commandments and abiding was already present at 15:10. Furthermore, once more Jesus is likely the model inasmuch as he also kept faithfully the commandments of the Father and abides in God (John 15:10cd). Since the Johannine Christ says that “the Father who dwells in me does his work” (14:10), then if this dynamic is applied to a believer it is indwelling that empowers her to good works (14:12). Were this complementary idea also in the theology of the Elder, which is possible but admittedly not explicit here, then both the believer’s engagement and the divine empowerment could be seen interacting creatively. In any event, the reciprocal indwelling is implicit (v. 24). Demand (v. 24a) and grace

1 John 3:19-24

157

Validation of Abidance (v. 24d) both make a forceful appearance. Abiding here Although abiding is an intedoes not point only to faithful loyalty. Does the rior event, it is “validated by indwelling imply the new covenant? [Validation of Abidance] means that are not individualistic or The final sentence of v. 24 opens with a disclosure esoteric but thoroughly public: confesformula (test), “by this,” that offers a confirmation of sion of faith and love for one another.” David Rensberger, 1 John 2 John 3 John, ANTC abidance: the gift of the Spirit. The second criterion of (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1997), 107. recognition that points to the present experience of the believers contributes to “Christian awareness of the reality of salvation . . . brought about by the Spirit!” Christians, all believers, are then those who have the Spirit. Strecker declares that “the pneuma is a universal characteristic of the Christian community.”7 Every Christian is a charismatic. This likely implies the past reception of the Spirit at conversion as well as the present experience. This initial mention of the Spirit functions as a verbal transition to the second critique of antichrist (4:1-6), even an inclusion between 3:24 and 4:6. Two signs or tests for being a Christian, synonymous with abiding, pop up in v. 24: keeping the commandment and possessing the Spirit. The attentive reader accustomed to finding Johannine promises will count several in 3:19-24. Note (1) the promise of reassurance (v. 19), (2) boldness before God (v. 21b), (3) answer to prayer (v. 22a), and (4) abidance (v. 24). For this writer, 3:19-22 represents the most obscure grammar in the Epistle, surpassing 1:1-3! On the other hand, 3:23-24 provides the classic summation of the Epistle with its finely balanced orthodoxy and orthopraxy, a significant theological contribution for understanding the essence of Christianity. Verse 24 functions as transition to the next paragraph concerning both the Spirit of the antichrist and the Spirit of God.

CONNECTIONS 1. An Awesome and Appealing God

From this God-oriented paragraph just covered above, traditional categories for the divine can be extracted, such as sovereignty, greatness, omniscience, gracious giving, spiritual indweller. This Johannine God expects accountability and offers approachability. The epistolary author believes (1) there is a God, (2) that this God loves and gave his only Son, (3) that God holds believers accountable, and (4) that God spiritually indwells the faithful.

158

1 John 3:19-24 2. “When the Lamp Flickers,” 3:22

Leslie Weatherhead shared a personal experience about his teenage years. When he was a boy of fifteen, he wanted to pass an examination. Growing up in a Christian home and being aware of the promise of Jesus to answer prayer (John 14:13), he began to add the magic formula ”in the name of Jesus” to his prayers. On the night before taking the exam, the fifteen-year-old boy reminded God that Jesus had promised on his sacred word to answer prayer. The next day he took and failed the test. Worse, he lost a lot of faith. The lamp flickered; in fact, it almost went out. This led Weatherhead to more reflective thought about authentic prayer, coming to understand that God does not fail to respond to prayer, but prayers must be in the spirit of obedience to the will of God. He also started studying harder!8 3. A Secret of Prayer: A Unity of Wills

Our text reveals the potency of prayer from someone obeying the will of God, a kind of unity of wills (as 5:14; John 9:31). In Gethsemane Jesus aligned his will with the will of God. God responded not with the preferred answer, yet made Jesus the Savior of the world (1 John 4:14). In the model prayer, Jesus instructed the inclusion of the obedience: “Your will be done” (Matt 6:10). In the book of Job, you find the little-noticed promise that if you remove injustice from your tents, God will hear your prayers (22:23-27). 4. The Love One Another Thing, 3:23

If sin is the mode of existence in opposition to God, love is the mode of existence for a Christian. In real life you may love your little brother even if he majors in obnoxiousness and excels in bringing home dumb friends. You may choose to love your big sister who is into perfection and has your parents convinced. You may even try loving the boy in your class you figure for a nerd or the woman down the hall who is withdrawn and has dark patches under her eyes. You may love the person who seems so complete and self-sufficient as to need no one and the angry person hiding a hurt and the quiet librarian who always helps you find the book. You may even come to love a husband who does not understand what it is like to be pregnant in the summertime. You may love the visitor who diffidently finds a seat in the sanctuary on Sunday. You may love your wife you married such a long time ago. You may love

1 John 3:19-24

someone whose skin is of another hue than your own or those homeless folks called “street people.” [Herein Is Love] Some people wonder if they are loved. A Russian Baptist, meeting with a group of fellow Baptists, felt severely separated by language and political tension. Plaintively through a translator he asked an American, “Do you love me?” He didn’t know whether an American could love a Russian. Ron Stephenson, a pastoral counselor, speaking to a deacon group about crises in life when things can either get better or get worse, commented that a test of genuine ministry is “being with a person, and they knew you were there.” [While You Can] 5. The Essence of the Essence, 3:23

159

Herein Is Love In a classic book on 1 John from a pastoral counselor, Reuel Howe observed from his experience that (1) our deepest need is to be loved (p. 45), (2) our need to love is as important as our need to be loved (p. 47), (3) giving ourselves is risky (p. 49), (4) emotionally needy people may embarrass us or make us resentful (p. 46), (5) everyone wants to be known and to know (p. 94), (6) the vicious circle of nonrespect must be broken by someone (p. 95), (7) at all costs married couples should keep the lines of communication open (p. 100), and (8) a selfcentered church cannot show love for others. Reuel Howe, Herein Is Love (Valley Forge: Judson, 1961), 107.

While You Can In a moving funeral sermon for his own child, a theologian admonished his audience to “truly love one another as persons who could soon—alas, how soon!—be snatched away.”

Numerous people have had a go at distilling the Friedrich D. E. Schleiermacher, “Sermon at Nathanael’s Grave,” essence of Christian faith. Some say Christianity in A Chorus of Witnesses, ed. Thomas G. Long and Cornelius is the church (the institutional answer) or a conPlantinga (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 1994), 261. fessional creed (doctrinal response) or an emotional experience. Others have suggested that Christianity is Christ (Barth) or the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God (Harnack) or Christian missionary preaching (Bultmann). Some thought Christianity only the sum of humanity’s fondest illusions (Feuerbach) or an empirical phenomenon that can only be spoken of at a particular moment (Troeltsch). Christianity has been understood as being a person for others (Bonhoeffer) or as visiting orphans and widows and keeping oneself unstained from the world (Jas 1:27) or the central paradox of a grain of wheat falling into the ground, dying but bearing much fruit (John 12:24), or as radical obedience (Kierkegaard). The Elder weighs in tellingly with two interrelated convictions—believing in Jesus and loving one another, a durable duet. 6. Believing in Jesus, 3:23

Some have ventured far enough to say that Jesus had annihilated his ego, stripping away the veil of self-centeredness that hides ultimate spiritual reality, allowing others through Jesus to have a direct vision of ultimate spiritual reality (Toynbee), while others have discovered that Jesus is a parable of God as well as the definitive

160

1 John 3:19-24

model for humanity (Schillebeeckx). Some have felt practical certainty in the reality of Christ because of a personal life changed and renewed morally (A. M. Hunter). I personally believe in Jesus because of the Sermon on the Mount, because of his story of the prodigal son. My faith leaps up because Jesus loved his enemies. I believe because he died for me. I see incarnated in Jesus light, righteousness, and love. It is not just what you believe, stressed in 1 John, but in whom you believe.

Notes 1. John Painter, 1, 2, 3 John (SP; ed. Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002), 248. 2. Raymond Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982), 459. 3. Ibid. 4. Robert Law, The Tests of Life (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909), 5; A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948), 5–7. 5. Urban C. von Wahlde, The Johannine Commandments: 1 John and the Struggle for the Johannine Tradition (New York: Paulist Press, 1990), 10. 6. Theodor Häring, “Gedankengang und Grundgedanke des 1 John (Theologischer Abhandlungen für C. von Weizsacker; Freiburg: J. C. B. Bohr [Paul Siebeck] 1892), 171–200. 7. Georg Strecker, Johannine Letters (Hermeneia; ed. Harold Attridge; trans. Linda M. Malony; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 129. 8. Leslie Weatherhead, When the Lamp Flickers (New York: Abingdon, 1948), 139.

Discerning the Spirit of Truth and the Spirit of Perception 1 John 4:1-6 The passion to persuade, so pervasive in this rhetorical Epistle, prevails here, revealing the seriousness of the christological problem addressed. In v. 1 alone the Elder brings to bear affectionate address, alarm, imperatives, reason, provision of the theological alternatives of testing, in essence warning. He will go on to advocate by means of disclosure formulas, general maxims of thesis and antithesis (vv. 2b, 3a), unmasking opponents as false prophets and even antichrists, urgency with “now” and “already” in the same sentence (v. 3d), affirmative identification of the readers as conquerors (v. 4), and a tone of authority (v. 6). Both praise (v. 4) and blame (vv. 3bcd, 5) appear. This rhetorical strategy, not a matter of manipulation but the Epistle’s familiar combination of passion and reason, demonstrates respect for the recipients. He leads their thinking but allows them to make up their own minds. The warning finds support not only in confessional maxims or homologies (vv. 2-3) but also in causal clauses (hoti, vv. 1c, 4c). Logical notations like “by this” (v. 2a), “therefore” (v. 5b), and “from this” (v. 6d) are scattered about. While this paragraph breaks with the style of the preceding verses and might even be considered a digression, it functions rather like 2:18-28 both in content and function. The passage at 2:18ff stands at the closing of the first movement of the Epistle (1:5–2:28), as 4:1-6 is posiParallels between 2:18-28 and 4:1-6 tioned as the second classic warning at Presence of antichrists (2:18; 4:3) the end of the middle movement Realized eschatology (2:18a; 4:3d) (2:29–4:6). Connections can also be Means of knowing (2:18d; 4:2a, 6d) Deception (2:26; 4:6) forged with 5:4b-12. [Parallels between 2:1828 and 4:1-6]

Denial of Jesus (2:22b; 4:3a) Confession of Jesus (2:23; 4:2b) Truth (2:21; 4:6) Affirmation of recipients (2:21, 27; 4:4)

Furthermore, the seeming digression actually links up with the immediately preceding passage. It not only advances the argument but the gift of the Spirit (3:24), and its presence in the community allow for a problem of discernment in conflicted congregations. The introduction of the word

162

1 John 4:1-6

“spirit” led to several varied applications in 4:1-3 and 6. Also, the christological text (4:2-3) represents an extension of 3:23b. Evidently the false prophets in the Johannine churches were not making predictions or claiming to speak for other gods but were denying the humanity of Christ, rescinding the full incarnation as it were. The warnings can be found in Image Not Available Hellenistic Judaism, such as due to lack of digital rights. Josephus and Philo, but Please view the published derive from the Hebrew commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below. Bible. Our author seems to be following generally a biblical pattern of responding to false prophets. Other biblical texts warn of false prophets (Deut 13:1-5; 18:20-22; Jer 14:13-16; Matt 7:15-23; Mark 13:5-6, 21-22; 2 Pet 2:1-3; Rev 16:13-14) who mislead the Nicholas-Pierre Loir (1624–1674). St. Paul Strikes the False Prophet Blind. Oil on canvas. Musee des people of God (Mark 13:5, Beaux-Arts, Rennes, France. (Credit: Adélaïde Beaudoin, Réunion des Musées Nationaux / Art 6) with deception (Matt Resource, NY) 7:15; Mark 13:5, 6; 2 Pet 2:3). False prophets are roundly denounced (as Jer 14:14; 2 Pet 2:3). Criteria for discerning these false prophets include following other gods (Deut 13:1; 18:20), predictions not coming true (Deut 18:22), their (whose?) fruits (Matt 7:16), and denial of the master (2 Pet 2:1). The last named criterion correlates with 1 John 4:2 and 3, and the emphasis upon fruits certainly resonates with numerous texts of the Epistles. With all the parallels (intertextuality), nevertheless, the insistence on confession of Jesus come in the flesh (4:2) and the test of responsive hearing (4:6) stand out as distinctives, aiding the reader in distinguishing the historical problem and the defense. The denial represents quite a gap within the splintering community, but St. Paul Strikes the False Prophet Blind Opposition to those perceived to be false prophets takes many forms in the biblical tradition. While Paul is depicted as using physical violence against false prophets in this Loir painting, the author of 1 John restricts his attack to invective rhetoric.

1 John 4:1-6

the sturdy affirmation of the incarnation in John (1:14) and the defense in 1 John carried the day in orthodox Christian circles. The passage naturally subdivides into two roughly equal segments, one on the cruciality of the full christological confession (vv. 1-3) and the second on the relationship to the world (vv. 4-6). The last sentence of the paragraph (v. 6d) states succinctly the unified topic, knowing/discerning the spirit of truth and deception. Two “tests” then are embedded in the passage, confessing and hearing. The opening verse is addressed to the “beloved,” and the writer will utilize the personal direct address of the second person “you” several times (vv. 2a, 4, 5). The author speaks with authority and conviction, discouraging his readers from a gullible posture in a now conflicted, complicated landscape. He encourages and educates toward critical thinking. The combination in the Greek text of the immediate m∑ (“not”) in the word “or” and the adversative alla (“but,” “on the contrary”) heighten the sense of urgency and suggest the seriousness of the problem. The use of the imperatives, “stop accepting” (prohibitive) and “keep on testing” (positive command, iterative use of present tenses), implies concern and authority. It defines what time it was—the epoch of pseudoprophets. Rather than the religious credulity of accepting every testimony, the writer commends a critical process of sifting prophetic teaching, actually offering a powerful alternative that would empower the local believers. The verb form used (dokimazete) never appears in John and only this once in 1 John. The word does appear in two Lukan parables, the weather signs depicting an eschatological situation requiring discernment (15:6) and the great dinner with the sense of trying out oxen (14:19). The verb connotes an assortment of related nuances such as test, examine prior to approval, evaluate, or discern, especially as it relates to metals (Prov 8:10; 17:3; 27:21; Wis 3:6; Sir 2:5). In the Pauline Epistles, one finds the meaning not only of examining oneself as a believer (1 Cor 11:28; 2 Cor 8:8; 13:5; Gal 6:4; cf. 1 Pet. 1:7), but also of assessing other believers (2 Cor 8:8, 22). In Pauline usage it means to test (1 Thess 2:4), examine (1 Cor 11:28; 2 Cor 13:5), determine, or discern (Rom 2:18; Phil 1:10). These latter connotations speak to the meaning of 1 John 4:1, but perhaps the most instructive parallel is 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22. There in a common context of Christian prophets we find the dual advice: do not despise prophets, but test everything. Here, early on Pauline communities faced the necessity of testing and sifting

163

164

1 John 4:1-6

Christian prophecies. At Qumran, testing (discriminating) the spirits of new members of the covenant in regard to insights and deeds (1QS 5:20-21) was common. The reason, causal clause (hoti, v. 1d), those Johannine Christians may not accept all spirits uncritically lies in the recent reality in the community of numerous defecting prophets. The apostle is concerned to make absolutely clear that the false prophecy does not constitute an isolated phenomenon, and indeed may be a worldwide activity not to be underestimated. Since pseudoprophets are not mentioned in John, one suspects that we are Spread of False Teachings seeing a new development reflected in the com“On the whole,” Baly generalizes, “it is munity. They represent, however, a common presupposed that the false prophets will both spread false teachings and appear with illephenomenon in the early church (Matt 7:15; gitimate prophetic claims, and thus deceive the 24:11, 24). [Spread of False Teachings] churches” (cf. Did., 11:5f; 8-10). Our text itself provides two specific tests for H. Balz, “Pseudoprohetes,” EDNT, 3:498. evaluating the various spirits, or charismatic manifestations, rather than leaving the believer with generalities. These two commended criteria can be picked up by attentiveness to the two statements regarding knowing. The per“False” as a Part of the plexed and bombarded believer can know (v. 2a) by the Necessitated Vocabulary of the Early Church confession of Jesus or absence of confession or by 1. False brother or sister responsive hearing (v. 6b), hence acknowledging what (2 Cor 11:26; Gal 2:4) and hearing whom. Verse 1, it should be observed in 2. False apostle (2 Cor 11:13) passing, represents quite a proof text for Robert Law’s 3. False teacher (2 Pet 2:1) The Tests of Life. [“False” as a Part of the Necessitated Vocabulary of 4. False speaking (1 Tim 4:12) 5. Lying (1 John 1:6) 6. False witness (Matt 5:19; Acts 6:13) 7. Falsehood (1 Tim 2:21-27) 8. False messiah (Mark 13:22) 9. False prophets (Acts 13:6; Rev 16:13; 19:20; 20:10)

the Early Church]

With vv. 2 and 3 in antithetical parallel, both the confirming confession and the discrediting denial are presented as telling choices as to whether one is indeed Spirit-led. The argument makes use of the alternatives of the divine and demonic spirits, the former being the spirit of truth and the latter being the spirit of deceit (v. 6). The one in the world (v. 4c) obviously refers to demonic force, as does antichrist (v. 5cde), maintaining a dualism. This defines being and character. In a similar vein, it remains imperative for one’s reading to pick up on the “from God” and “from the world” as an animating, defining origin. The preposition ek, translated “from” or “of,” points to source, origin, domain. The derivation “from God” implies being divinely begotten. The expression “belonging to the world” not only assumes an evil society but one saturated by the power of evil (v. 4c; 5:19b). Throughout 4:1-6, the test turns on the two parallel prepositional phrases “from God” (ek tou theou,

1 John 4:1-6

vv.1 c, 2c, 3a, 4a, 6ac) and “from the world” (ek tou kosmou, v. 5ab). The idea implies belonging to a certain realm (see John 3:31; 8:23; 13:26; 18:31; 1 John 2:21; 3:19). Schnackenburg goes so far as to dub it an “ontological difference.”1 The Epistle not only provides the test but offers the answer. Once the origin has surfaced, the author, with considerable rhetorical skills, builds upon it, explaining eventually why the world responds to the false instructors (4:4-6). The confessional issue of 4:2-3 represents a major disclosure of whether a purported religious pedagogue merits the sanction of the community. Rather obviously, on the basis of this crucial text for reconstructing the community crisis, Christology stood at the vortex of disagreement (cf. 2:22-23). The test applies to all Christians, however, not merely to the false prophets. The critical christological confession, explicit at v. 2 and implicit at v. 3, incorporates not only the considerable claim of the arrival of Jesus Christ but also his “fleshliness.” Evidently the false prophets denied some or all of this Johannine witness of faith (John 1:14). Numerous Johannine specialists interpret the insistence as reflecting an anti-docetic correction. In the early second century, Ignatius warned of docetic tendencies, especially in his letters to Trallians (9-10) and Smyrnaeans. Docetism points toward the tendency that Jesus only seemed to have a physical body. In the writings of Ignatius, “unbelievers” hold in particular that the crucifixion of Jesus was merely a semblance. These opponents think of Jesus as a phantom, leading Ignatius to defend the bodily resurrection as well (Ign. Smyrn. 3). They “do not confess that he was clothed in flesh” (Ign. Smyrn. 5:2), which sounds like 1 John 4:2-3. Obviously this notion of a phantom does not lead to an incarnational view. Ignatius wrote to churches of Asia Minor ten to twenty years after the probable date of 1 John. Additionally from the church father Irenaeus’s treatise Against Heresies (3.3, 4), we encounter the famous story of John the disciple fleeing from a public bath in Ephesus, calling out, “Let us save ourselves; the bath house may fall down, for inside is Cerinthus, the enemy of truth.” The credibility of this story is in some question. While this Cerinthus did accept the humanity of Jesus and his exceptionality, he taught that Christ descended upon Jesus at baptism and withdrew before the suffering of the crucifixion (Haer. 1.26.1). So Cerinthus, somewhat in the adoptionist mode, believed that Jesus was temporarily Christ, but presumably not Son of God. Incarnational understanding did not belong to Cerinthian thinking either. Raymond Brown proposed the specula-

165

166

1 John 4:1-6

tion that the opponents in 1 John eventually became Cerinthians.2 One should not necessarily be shocked that some could not accept the notion of the divine incarnate since it is not universally accepted currently. Indeed, for Paul, to make such a confession Image Not Available required the Spirit of God due to lack of digital rights. (1 Cor 12:3). First John Please view the published insists upon confessing the commentary or perform an Internet fleshly existence of Jesus, search using the credit below. Jesus Christ incarnate. On the other hand, if Jesus as the Christ (2:22b), as the Son of God (2:22d, 23; 5:10, 12), as Jesus Christ come in the flesh (4:2; 2 John 7) are all contested by the secessionists, then (a) the community faced an enormous crisis Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn (1606–1669). Bust of Christ. c. 1648–1652. Oil on oak panel. Harvard and (b) one can scarcely Art Museum, Cambridge, Massachusetts. (Credit: © Harvard Art Museum / Art Resource, NY) argue that the opponents held a high Christology. Rejecting the “inflesh“In the Flesh” ness” could imply a high Christology of a “There can be no doubt that the author Gnostic kind, but the other denials make the is thinking at this point of the incarnation of Jesus Christ, which occurred ‘in the flesh’—in hypothesis suspect. [“In the Flesh”] other words, the entry of the Son of God into the While the position of Cerinthus is largely consphere of the tangible and mutable . . . .” demned implicitly, the possibly incipient Georg Strecker, Johannine Letters (Hermeneia; ed. Harold Gnostic attitude is condemned explicitly. Jesus Attridge; trans. Linda M. Malony; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 134–35. was no phantom or mere semblance. Contrary to Cerinthus, Jesus was Son of God and permanently messianic. Whether consciously related to either of the above, the Presbyter was exercised from the opening line to counter Gnostic-like tendencies to deny the tangibility of the Word of Life (1:1-3). Our pivotal thought in question (v. 2b) can be rendered literally, “Every spirit who confesses Jesus Christ having come in flesh is from God.” Due to the importance of this text, several variant translations have been offered leading to nuanced difference. Some Bust of Christ

1 John 4:1-6

167

prefer Christ as having come, stressing the salvific coming as 5:6 (Schnackenburg, Rensberger); others prefer a reading that allows the confession to include the entire package “Jesus Christ having come in the flesh” (Brown). Others introduce “as” between Jesus Christ and commend Jesus as Christ (cf. 2:22; 5:1), advocating the confession of an incarnate Messiah (Law, Houlden). All the above are possible grammatically! Jesus Christ often appears, however, as a compound in the Epistle Remarkable Parallels at 2 John 7 (1:3c; 2:2d; 3:23b; 4:20; 5:6a, 20d.). Of 1. many deceivers special importance is the parallel in 2 John 7 that 2. have gone out into the world treats the two words as a unity. Indeed, at 3. the ones confessing 2 John 7, its verbal parallels uncanny, Jesus Christ 4. Jesus Christ come in the flesh come in the flesh, appears to be a package. [Remarkable 5. antichrist Parallels at 2 John 7]

6. deceiver

If they would not confess that Jesus Christ came in the flesh, then it was the fleshliness to which they took exception. They rejected the notion of Jesus Christ incarnate. They would likely deny the Word become flesh (John 1:14). Those who are deniers, as it were, reject the apostolic witness, a prominent theme in the Johannine tradition, while those who make christological confession receive the witness and positively ratify it. Neither Cerinthus nor the docetists accepted classic incarnational thought of the Johannine tradition, so either or both could be rejected along the confessional lines of 1 John 4:2-3. Some recent scholars read the situation quite differently, distancing themselves from the traditional reconstruction. Martinus de Boer concludes that the text’s insistence upon “unflesh” reflected an affirmation of the salvific significance of the death of Jesus, basing this conclusion in no small measure on John 6:51 and 1 John 5:6. While this is quite possible in the light of the emphasis upon atoning sacrifice and forgiveness of sins elsewhere in 1 John (1:5–2:2; 4:10), the opening prologue is more pivotally defining. In the familiar lines of the opening (1:1-3), we find an unusual insistence upon tangibility of the Word of Life, perhaps especially the significant report “our hands touched” (1:1d). The prologue itself gives away the defining christological issue that most likely attaches to 4:2 as well. The opening verses read as crafted for the crisis, with the christological emphasis reflected best at 4:2-3. The text of v. 3a is in some dispute because some manuscripts simply read “all who do not confess Jesus,” but others add “Jesus Christ” or more importantly “Jesus having come in the flesh” and variations thereof. While the latter enjoys the support of the great manuscript Sinaiticus, along with 33 and 81, it most likely reflects

168

1 John 4:1-6

a latter scribal emendation to clarify the intent of the original verse. It is reasonable that the shorter text is original, but the emendations themselves do not, however, misrepresent original intent. Once again, as in the parallel warning text out of the first movement (2:18ff ), the church leader defines the last times indication, the arrival of the antichrist. These antichrists in context are christological deniers, specifically those who deny the reality of the incarnate Jesus Christ. The sense of fulfillment (“now,” “already”), what is often called realized eschatology, can contain a negative dimension as it does here. The writer alerts his readers to what time it is with forceful warning. Of course, antichrist here refers quite literally to those who refuse to participate in the community confession of faith (homology). The writer persuasively folds this identification of antichrists into already held beliefs about which they had heard. If the first condition or test concerns confession of Christ, the second relates to responsive hearing (4:4-6). The Elder reassures his readers, with whom he has built or enhanced a warm pastoral relationship of trust through sixty-seven verses. He lets them know his confidence that they belong to the category of authentic children of God, with their spiritual welfare not in doubt (v. 4a). They are conquerors (2:13d, 14h) of “them” (referring to false prophets); it is a theme of celebration (5:4, 5; cf. John 16:33). The writer, utilizing thoughtful theology, credits both the community’s status as children of God and as conquerors to the “greatness” of God (cf. 3:20). While this theological assertion stresses the dividing line of regeneration, it also grounds assurance in the superior prowess of God rather than Parallel from War Scroll merely personal strength of the believer. This For the battle is yours! verse sustains the dualism of the sovereignty of And it is from you that power comes, God and the demonic, but the dualism does not and not from our own being. It is not our might require equality of the two forces. The writer nor the power of our own hands remains realistic enough to recognize the which performs these marvels, awesome power of the demonic in the world but except by your great strength resilient enough to hold to the ultimate soverand by your mighty deeds. eignty of God. [Parallel from War Scroll] 1QM 11:4-5 in The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English (ed. Florentino Garcia Martinez; Leiden: E. J. Our author identifies his opponents as having Brill, 1994), 104. the demonically distorted world as their origin and habitat (v. 5a), not only branding them but also setting up the explanation for the popular reception of their teaching (v. 5b, c). This perspective, however, was not invented for the immediate debate but represents a transposition from John (cf. John 15:19). Just as the world hates disciples as it hated Jesus (15:18; 17:14), the

1 John 4:1-6

169

world hears the false prophets because they share a common origin. Listening, of course, implies responsiveness and acceptance. Since the false prophets speak the language and know the beliefs and values of the world, they are heard by the world, hence explaining their apparent success. The final sentence of this stirring paragraph utilizes the “we” in a manner startlingly like 1:1-4. The author once again speaks in the voice of the tradition bearers. This second test of responsive hearing lies parallel to the saying of the Johannine Christ, holding that those of God hear the word of God (5:37-38; 6:45; 8:47); they are sheep of his who will listen to his voice (10:16). A willingness to listen to Jesus constitutes a sign in John (8:43-44, 47; 10:26-27; 18:37). It does appear that the Elder made the teaching he represented the test of orthodoxy. It is a matter, however, of receiving their witness—their hearing, touching, seeing of Jesus as Word of Life (1:1-3); here the Johannine Jesus tradition, not merely personal authority or opinion. One must not forget how the writer has grounded everything in the Johannine tradition and/or what they had heard previously. This author has also sought to convince, indicating respect for readers. While one might well find this posture arroDualistic Opposition gant, that is, taking over a seemingly similar “It is the only passage in the Johannine authority to the word of God and Jesus no less, writings in which we find the dualistic opposition of the two spirits . . . .” the epistolary writer would defend on the basis Ignace de la Potterie, “The Truth in Saint John,” The of being faithful to those very words. Indeed, as Interpretation of John (ed; John Ashton (2d ed.; Edinburgh: T&T Jesus declared what he had heard (John 8:26), Clark, 1997), 74. the apostolic testimony faithfully spoke. [Dualistic Opposition]

The Spirit of Truth points most assuredly to the Spirit of God (4:2a; John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13); and the spirit of deception (2:26) surely points to the spirit of antichrist (4:36). Our writer has rounded out his topic, reaching his goal at 4:6d. In effect, the epistolary writer engaged in a contest for listeners/adherents. Incidentally, while a defined dualism appears here, it is not likely that the writer has all humanity in mind so much as merely the two sides of this festering dissension. Opposing spiritual forces hid behind the two contending groups. It is all about who confesses what and who listens to whom. The absolute opposite of truth (read: Christian truth) is not deception, but deception is intertwined with what false prophets do. We have a profile of false prophets, antichrists, deniers, deceivers. Translations tend to render the last phrase of v. 6 “the spirit of error.” The Greek noun plan∑ does not appear at all in

170

1 John 4:1-6

John and only here in 1 John, but the word “deceiver” (planos) is used at 2 John 7 for those refusing to confess Jesus Christ come in the flesh. The verb in 1 John is used for self-deception (1:8) but, more to the immediate point, represents a warning about those trying to mislead the believers (2:26). While 3:7 can be applied broadly, it nevertheless in context rails against the dangerous seduction of the secessionists. Parallel with Qumran Scrolls Both the picture of many deceivers coming 1. “They are the spirits of truth and of deceit” (1 QS 3:18). into the world and that of the association of 2. “Until now the spirits of truth and of injustice deception with the antichrist and with the feud in the heart of man” (1 QS 4:23). denial of Jesus Christ come in the flesh The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English (ed. (2 John 7) function as connections between Florentino Garcia Martinez; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994), 6–7. 1 and 2 John; they also effect the nuance that the error implied is one of deception, reminiscent of Qumran (1QS 3:18; 4:23; cf. John 20:11, 35). The writer in effect makes moral accusations against those understood Differences from 1 John as intentionally misleading. [Parallel with Qumran 1. God created the two spirits and places them in each person (1 QS 3:18, 25) 2. The issue of injustice (1 QS 4:2, 17-24) paired with truth 3. Typical characteristics of the sons of Truth (meekness, patience, compassion, intelligence, wisdom, etc.) (1 QS 4:2-6) and the spirit of deceit (greed, irreverence, pride, dishonesty, cruelty, etc.) (4:9-11)

Scrolls]

While the tone of the claim “we are of God” stirs consternation in some modern readers, it correlates dramatically with the initial claim “our fellowship is with the Father . . .” (1:3). It appears probable that the fellowship at 1:3 is grounded partially in the earlier fellowship with the historical Jesus (1:1-3) and the teaching authority that grows out of the credibility of eyewitnesses. Once again the Broad Parallels in Apocalyptic Judaism 1. 1 Enoch 8:1-3; 10:7-16; 19:1; 64:2 interpreter is up against the question of 2. Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs (T. whether the writer speaks for the apostolic traJud. 20:1; 14:8; 19:4; 23:1; T Levi 3:1) dition or was among those actually present. Cited by Georg Strecker, Johannine Letters (Hermeneia; ed. Harold The latter is difficult to shake off in light of Attridge; trans. Linda M. Malony (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 140–41. 1:1-3, but in any event the text speaks for others besides the author, possibly the community, but more likely those from the beginning. He does fend for the classic confession of the community. [Differences from 1 John] [Broad Parallels in Apocalyptic Judaism]

1 John 4:1-6

CONNECTIONS 1. Developing a Christian Critical Faculty

Some universities place in their purpose statement the goal to develop a critical faculty among their students, indeed for them to learn constructive critical thinking. One of the lessons of early life is that you cannot believe everyone. You cannot believe everything you hear or read on the Internet, either. We as Christians would do well to develop an informed discernment. Christians should become informed and be perceptive, even critical. C. H. Dodd, commenting on Romans 12:2, observed keenly that the Christian “is not the slave of the conventional judgments of society . . . but has a fresh and independent insight into moral realities.”3 In regard to some religious options, we do well to exercise spiritual skepticism rather than well-meaning naiveté. We need not become neurotically suspicious; some expressions of “the hermeneutic of suspicion” overwhelm reasonable research by going to unwarranted extremes. Are there false prophets today in the church, in the world, on television? What about “health and wealth” promises in the name of faith? What about “positive thinking” parlayed alone as an adequate representation of biblical religion? What about those who predict the time of the return of Christ, whose own predictions eventually discredit them? We need to be alert to the dangers of deception and the cults that cultivate our children. Brian Harbour, in a sermon titled “Test the Spirits,” warned against the spirit of self (as the center of our lives), the spirit of sensuality (pleasure as the primary purpose for living), and the spirit of secularism (money and the things money can buy).4 2. Knowing What Time It Is

Just as the writer was keen on what time it was, “many false prophets have gone out into the world” (v. 1) and “now it [the spirit of the antichrist] is already in the world” (v. 3), so should contemporary believers be alert to what is going on in their own time. We live in a time of terrorism. We inhabit a celebrity culture of people obsessed with iconic figures. We live in an era of gluttonous consumption of fossil fuels. We experience sincere division of conscience within the church. Financial downturns challenge the church to help the needy more than ever. The twenty-first century seems up for grabs. Will there be a dreary repeat of the wars of the

171

172

1 John 4:1-6

twentieth century? Should the church become more proactive? Is it time for the church to reevangelize areas once considered classically Christian? Will the church appeal to more men? What time is it? 3. How to Become Human

In Johannine thought, Jesus became a down-to-earth God. Pilate spoke the famed words of apparent respect: “Ecce homo” (“Behold the man,” John 19:5). Jesus stood resilient with quiet courage when the forces of chaos rose up against him. He remained unbowed by the threats to his very existence. Indeed, he advocated love of enemies. We do well to behold the humanity of Jesus, indeed to see a new vision of humanity and emulate it. Jesus embodies the fully realized human, inviting us to become ourselves, scars and all. Jesus stands as a kind of Sinai of the soul where truth still speaks. Jesus reveals a new being, an anthropic revelation. David Flusser, Israel’s foremost scholar on Jesus, penned the words, “I readily admit . . . that I personally identify myself with Jesus’ Jewish worldview, both moral and political, and I believe that the contents of his teachings and the approach that he embraced have always had the potential to change our world and prevent the greatest part of evil and suffering.”5 4. Confessing the Christology of Incarnation

The Johannine tradition with magnificent monotony insists on the incarnation, the Word become flesh. A faint faith in an amiable carpenter will not do. As a young man Elton Trueblood inclined toward a Unitarian view. He took a class on the Gospels at Brown University, which led him to a more Christ-centered faith. He wrote in his diary, I owe Dr. Fowler of Brown University an unpayable debt. When I came to New England I was inclined toward a Unitarian view, but now I have found my Lord and master . . . . I do not know what I was shying at before, I objected to thinking of him as an incarnation of God. Now it seems so simple. I think, however, that the whole trouble was my conception of God. I still thought of God as a glorified eastern potentate and of course Jesus wasn’t an incarnation of that. But, if God is the eternal spirit of love, Jesus was that in flesh and blood.6

1 John 4:1-6

The Elder, with his sense of the embodiment of love in Jesus, would heartily agree. Indeed, if God ever became a human being, would he or she not be like Jesus of Nazareth? 5. Get in the Pool

On family vacation, several younger children splashed and played in a pool. They bounded down the water slide with great glee. Their grandfather patrolled the sides of the pool, checking constantly on their well-being, since several of the children were fearless of the water. One energetic grandson shouted with insistent enthusiasm, “Granddaddy, get in the pool!” He did not want his grandfather standing on the sides playing lifeguard from on high. He wanted him to get in the water with the children. He had a point. Get involved; get in the game. This is what Jesus did (Phil 2:1-11). We too are invited to be incarnational as Christians, to get involved, to plunge into the water. We may get engaged in congregational life and even work toward a Johannine sort of community where fellow Christians value one another. We may look for sisters and brothers in need and take action such as sharing food and clothing, helping someone find a job during a recession, going on a Christian mission, speaking out for justice. Eric Rust, student of faith and science, reflected much on the incarnation. He wrote the following words: In Christ the whole universe and the whole of humanity are summed up in one human life, and the creative energies of man and his world are redirected once more. Here man is not only shown how he should live as God’s partner, but is also lifted from estrangement back into divine fellowship and given the spiritual dynamic to fulfill his destiny.7

Good theology, as we have learned from 1 John, invites good living, and incarnational Christology carries the potential of transformed Christian living. It does matter what you believe. 6. Who and What to Listen To

We listen to subliminal messages that creep into our psyches, we hear advertising pitches, we are assaulted with sound bytes that lack nuanced significance, with news that carries poorly disguised bias, with media preachers who have limited theological education and

173

174

1 John 4:1-6

are given to sweeping assertions. Some listen to gurus and others design their lives around pop psychologies. We do well to become more conscious of those to whom we listen and what they say. John Wesley listened ever so attentively to 1 John to the great good of the world and the church. We can listen to tried and true voices in the church while engaging the priesthood of the believer. In Johannine thought the sheep recognize and hear the voice of Jesus (John 10). The Shepherd goes ahead of them and the sheep follow him (v. 3). In 1 John the reader is expected to listen in particular to the love command (1 John 3:23; cf. John 13:34-35). Hearing the authoritative words of Jesus takes a most prominent place at the close of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 7:28-29), including actions like loving your enemy, rejecting retaliation, doing to others as you would have them do to you. In the parable of the soils, seeds, and sower, hearing the gospel of Jesus plays a critical role with extraordinary outcome (Mark 4:1-9). In reading Scripture, we must try to listen for the voice of the Risen Lord. In our time, a heightened appreciation of listening in the silence offers much. “Jesus is calling, is tenderly calling today.”8

Notes 1. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992), 203. 2. Raymond Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982), 105. 3. C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932), 192. 4. Brian Harbour, “Test the Spirits,” Brian’s Lines, November 1985. 5. David Flusser, The Sage from Galilee (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2007), xviii. See Molly Marshall, What It Means to Be Human (Macon GA: Smyth & Helwys, 1995). 6. Elton Trueblood, While It Is Day (New York: Harper and Row, 1974), 22. 7. Eric Rust, Faith and Science (New York: Oxford, 1967), 307. 8. Fanny Crosby, “Jesus Is Calling Today,” 1883.

The Third Movement: God Is Love 1 John 4:7–5:12 This reading of 1 John recognizes three movements in the Epistle, the first around the theological understanding of God as light (1:5–2:28), the middle concerning the implications of God as righteous (2:29–4:6), and the final movement drawn from the comprehension of God as love (4:7–5:12). The contention, furthermore, stands that the author, who develops an impressive theological ethic, begins with a core attribute of God, also characteristic of the Son, then applies it as a sign or test for all genuine believers. In the instance of God’s identification as love, the Elder portrays Jesus as the active embodiment, revelation, and redemption inherent in such love and insists with a particular passion throughout the Epistle that every authentic Christian exhibits a mutual love in community. The community has been torn apart (2:19) by a spirit of hate on the part of some dissidents (3:15). Ironically, these false teachers apparently boasted boisterously about how much they loved God (4:20). Our author will test the veracity of such claims in terms of loving fellow believers, his theological ethic relentless and persuasive. This third movement of the Epistle consists of an A Winsome Outline of 4:7–5:4 The source of love (vv. 7-10) exhortation to love (4:7-21) and to The inspiration of love (vv. 11-16) believe (5:1-12), both anticipated by The practice of love (vv. 17-20) 3:23 and elsewhere. [A Winsome Outline of 4:7–5:4]

The command of love (4:21–5:4)

Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC, vol. 51; Waco TX; Word Books, 1984), 236.

Exhortation to Love 1 John 4:7-21

COMMENTARY Rhetorically speaking, the persuasive author, who has mounted a full court press from the first movement (1:5), will now effectively use logos (logical arguments) and ethos (character) as well as pathos (emotional appeal). The author employs constant use of reason, shoring up his assertions with supportive causal clauses (as vv. 7b, 8b, 18c, 19b), definition (v. 10), clarification (vv. 9, 10b), assurance (vv. 7c, 13-16), critical revelations (vv. 9b-10), and promises (v. 12c). He makes an emotional appeal in terms of the extreme love of God in the sending of his Son, comprehended as a holistic theological action with its definitive expression in the atonement (4:9-10). The ethical insistence upon mutual love characterizes and epitomizes the Epistle as a whole. The use of the discernment/disclosure formula “by this” or “in this” (en touto) stamps the passage (vv. 9a, 10a, 13a, 17a). In this passage the church leader displays not only his passion but also his strategy for saving the movement. He was not merely a deft rhetorician but a thoughtful pastoral theologian, though his arresting aphorisms throughout the letter also point to a clever and inspired wordsmith. His rhetorical engagement, in this instance in response to a probable boast about loving God (v. 20), may have drawn out fresh theological reflection as well as the incorporation of previously coined one-liners effective in an oral culture. Here the apostolic author argues confidently and authoritatively as the faith representative of Johannine Christianity, but rather than striking a strident authoritarian tone he respects his recipients and makes an appeal to them. The pastoral/polemical style characteristic of the entire Epistle functions exquisitely here. One detects both the pastoral (vv. 7a, 11, 13-16) and the polemical (vv. 8, 10b, 20-21). This set piece, not merely tactical rhetoric, reflects a preexisting, inhabited conceptuality of God. It begins with the exhortation to love one another (4:7) and ends with the indissoluble connection between love of God and love of brother/sister (4:21). This inclusion

178

1 John 4:7-21

leaves little doubt about rhetorical intent. The scopus or goal lies primarily in the urging to mutual love and secondarily in refutation of those who refuse to do so. Though there are a few slight connections to the preceding verses, this passage begins rather abruptly, suggestive of a new start and connecting best with 3:11 and 23a. This concern for mutual love has been explicit since 2:10, implicit even earlier, and of the three thematics regarding God (light, righteousness, and love), this one most closely approaches Robert Law’s famous model of a spiraling upward argument in 1 John, reaching its apex here.1 Some consider this extended reflection on agap∑ as significant as any passage in the epistolary literature of the New Testament, this writer among them. The Revelation and Redemption of the Divine Love, vv. 7-12

The section begins with the warm signature address “beloved,” which models a Johannine community that knows itself beloved of God and understands itself as a place of unique relationships. “Before John asks for love,” observed Stephen Smalley, “he shows himself to be loving.”2 The appeal itself to mutual love, a hortatory subjunctive with its urge to action, represents the primary passion of the Epistle. It was likely in mind as early as walking in darkness and light (1:5-6), as keeping his commandments (2:3-5), and surely as keeping the new commandment (2:7-8). Walking in darkness, after all, is defined as hating one’s sister or brother (2:9). Loving one another belongs to the distinctiveness of Johannine Christianity, stems from the Johannine Christ (John 13:34-35), and represents the potential antidote, not merely test, for the schism and for faithful discipleship. It represents the definitional essence of Christian interrelationships. “Love one another,” replete with a reciprocal pronoun, replaces a selfish love for oneself with a love not simply for others but for one another. In this beloved community, one receives from as well as extends to a fellow believer, one lives in a new kind of fellowship where believers can flourish, in a community like the Twelve in relation to Jesus (John 13:35). All this vision flows from the author’s understanding and experience of God. The source and possibility of such love-in-relationship derives from God. Why can and should we love one another? Because love is sourced in God. The contemporary reader does well to enter this ecclesiological vision rather than merely doing the historical reconstruction of the situation in the light of the historically bitter conflict. [“I Have a Dream”]

1 John 4:7-21

179

Everyone obeying this love command can “I Have a Dream” rest assured that she or he (a) has been born of I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning God and (b) knows God (v. 7cd). This spiriof its creed: “we hold these truths to be selftual rebirth has happened already with evident; that all men are created equal.” continuing implications (perfect tense) and I have a dream that one day on the red hills of enables the believer to participate in the nature Georgia the Sons of former slaves and the Sons of of a God of love. The assurance that they know former slave owners will be able to sit down God, a confidence apparently upset by the together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that my four little children will other mentors, is grounded in loving. Knowing one day live in a nation where they will not be is quite prominent as a theme in 1 John (25 judged by the color of their skin but by the content times), can refer in biblical literature to the of their character. intimacy of sexual relations (Gen 4:1, 17, 25; Martin Luther King, The Words of Martin Luther King (ed. Coretta Matt 1:25; Luke 1:34), means more than the King; New York: Newmarket, 1983), 95. truth of something, and implies a personal connection. The knowing of God in the present tense (v. 7d) means not only a saving knowledge but a present communion. So two crucial important religious experiences, being begotten of God and knowing God, can be attested by the presence of love for one another. The following verse (8), functioning in the common antithetical pattern of the Epistle, draws out the inevitable implication that those not loving simply have not “known” (aorist tense) the God of love. Their being, their conduct, their interrelationships deny any rightful claim to knowing God since God is love. The Elder assumes that if one has been begotten of God as parent, a loving child of God will be the outcome of such parentage as (Credit: Marion S. Trikosko. Martin Luther King leaning on a lectern. March 26, 1964. Library of Congress.) the believer participates in the nature of God. There may be here a claim by the false prophets (4:1) that they love God (4:20), which the Epistle resists and discredits. At John 8, reflecting in part debate between the church and the synagogue, Jesus counters the claim, “He is our God,” with a challenging refutation of his opponents’ belief that they know God (vv. 54-55), a christological precursor for the kind of move the Elder makes, yet another sign of typical Johannine patterns of thinking. The support of the author’s argument comes from a causal clause about the revealed nature of a God of love (v. 8b). Once more a theological ethic plays with the author’s characteristic alignment of

180

1 John 4:7-21

the character of God, Jesus, and the believer. The epistolary writer has learned to think theologically, on his own or in the Johannine school, and teaches his readers the rudiments. Of course, the Epistle reaches its highest place with its discloPersonal Implication of “God Is Love” sure of the personal nature of God as love. When in fact we take the metaphor “God is love” and as in I John 4 we understand it personally: He is the One who loves. This personal way in which Scripture speaks is not in any way childish or naïve or anthropomorphic . . . . The personal way in which Holy Scripture speaks corresponds absolutely and exclusively to the fact that God is not something, but someone, the One from whom man merely holds in fee the possibility of being one himself.

[Personal Implication of “God Is Love”]

The entire passage is fairly saturated both with the definitive concept love (agap∑ ) and its embodiment in a classic portrayal. At v. 7b it is not merely the character of God but the origin of love for the community, a kind of love not otherwise possible. The author reaches behind and before the command, going directly to the Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics 2/1 (1957): 286. being and character of God (v. 8b). This represents a masterstroke not merely polemically but theologically. Once again the keen author offers justification for his appeals, not merely bare pronouncements demanding adherence. Take note of the grand assumption that believers should want to be like God. As for our author, this is how and who he is. The source of love indeed comes from God, once more using the telling prepositional phrase ek tou. It may be rendered literally as “out of ” or “from.” The derivation of love among Christians comes actually from God. This love is not merely as example or character of God, though both in the Epistle, but a spiritual gift from God associated with rebirth. The contention for being born of God does not amount to a minor motif in the Johannine tradition. Hence the Elder understands Christian love as supernatural gift rather than merely breezy disposition or personal achievement. One can discern from an empirical life of loving that a prior transference from death to life (3:14) has transpired. Such conversion involves a derivation from and a movement toward the being and character of God as love. The expressions “everyone loving” and “the one not loving” (v. 8a) are not in the abstract but refer to the imperative to love one another in Christian community. The interpreter of 1 John comes to recognize not a contradiction but a definite interplay between the exhortation (imperative) to love one another and the announcement of begottenness (indicative). Does one speak of paradox, a dialectic, or is it more a matter of the believer becoming what she is? There follows the inevitable alternative of v. 8, both 7 and 8 dependent upon the common ground of belief in God as love. If one can deduce from a loving life, one can alas also draw implications about the one who “keeps on not loving,” the one habitually being unloving, indeed hateful, the opponents representing such a

1 John 4:7-21

possibility.3 The Greek verb form egnø, the second aorist tense of “to know,” is naturally enough rendered “has not known.” The translation “does not know God” (NRSV) does not represent the tense as well.4 The author likely intends to say that the unloving in the community have not experienced regeneration (cf. 2:19), have never “known” God. As in the previous paragraph, this church leader urges discernment (4:1). Howard Marshall takes the positive of v. 7 as of greater importance than the negative antithesis of v. 8.5 In agreement, Smalley mentions the presence of “all” at v. 7, but its absence at v. 8.6 In light of the severity of the problem combated in the letter, it is doubtful that the negative warning/critique vis-à-vis love can be downplayed even though the positive is undoubtedly of greater importance. Smalley’s suggestion that “a lack of love does not by itself prove that no relationship with God exists” is doubtful at best (cf. 3:10, 14, 18), though one can acknowledge that the sanguine disposition of some lends itself more readily toward affection than others.7 The warning of v. 8 may have and can play an awakening role. Smalley’s reflection is more helpful as he writes, “[a]nyone who enters into a real relationship with a loving God can be transformed into a loving person (see v. 11).”8 For Smalley and the Elder, both believing and loving are essential marks of the authentic follower (3:23). One does question if in fact every last one of the opponents were lacking in both love and faith. The justly famous characterization of God as love as a reason (v. 8) and an opening assertion (v. 16) certainly represents a pinnacle in the history of religion, “a depth hitherto unplumbed.”9 Here in the first instance it negates an inauthentic religious existence. Obviously the believer who cannot bring himself to love fellow Christians does not “know” the Johannine God. Likewise those who walk in the darkness obviously have no fellowship with the God who is light (1:5-6), the introduction of the first movement. This God, we might say, is not merely in essence love but also lovingness. That is, God expresses love relationally and even experiences love reciprocally. This loving God sent his only Son into the world (v. 9b). So agap∑ is not all about oneself, even Godself, but a self-giving to others. How does the Elder know that God is love? He backs up his claim that God is both the source of love (v. 7b) and love itself (v. 8b). His development not only presses his argument but also divulges the writer’s epistemology, standing as he does in the mainstream of Johannine thought, somewhere near its center and genius. He will ground the love of God in the “sending” (vv. 9-10) paramount in John and in the example of Jesus in living and giving

181

182

1 John 4:7-21

the love command (John 13:34-35; 1 John 3:11) and especially the laying down of life for others (1 John 3:16). There follows the revelatory disclosure of how the love of God is discerned from the divine initiative of sending (v. 9). The revelation in turn defines God and the divine intention (“that we might live through him”). This agapaic God wills eternal life, so reminiscent of John 3:16. Note that here it is not just the argument “from beginning,” typical of the Epistle, nor only the argument from the love commandment, but is theologically based on the reaching love of God. The motif of sending stands out far more prominently in John than in the Epistle, being used only in this paradigmatic passage. This language of the Son being sent (the perfect tense “sent” or “has sent” of the verb apostellø) certainly authorizes Jesus as one in unity of purpose with God, but it could also imply preexistence. Schnackenburg takes the position that Jesus’ being sent or coming from the Father makes sense “as pre-existent being with the Father.”10 At John 1:6 the Baptizer, however, also is represented as a person sent from God. Indeed the idea of sending a messenger with a special task, bearer of a commission, belongs to Old Testament usage. Sending (“he who sent me” or “the Father who sent me”) may be the most reiterated christological expression in the Fourth Gospel. In John, sending represents the mission of the Son to do the will of the One who sent him (4:34; 7:28-29). While sending is rightly associated with Johannine thought, the motif is actually grounded in the synoptic tradition, as especially in the Gospel of Matthew. The idea can be found in the sending of angels (Matt 8:31), disciples on mission (10:5; also Mark 3:14; 6:7; 13:27), sages, prophets, scribes (23:34), and those sent to Jerusalem (23:37). The Matthaean Jesus could declare that he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (10:16). This viewpoint is well represented in the parable of the vineyard on the lips of Jesus (21:33-46; also Mark 12:2-4, 5). While the motif of sending is not emphasized in Luke, it belongs to the sermon at Nazareth importantly in the quotation from Isaiah 61:1 (Luke 4:18). This sense of intentional mission reiterated in John’s distinctive manner appears well grounded in the historical Jesus. [The Only Embodiment] The translation “only Son” speaks to the singularity of Jesus in Johannine thought (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18). John refers to believers as children of God but never as sons or daughters of God. In everyday usage the word can mean simply one’s only daughter or son (Luke 7:12; 8:42; 9:38). Perhaps significantly John reserves the word only for Jesus. While the conceptuality of divine generation represented by the translation “only begotten” does not seem to

1 John 4:7-21

reside in the Greek monogen∑ (but see 1 John 5:18; John 1:13), an interesting alternative, at least from the etymological side, lurks. Could it be that the writer intends “one of a kind,” that is, unique? In any event, etymologically the second half of monogen∑ derives from genos (“kind”) not gennaø (“birth”). [Quoting from Dale Moody in IDB]

The love of God was also made known by the divine intent that believers “live through him,” “that” (hina) being purposive (v. 9c). For the Epistle, Jesus is the Word of Life from the outset (1:1), eternal life being as it were what the Johannine gospel has to offer (1:1-2; 4:13, 16, 20). Regularly “life,” or here the verb, is shorthand for eternal life, and in this context it could be an ingressive aorist with the nuance “come to life.” Eternal life in John is not only an alternative to perishing (3:16; 6:12, 27, 39; 10:10, 28; 11:55; 12:25; 17:12; 18:19), but also a quality of life realized now, as here, as well as in the future. Though “perishing” is prominent in John, interestingly it is absent in 1 John (but see 2 John 8). This life comes through the agency of Jesus, the “his” apparently a reference to him. [The Proclamation of John]

183

The Only Embodiment “Jesus is the one sent by God, from God, not only as a messenger, but as the very embodiment of his love. To send someone else is hardly an ultimate proof of selfgiving love.” After all, Jesus “is the one in whom the living God, Israel’s God, has become personally present in the world . . . .” N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, Christian Origins and the Question of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 732.

Quoting from Dale Moody in IDB “Monogen∑s” is derived from monos, “single,” and genos, “kind,” and means “one of a kind,” “only,” “unique,” not “only begotten,” which would be monogenn∑tos. The distinctive vocabulary of the Johannine writings reserves the term huios, “Son,” for the Son of God alone . . . . It would be awkward for John to speak of the Son as “begotten,” since the word for “beget,” gennaø, is used to designate the relation between God and all his children . . . . Dale Moody, “Only Begotten,” IDB 3:604. See also Moody, “God’s Only Son: the Translation of John 3:16 in the Revised Standard Version,” JBL 72 (1953): 213–19. For an opposing view, see John Dahms, “The Johannine Use of Monogenes Reconsidered,” NTS 29:222–32.

The Proclamation of John John’s proclamation consists of the message that God so loved the world that he sent His “only-begotten” Son—not to judge it but to save it . . . .

As vv. 7 and 8 function together, vv. 9 and 10 are parallel in explicit definition of the love of Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (New York: God, both opening with the disclosure formula. Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1955), 2:15. Nevertheless, the differences are important. At v. 10 the writer utilizes the construction “not that” (ouch hoti), quite important because it often functions grammatically to correct a misunderstanding. The writer, not merely ruminating on the love of God, has in mind the false teachers who avow their love of God (4:20). Christian love is not constituted by love for God but by the love of God, himself (autos) being accentuated. Christian love finds its center, origin, and initiative in God, in God’s love for us rather than our love of God. Another significant difference in v. 10 certainly falls upon the image of atoning sacrifice (hilasmos). In consonance with v. 9, the divine intent falls upon the well-being of humanity, but in this instance “for our sins.” For more extended discussion of the conceptuality of atonement, see comments on 2:2. This term for atonement is not typical of the Gospel, which prefers the notion of

184

1 John 4:7-21

exaltation. John 1:29 and 36b do carry sacrificial overtones, however, as does the handing over of Jesus to death at the very time of the slaughter of the Passover lambs (19:14-16) and the sacrifice of the shepherd for the sake of the sheep (10:7-18). Note here importantly in 1 John the initiative of God in forgiveness, God making loving provision for the reality of human sins. One could find grounds for a limited atonement for believers alone, but this reading is rendered impossible by 2:2. The writer understands the divine intention in terms of an abundant life (v. 9) that is enabled by the freeing of forgiveness (v. 10), reflecting a remarkable interest and concern for humanity. For 1 John the love of God preceded and motivated the sending. God’s love was understood revealed in the actual sending. Here at v. 10 the love of God does not float in majestic abstractness. Rather the divine love acts and it also performs with incredible unselfishness as well as a capacity to redeem. Love not only reflects the character of God, not only relates to revelation, but also preeminently has to do with the act of God in Jesus Christ. Such love then naturally has to do with the act of believers in relation to one another (3:17; 4:11). The purpose of the sending, “that we might live through him,” reflects the divine love in willing qualitative, eternal life. This love is demonstrated supremely in the atoning sacrifice (v. 10) but is inherent in the sending. The living through him includes a forgiveness, a forgiven existence. The “living through him” appears also in our loving one another (v. 12), a loving existence. Many interpreters find the “gospel” of John at 3:16 and the “gospel” of 1 John, as it were, at 4:9-10. The striking similarities as well as important differences are telling. John 3:16 puts an emphasis upon the giving of the Son by God, while in this text 1 John emphasizes the sending of the Son. Both texts represent a definitive interpretation of the love of God, in that both focus on the act of God on behalf of the world. Both texts speak of Jesus as the “only one” and mention the provision of eternal life. The dramatic differences present in 1 John include both the explicit idea of an atoning sacrifice for sin and the overt definition of God as love. The Gospel context emphasizes believing while the epistolary context presses for mutual love. John 3:16 has to do primarily with incarnation but possibly includes expiatory death in the loving and giving. These differences accentuate the individual personality of both Gospel and Epistle. It is tempting when comparing these classic texts to speculate as to which came first. It would seem most natural to see the text in 1 John as dependent upon and advancing upon the Gospel text, though one could argue that the view of

1 John 4:7-21

185

The Five Hearts of Divine Love and Christ Crucified atonement in 1 John reflects early and traditional Christian views. One would think, however, that had the exceptional phrase “God is love” appeared in the earlier of the two documents, it would reappear in the later document. Once more appealing directly with the second “beloved” of this address (v. 11), the Elder draws a major deduction from Image Not Available his portrayal of the love of due to lack of digital rights. God, the thrust toward which Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet he has driven. What about the search using the credit below. pivotal “thus” of God’s love? What does this “thusness” entail? It involves a love for others! Rather than an aggressive self-centeredness, one finds here an aggressive outgoingness (vv. 9-10). This revealing and redeeming love of God provides life and sacrifice for sins, wellbeing, and forgiveness. The true believer should love fellow The Five Hearts of Divine Love and Christ Crucified. Germany, 15th C. Colored woodcut. Kupferstichkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. (Credit: Joerg P. Anders, Christians with a similar outgoBildarchiv Preussischer Kulturbesitz / Art Resource, NY) ingness that intends well-being for the other and perhaps even This medieval woodcut depicts the scope of God’s love revealed in the forgiveness for one another. crucifixion of Jesus. Each heart carries a caption denoting a particular kind of atonement accomplished in the cross, with the spear that This writer habitually thinks in pierced Christ's heart through the wound in the side signifying the depth terms of models to imitate, to of God’s sacrificial love. reflect in one’s own being, and routinely refuses to flinch from the moral imperative of oughtness (vv. 7a, 8; 2:6; 3:16). This conception of oughtness, “not an optional extra,”11 belongs to the writer’s ethic on the imperative side. At John 13:14 where the same verb for “ought” appears, Jesus enjoins his disciples to the loving service of washing one another’s feet on the basis of the example of Jesus. Here again (v. 11) the imitation or “just as” shows up, but here not only imitating the Son but God as well. What does one imitate? An initiating love for the other. Once more a theological ethic emerges. This phenomenon is spelled out in a fashion not explicit in John.

186

1 John 4:7-21

How unselfish is this divine love! One might expect a primary emphasis about the duty to love God in return (see 4:19, 21). Indeed, v. 11 can be read as a surprise. The nobility of God’s love for us was established earlier in the sending of the Son, but here at v. 11 the oughtness is to love others more than to love God. This disarming unselfishness is its charm. The divine intent appears (1) to live through the Son (v. 9) and (2) to live in love (vv. 7a, 11b). This Johannine God intends a community of love. The reader is expected to return the love of God by actualizing it with others. Our author works with the grand assumption of an unavoidable imperative growing out of the gracious indicative of God. This eloquently depicted divine love functions not merely as The Love of God for Us awe-inspiring but as a love beamed to the believers. 1. Its source: God, who is actually Hence the oughtness (v. 11b) arises not only from love (4:8, 16) 2. Its very character: outgoing in sending the character and essence of God but from a love and giving (4:10) directed at and received by the recipients. [The Love of 3. Its activity: self-giving for the sake of the other (3:16) 4. Its effect: expiation for our sins (4:10), that we may live through him (4:9), the salvation of the world (4:14)

God for Us]

We have loved God (v. 10b) But he has loved us (v. 10c) For our sins (v. 10c) God loved us (v. 11a) We ought to love one another (v. 11b)

with Recipients as Fellow Christians]

Having waxed eloquently about the love of God (vv. 7-11a), the author unapologetically urges mutual love (v. 11b). While the exposition of the love of God John Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John (SP; ed. Daniel J. has been extraordinary (vv. 7-10), the intent of the Harrington, S.J.; (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, pregnant paragraph is telegraphed here in service of a 2002), 276–77. practical appeal in a broken situation. The writer does express himself in the first person plural, thus identifying with his readers, accepting responsibility for love of one another for himself and standing with them, and modeling a teaching style with and not at them. The perspective reflects comIdentification with Recipients as munity and not just individualism. Such mutual love Fellow Christians for this writer includes the sharing of one’s earthly Let us love one another (v. 7a) goods with sisters and brothers (3:17), embodying Among us (v. 9a) We might live (v. 9c) the present love of God in community. [Identification While the reduction of loving God to loving others resides in the vicinity intended by our pastoral theologian, this view does not represent precisely the theological thrust. The Elder conceives of the believer’s love of others as one styled on God’s love for others and as completing God’s received love by loving others. This down-toearth theologian consistently stresses “doing” truth, a typically Jewish idea. The assertion that no one has ever seen God at v. 12 seems awkwardly intrusive, though it advances the second stage of the writer’s argument at v. 10 and comes around again at 4:20, connecting the

1 John 4:7-21

larger essay as does abidance. Both the strong expressions “no one” (oudeis) and “ever” or “at any time” (pøpote), however, accentuate his point. Of course, the writer and/or the apostolic tradition did claim to have seen the Word of Life, the manifestation of God, but he decidedly did not make mystic claims about seeing God in some unmediated fashion as possibly did his opposition. Strikingly at John 1:18 we have rather abruptly, “No one has ever seen God,” as a generally accepted truism but contextually in order to portray the Son as making the unseen God known. While the prologue of John works with the category of revelation at 1 John 4:12, the issue turns rather on love in community, the invisible becoming visible and experiential here. One thinks of the theophany (appearance of the divine) when God tells Moses, “you cannot see my face, for no one can see me and live” (Exod 33:20, NRSV). Moses would see the hind parts of God. The Hellenistic world presumed the invisibility of God, that God cannot be seen, as does 1 Timothy 6:16. At John 5:37 Jesus seems accusatory and at 14:9 explains to Philip that those who have seen him have seen the Father. In this latter case, Jesus stands as the decisive revelation of God (Barrett), the completed revelation of God (Beasley-Murray), but at John 6:46 the Johannine Christ as the pre-creational Word represents the lone exception. So in John if you have seen Jesus you have seen the Father, and the Word become flesh (the One with the Father) has seen God. The conditional “if we love one another” (v. 12b) makes two vital promises that portray how God may be experienced and seen indirectly. Two significant theological implications are drawn: (1) abidance of God and (2) the perfection of God’s love. Here God abides in the community among the believers, though Christ at John 15:4-5. The brackets, a kind of inclusio, emphasize loving one another (7a, 12b), making transparent the practical intention of the pastoral theologian. Both use “love one another,” the first one as exhortation (v. 7a), the second a conditional “if.” At v. 11b it appears as moral obligation. Reference to the love of God (v. 12d) could be understood as our love for God (objective genitive; Dodd), God’s love for us (subjective genitive; Brooke, Bruce, Brown) or God’s kind of love (genitive of quality; Westcott, Law). While the first suggestion is not likely because v. 12d follows from God’s love at v. 12c, it remains possible and consonant with the idea of John 13:34-35 that the writer means the divine sort of love happening in the believer. Though the latter belongs to the perspective of the text, the notion of God’s love for us fits the context more snugly. [Mainsprings to Loving]

187

188

1 John 4:7-21

First John 4:7-12, a singular passage indeed, reflects on a distinctive understanding of the love of God and how the love of God intertwines with mutual love of believers. Loving one another is interpreted as a sure sign of having being born of God (v. 7c), of knowing God (v. 7d), of abiding fellowship with God (v. 12c). It is not too much to say that by the epistemology of faith the apostolic community “knew” in the sending.

Mainsprings to Loving 1. The nature of God as love (4:8, 16) 2. The command to love one another (4:7, 12) 3. The act of God in loving us (4:9-10) 4. The appeal of completing the love of God (4:12)

Sure Signs of Abidance, vv. 13-16

At 4:13-16 we find transition from theology to experience as the question has shifted from how we know we love God to how we can be sure we safely abide. While polemic definitely remains in the wings, this pastoral paragraph reassures impressively with pivotal disclosures. The experienced pastor brings forward the assurance of abidance based on the spiritual presence of the Spirit (v. 13), authenticated eyewitnesses (v. 14), confession of faith (v. 15), and the assurance of knowing and believing (v. 16). The spiritual idea of indwelling, which stitches together 4:7-12 with vv. 13-16, plays a key role in providing assurance to the readers. Its use in v. 12 transitions to vv. 13-16 and could have been their impulse. It is quite telling that in six verses the verb menø (abide) appears no less than six times explicitly and twice implicitly, which represents 25 percent of the explicit usages in 1 John. It is probable that this presiding metaphor of abidance was contested in the Johannine house churches. Which type Christians truly abided? Abidance stood for a prized spiritual possession, the coveted status of spiritual security, a critical community concern. It includes existing in love (v. 16de) and the Spirit abiding in us (v. 13c). The astute author mounted quite a refutation with his unassailable signs as well as pointing to a convincing basis for confidence on the part of anxious believers. Possibly the new covenant complex of ideas is present here as Malatesta and others insist.12 Certainly such rudiments as the presence of the Spirit (Ezek 36:27; 1 John 4:13c) and an internal dimension (Jer 31:33; 1 John 4:13b) can be rustled up easily, and the offer of forgiveness (Jer 31:34; 1 John 1:5–2:2; 4:10), the lack of necessity to teach (Jer 31:34; 1 John 2:27), and the promise of knowing God (Jer 31:34; 1 John 2:5) resonate somewhat with other portions of 1 John. One finds it sobering to note, however, no use of the word “covenant” in John or 1 John, no quotation or

1 John 4:7-21

189

overt citing of the texts, no mutual indwelling in the Old Testament text in question. Parallel ideas are present, yet one may not be certain that John consciously intended Signs of Abidance in God (How You Know You Are a Christian) the new covenant. If so, he kept it subtle. [Signs of Abidance in God (How You Know You Are a Christian)]

1. Love for one another (v. 12bc) 2. The gift of the Spirit (v. 13c) 3. Confession of Jesus as Son of God (v. 15ab) 4. Abidance in love (v. 16de)

With the discernment formula “by this we know,” the author divulges that gift of the Spirit as a sure sign of mutual indwelling, its reality bestowed in turn by confession of faith (4:2-3). At John 14:16-17, the Spirit is portrayed as a gift to be received, known, and experienced only by the believer and not by the world. During the “Johannine Pentecost,” the Risen Lord imparts the Holy Spirit (John 20:21-22), there in a context of mission while in 1 John as assurance of abidance. The abidance in the plural “we” likely includes the recipients in a positive tone and therefore reflects a strong community orientation. The abiding “in him” most likely refers to God, rather different from John (15:3-7), where Jesus more characteristically functions as mediator in the experience of mutual indwelling. The experience of the Spirit becomes a hallmark of primitive Christianity, v. 13 reiterating and underlining 3:24cd. Verse 14 reads like the apostolic voice and apparently reiterates the witness of 1:1-3. The strong assertion tends to credentialize the sender(s) as well as authenticate the truth claims of the author. The Greek words for “see” or “behold” and “witness” (cf. John 1:34) appeared first at 1:1, 2 in a not dissimilar function. Verses 14 and 16 speak to the truthfulness of the faith, and both refer back to vv. 9-10. The competitive opponents of the church leader suffer a distinct disadvantage against one who can speak for the beginnings, appealing perhaps to the Palestinian stratum of the Johannine tradition. This strong rhetorical tactic was undoubtedly persuasive. The Greek form tetheametha, a perfect tense, can not only mean simply “see,” but it can also conjure up what is beyond the senses, “the event of revelation,”13 that is, a not ordinary perception. After all, the Johannine purview goes well beyond mere sighting of the historical Jesus to a high Christology, a seeing in faith (cf. John 1:32, 33, 34, 46, 51). This testimony represents contemplation of meaning. The present witnessing (v. 14a) reflects most likely the typical preaching style of the author but also materializes in the writing and reading of the letter itself. The Elder certainly claims for himself to be both abiding and in the Spirit, hence he could be claiming that his Epistle is inspired, but he also assumes that those who respond to the witness abide and enjoy the gift of the Spirit.

190

1 John 4:7-21

Incidentally, if the reading is accepted that v. 14 returns to the voice of the tradition at 1:1-3, then one would be hard put to accept the theory that the opening five verses of 1 John represented a previous apostolic witness while the remainder of the letter interpreted it. Judith Lieu, less willing to see the work of an eyewitness in 1 John, takes 4:13-16 in terms of the whole community. Perhaps, as Lieu muses, the writer utilized the language of witness “in virtue of his place within a group which saw itself as standing in continuity with the first witnesses . . . .”14 At v. 14b we come upon the third text on sending within a compass of only a few verses. We have (1) the loving sending by God of his Son so that believers may live through the Son (v. 9c), (2) the love-defining sending of his Son for the covering of sins (v. 10d), and now (3) the Father sending his Son as savior of the world. This latter category of Christology, savior of the world, is quite scarce in the Johannine literature, appearing only this once in the Epistle and a lone usage in John 4:42 by Samaritans who have heard and believed for themselves. The lofty title strikes a universal note, as do 1 John 2:2 and John 1:29; 3:16f; and 6:51. Surprisingly the word “salvation” (søt∑ria) occurs only once in John (4:22) and not at all in 1 John. It should be noted, however, that the paucity of explicit references to salvation and savior in John does not lead to the conclusion that the idea is marginal. The Greek verb for save (søzø) appears several times (John 5:34; 10:9; 11:12), and the idea of saving the world shows up as well (3:17; 12:47). Salvation is far less a critical category in 1 John, the verb curiously not present at all, but abiding carries some of its freight. God is depicted routinely as the savior in the Old Testament (Isa 43:3,11; 45:15, 21; 46:26; Jer 14:8; Hos 13:4) and in the New Testament (Luke 1:47; 1 Tim 1:1; 2:3; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4). The New Testament also bears witness to Jesus as savior (Phil 3:20; Eph 5:23; 2 Tim 1:10; Titus 1:4; 2:13; 3:6). The term enjoyed currency in the Hellenistic world as a title for gods, and Emperor Hadrian (AD 117–138), presumably later than the Epistle, carried the title. This usage does suggest the possibility that the vision of the world in 1 John might be at least as extended as the Roman Empire. Salvation can mean things like “cause to be saved from danger” and positively well-being. Here in our context it defines the universal mission of Jesus designed by God, a natural outcome from a God of love. Salvation in 1 John encompasses the presence of love, the loss of fear in the face of the judgment of God, the gift of eternal life, and expiation for our sins. It also involves walking in

1 John 4:7-21

the light and living a life of righteousness apart from the domination of sin. If “world” carries the connotations of thralldom to the Evil One (5:19), “savior” might address being transferred from death to a life of love (3:14). This savior rescues from an overcommitment to an ephemeral world and offers eternal life for those doing the will of God (2:15-17). Jesus himself lived out a saving ministry (Luke 4:16-30) and interpreted his own ministry as coming to save sinners (Mark 2:17; Luke 15:1-32). Verse 15, connected to v. 13 by mutual indwelling, opens with a strikingly open-ended and potentially inclusive “whoever may confess.” We meet here once more with a confession of faith (a homology), rather characteristic of the Epistle. These confessions of faith are not exactly alike. For instance, the confession at nearby 4:2 requires stress upon coming in the flesh, whereas here and at 3:24 the faith statement affirms Jesus in his Sonship. The willingness and ability to confess Jesus stood as assurance of the mutual indwelling, the spiritual union with God. While the community lies in view, the mutual indwelling has here an individual dimension (“in him or her”). This profession of faith might be public (John 1:34; 12:42), possibly before an unbelieving world (cf. Acts 18:5), in an environment where others evidently refused to do so within the community. At v. 16a the Elder may be drawing the faithful recipients into his affirmation of both knowing and believing God’s love. The writer and those he represents are not merely authoritative witnesses but fellow believers. These two categories in the perfect tense may point to conversion. Believing and knowing appear in John (8:31-32; 10:38; 14:7-10; 17:8), especially by Peter at 6:69 speaking also on behalf of fellow disciples, but these usages have to do with the identity of Jesus rather than the love of God. The latter part (v. 16b) can be understood in terms of God’s love for the Christian community (vv. 9-10), belief in the act of love and in Jesus as the Son inextricably bound. The Greek text, however, is literally “in us” (the preposition en in constant use throughout the Epistle), suggesting the idea of God’s love at work within, pointing to interiority once again as at v. 16de. Both definitions of God as love (vv. 8b, 16c) function in relation to disciples loving, the first as a kind of test, the second as a positive promise of abidance. Both seem to address the essential being of God. An overview of 4:13-16 nets several virtual confessions of faith that should not be overlooked. The Elder professes his own belief that God sent his Son to be savior of the world (v. 14b) and the resulting knowledge amid the community of the love of God

191

192

1 John 4:7-21

Christian Theology and Christian Experience Christian theology (4:7-12) and Christian experience (4:13-16) alike demonstrate that God is love and the origin of all love. Thus, for John, as for Jesus and Paul, gospel and ethic coincide-in love. R. E. O. White, Christian Ethics (rev. ed.; Macon GA: Mercer University Press, 1994), 200.

(v. 16b). He also implies his own willing confession of Jesus as Son of God (v. 15b). The witness of vv. 14 and 16 is one of seeing, knowing, and believing. [Christian Theology and Christian Experience]

Confidence in the Day of Judgment, vv. 17-18

At vv. 17 and 18 the author turns abruptly to the Day of Judgment (only appearing here in the Johannine literature but prominent in Matthew) with assurance that the loving and believing disciple need not dread it but actually enjoy vibrant confidence and a certain fearlessness. The Epistle does teach the hope of a coming day, a parousia (2:28), and actually presupposes one. In John judgment is frequently present or realized (3:18, 36; 5:24; 8:24; 15:6), though the idea of a last day does appear as well (6:39-40; 11:24; 12:48). While accountability before God is stressed in both Gospel and Epistle, in John the word “judge” shows up sixteen times and not at all in 1 John, and the word “judgment” appears ten times in the Gospel and only at 4:17 in 1 John. Previously in 1 John (3:2), the writer promised that believers would see and be like the Coming One. Now he fills in more about his assurance of boldness (parr∑sia), a characteristic Christian trait. Things like his persistent notion of the perfecting love of God among the believers and a particular Christian confidence in the eschaton (2:28) are by now familiar to the attentive reader of the Epistle. John opens the eyes of the recipients, as it were, with his disclosure formula “by this” (v. 17a) followed by a dramatic example of the fruition of the perfecting of God’s love, an increasingly meaningful category. This completing of the love of God not only points to a vital actualization in the believers but the infused divine love within, and it empowers the believer (v. 17de). The community, rather than merely individual persons, is envisioned explicitly as the plurals indicate. The Pastor asserts/promises that in such a moment of intense reckoning when one’s whole being comes under scrutiny, the Christian will actually experience boldness rather than frantic fear (cf. Rom 5:9-11). At v. 17c the typically important “just as” (kathøs) appears, a Johannine signature usually pointing toward modeling and ethics. Here, as regularly, the model is “that one” (ekeinos), which consistently refers to Jesus, though here one might understand it as reference to God. A pivotal principle for the Elder is taken for granted here in the assertion that the believer plays a

1 John 4:7-21

193

parallel role in the world to that of Jesus during his incarnation (3:7; cf. 2:6), despite the potentially misleading present tense. Jesus modeled love in a hostile world, and from his salvific mission of love (vv. 7-10) the believing community can extrapolate its role to actualize love in and for the world. Fear appears most prominently at v. 18, three times as a noun and once as a participle, though not elsewhere in the Epistle. Apparently the false prophets had disturbed the equilibrium of the recipients, causing them to doubt their salvation, possibly fomenting fear of the judgment. Or could it be that the opponents did not believe in judgment? Fear and confidence stand as polar opposites, with love the expelling power. In the Wisdom of Solomon, the writer also envisions dread for some whose sins are reckoned up but great confidence (parr∑sia) for the righteous person (4:20; 5:1; see also 4 Esd 7:98ff.). The thought here at v. 18 is even stronger than the concern about being ashamed in the last day earlier (2:28). The presence of love in the life of believers, in the view of the Elder, provides secure grounds for assurance, reflecting again his pastoral sensitivities. The children of God perfected in love need not have servile fear concerning the judgment of God and need not cower at his coming. While a wholesome psychological relief is a definite outcome of the argument, the passionate insistence is anchored in the presence of love as an unassailable sign of salvation, dispatching fear. The fear envisioned relates to anxiety about possible punishment Completing the Love of God (kolasin, only also at Matt 25:46), not to rever1. The sent Son who dies for the world ence for God. Love and fear belong among the 2. Believers loving one another 3. The loss of fear, the possession of confidence “incompatibilities” of 1 John. [Completing the Love of God]

4. Obedience to the divine commandments

The Necessity of Loving Brothers/Sisters, vv. 19-21

There is no fear in love, John declares, and then no hate in love. With effective polemical strategy John devastates the final boast, “I love God,” in vv. 19-21 as he dispatched fear in vv. 17-18. Though v. 19 reaches back to v. 10, it pivots logically and distinctively on the word “first” (prøtos, comparative form), taking aim at the selfserving boast of v. 20, also corrected at v. 10b. The “we love” (v. 19a), the voice of authentic believers, stands rather indefinite as to an object. Who do we love? Did he have in mind God or fellow believers? Scribal emendations to the text reflect efforts to clarify, such as “God,” “ him,” and “one another.” The apostolic witness was most exercised to emphasize the cause of Christians’ love over

194

1 John 4:7-21

against the boasters who stressed their own love for God, the persuasive rhetoric of the letter leading the writer with magnificent monotony to buttress assertions with logical reasons. While both love for God and love for one another inherently fit the epistolary theology, it is the more probable that he intended as the first object God in the light of the boast in v. 20 and the corrective at v. 10ab. Quite likely the opponents devalued not only the imperative to love one another but the extraordinary love inherent in the redemptive event of Christ (vv. 7-10), the latter contributing to the former. The writer utilizes the aorist tense “loved” (v. 19b), thus pointing to the decisive act of love. Neither God nor the true disciple merely claims/says love. Love eventuates as an act! This prototype of love functions as example, empowPriority of the Love of God (vv. 10, 19) erment, definition, and priority in disclosing Undeserved love (which is the meaning agap∑. Such extraordinary love evokes of “grace”) comes first from God to man. (“because”) love. The initiating love of God As a result, and in response, man can be a loving makes it possible for believers to be loving creacreature. “We could not love secondarily if he had tures. [Priority of the Love of God (vv. 10, 19)] not loved primarily” (cf. Maurice, 245). Furthermore, the divine origin of love confers on Verse 20, with its conditional structure, sends human love the probability of depth and continuity one back to the first chapter of the Epistle (1:6, (cf. John 15:16). 8, 9, 10) and calls up an earlier pattern one last Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC; vol. 51; Waco TX: Word time. The grammatical structure is hypothetical, Books, 1984), 262. F. D. Maurice, The Epistles of St. John: A Series of Lectures on making the test applicable to all potentially, not Christian Ethics (London: Macmillan and Company, 1893). just the secessionists. Sometimes the alternative contrast of saying is doing, but here saying love and doing hate. The opponents had apparently postured superiority in their relationship to God. The glaring inconsistency pertains to any in the community who declare their love for God while maintaining hate toward fellow believers (cf. 2:9-11; 3:15). The present tense suggests to “keep on hating,” a habitual behavior, not a single spiteful outburst. For the writer, the perpendicular and the horizontal, the love of God and fellow Christians, were indivisible. Loving God and hating constituted an incompatibility, indeed a religious lie! The declaration of loving God can be shown to be a falsehood, whether a self-delusion (cf. 1:8) or an outright prevarication or a calculated claim for effect. The writer takes the position that if a professing believer fails to love a visible brother or sister in faith, then that same person is interestingly “not able” (ou dynatai) to love an invisible God (v. 20de). Once again he supports his own claims with follow-up argument, here introduced by “for.” What does he mean by this apparently obvious statement about loving those you can see and the One you cannot? Clearly it serves his purposes, but does he

1 John 4:7-21

simply mean that the former is easier than the latter? Or is it that loving a fellow believer can be proved while in the nature of the case the latter cannot? Since this does go to his convictions about inseparables, failure in the one observable disqualifies for the other. For this distinctive Epistle, all religious claims can and should be tested by ethical outcomes. Then why is the one not loving others unable to love the invisible God? One suspects the answer resides in spiritual realities such as not belonging to the realm of God, not having been begotten of God (cf. 3:9), and not having known God. God’s love for us is not only more important than our love for God, but our love for God can only be verified by our love for fellow disciples. At v. 21 the author sums up his case for the necessity of loving one’s fellow believers, about which he is quite wrought up. The commandment (John 13:34-35) cited throughout this Epistle carries decisive authority for this writer as can be seen from his persistent passion for it since chapter 2. It is not too much to say that for him it has become scripture because it derives from Jesus at a defining moment and most likely because it stood already in his version of the Fourth Gospel. The source is expressed indirectly as “from him,” which could point to Jesus or to God or even to the Beloved Disciple. The references to God in the preceding verse and in v. 21 favor identification with God. Furthermore, God gave the two commandments of loving God and neighbor (Deut 6:5; Lev 19:18). Jesus spliced the two together (Mark 12:29-31; Matt 22:34-40). While certainty eludes, it appears most likely that the author had Jesus in mind, since he is explicitly portrayed as the one who gave (John 13:34a) the commandment to love fellow disciples as he loved them. Of course, John may have intended simply that God gave the commandment through Jesus. As at John 13:34-35, the emphasis here falls upon the imperative to love fellow disciples, as the second “and” or “also” (kai) tips the reader at 1 John 4:21, the “also” requiring both/and not either/or. At vv. 19-21, love for fellow disciples rather than reciprocal love is the explicit wording. Both at John 13:35 and here, the sure sign of authentic discipleship emerges as love. Apparently the author has restated the new commandment to fit his immediate context, though one can find approximate parallel at Luke 10:25-37. The urging to love one another (vv. 7, 11-12) from the author came into play not merely as a political wedge to win a public debate but emerged from the very heart of Johannine ecclesiology. Here stands a dramatic instance, furthermore, where the Johannine tradition does not merely reveal the “that” (das) but the “what” (was).

195

196

1 John 4:7-21

CONNECTIONS In addition to the implications of the exegesis and boxes above, other insights and applications can be drawn hermeneutically from this extraordinary exhortation to love. 1. The Sending Love of God

While sending stands out dominantly in John, in 1 John the concentrated segment appears here (4:9, 10, 14). The Elder does not work with an impersonal understanding of God— the Unmoved Mover or Force, as Aristotle wrote—but as a dynamic and personal God who acts by sending love through the direct means of the mission of Jesus. This intriguing and suggestive motif, at the center of the Johannine gospel, can function as a model for the church. We can extrapolate a missiology. Indeed, the The Church Sends church sends its ambassadors of love into all 1. Because of its own experience of the portions of the global village because of the divine love model of the divine sending (cf. John 20:21). 2. Because of its revelation of God as love 3. Because of its passion to proclaim its gospel of the love of God, to spread the idea of loving one another all over the world 4. Because of its desire to emulate God through self-giving embodiments of love 5. Because of its commitment to preach the redemptive death of Christ with its expiating forgiveness and its gift of eternal life

[The Church Sends]

Some people single out a personal text of Scripture for their lives. One who selected 1 John 4:19, “We love because he first loved us,” translated the New Testament into the English language. He gave the Bible to the common people at the eventual cost of his life. He would read his verse out loud to two small boys and call 1 John 4:19 “the pearly gate through which he entered the kingdom.” William Tyndale told the children about his personal experience. “I used to think,” he said, “ that salvation was not for me, since I did not love God; but those precious words showed me that God does not love us because we first loved Him. No, no, ‘we love Him because He first loved us.’ It makes all the difference.”15 Josiah Conder in his hymn “My Lord, I Did Not Choose You” includes this meaningful line: “I know that if I love You, You must have loved me first.” This sending love originated in a loving God who dared to love first. Norman Vincent Peale speculated, in what theologians would call anthropomorphic language, about what God might have said to the Son on the night before Jesus left to go to earth. He imagined the Father and the Son conversing much as a human child and parent might do before the child leaves home to go out into the world. With great simplicity Peale suggested that God might have said, “Son, I hate to see you go. I sure am going to miss you. I love

1 John 4:7-21

197

you with all my heart. But I do want you to go down to earth and tell those poor souls down there how to live and point them to the way that will lead them back home.” Peale thought the last thing God said to Jesus was, “Give them all my love.”16 2. The Self-giving Love of God

This loving God sent his only Son to die for others, this self-giving love the core attribute of the divine. Indeed, here in 1 John 4:8, 16 we encounter the greatest single statement about God in the Bible, the simple revelation of God as love. While the now famous word for love, agap∑, preceded the Christian faith, it is not too much to claim that New Testament Christianity placed a distinctive and lasting impression upon its connotation. [Man’s Man’s True Nature True Nature]

Man is the kind of animal who cannot

What does this agap∑ love look like? How do merely live. If he lives at all he is bound to seek the realization of his true nature; and to we chisel out its features? We can make at least a his true nature belongs its fulfillment in the lives modest start, naming aspects such as (1) the iniof others. The will to live is thus transmuted into tiating, sending at its heart (4:9-10, 14), (2) the the will to self-realization; and self-realization laying down of one’s life for others (3:16), (3) involves self-giving in relations with others. the intending of a forgiven and abundant life for Reinhold Niebuhr, Children of Light and the Children of Darkness (Upper Saddle River NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), 19. others (4:9, 10), and (4) self-giving rather than self-centered. This self-giving love is life giving. The intent of the love of God clearly includes (1) a forgiven life (4:10), believers freed up from sin and freed to love. The religion of 1 John, however, is not just a religion of forgiving sin. Forgiveness through the atoning death of the Son becomes the launching pad for life and love. The goal of the divine love includes (2) a quality of life (4:9) “with the tang of eternity about it, Worshiping this God of Love life reproducing in its possessors God’s own self. . . the influence of the world still opergiving love, life that can never die because it is ates; and there is no possibility of God’s own life,” as A. M. Hunter put it.17 The increasing our self-dedication until it becomes purpose of the love of God also includes (3) a perfect, unless we deliberately and repeatedly turn our minds toward that Love of God, the God life of love, indeed a community of mutual love of Love, to whom we would be dedicated. This is of extraordinary fulfillment (4:7, 11-12, 20-21). [Worshiping this God of Love]

the place of Worship in Christian discipline. If we already love Him, and in whatsoever degree we already love Him, we shall desire times when we give our hearts and minds to Him alone.

Todd Boling, one of my seminary students, shared how in his family giving a gift was a pretty big deal. Part of the tradition of his family William Temple, Christus Veritas (New York: St. Martin’s, 1924), 230. involved committing quality time to finding the most thoughtful gift, regardless of the monetary cost. This self-giving tradition makes Christmas one of his favorite times of the year. It all began with his grandparents. Rather impov-

198

1 John 4:7-21

erished early in their life together, they struggled to make ends meet and had a big farm family, but were very happy. Since they had so little, Christmas could have been downright unhappy, but instead it became a time of affirming and giving thoughtful gifts. One particular Christmas, Todd’s grandfather gave his wife a special gift. By then they were better off materially but still continued their tradition. His wife had mentioned that she needed a new winter coat. He decided it was time for her to have the most special coat he could find. When she lifted the coat out of its enormous box on Christmas day, she began to cry. She gently took her husband’s face in her hands and kissed his forehead and softly said, “It’s exquisite . . . I love it . . . thank you, my love.” The grandson present at that moment felt indelibly affected. A few days later he was far more affected. Wearing their new clothes, his grandmother and other family members went to the mall for the after Christmas sale. His grandmother looked positively royal in her coat. As they left the mall, they passed a woman, quite dirty and cold, sitting on the curb. Grandmother left the children together at the car and walked back to the woman on the curb. Todd could not believe his eyes as he watched his grandmother walk over to the poor cold woman, drape her new coat around her shoulders, gently hold her face in her hands, and kiss her softly on the forehead just as she had kissed her husband. She walked back to the car and said, “Let’s go home.” To this day they have never talked about it, but this self-giving love influenced the young man like nothing else. The saving of sinners represents a divine choice, the collateral damage and human hurt of sinfulness calling forth self-giving love. At great cost, God acted (1) to transform sinners, (2) to liberate us from bondage, (3) to help us all become new persons, and (4) to reconcile us to God and to one another.18 3. Cross-shaped Loving

Life for this Epistle is not like a candle that burns and then sputters out, rather great meaningfulness derives from the dying love for sinners by the Son, Savior, and Messiah (4:10; cf. Rom 5:7-8). While the word “cross” itself does not appear in 1 John, clearly the epistolary gospel finds in the death of Christ powerful evidence of the love of God. Indeed, we can say that love does not define God, but that God defines love (4:8, 16), and that divine love finds its most emphatic fruition in cruciform. God is not just magnified me in my best moments.

1 John 4:7-21

Fred Craddock tells the story about a family stopping to pick up a stray kitten on the side of a road against the protests of the father. “Daddy, if you don’t, it will die,” the children cried. When the father stopped the car and picked up the cat, the kitten managed not only to hiss at him but also scratch his hand. Some days later in the house, the father felt something rub against his leg. When he reached down, the cat did not bare its claws and hiss. Instead it arched its back to receive a caress. Craddock commented, “Not too long ago God reached out his hand to bless me and my family. When He did I looked at his hand: it was covered with scratches. Such is the hand of love, extended to those who are bitter.”19 For many the influence of the loving death of Jesus alone, without device or creed, is convincing argument enough. In Monrovia I heard a swaying African choir sing in such singular fashion these words: “It is enough that Jesus died, and that He died for me.” Buechner tells about a magical day in New York when the sun was shining and the sky was blue. A black woman walked past Buechner and said to him, like it was the most natural thing to say to a complete stranger on the sidewalk, “Jesus loves you.” This metro witness led him to urge the good news: Believe in the good news. Believe in what the black woman said. Hurrying along Central Park South, she didn’t even stop as she said it. It was as if she didn’t have time to stop. She said it on the run the way Mark’s Gospel says it. “Jesus loves you,” she said. It was a corny thing for her to say, of course. Embarrassing. A screwball thing to blurt out to a total stranger on a crowded sidewalk. But, “Jesus loves you.” She said it anyway. And that is the good news of the gospel, exactly that.20

The Jesus of the cross sends a loving signal to a secular world. 4. Loving One Another

The characteristic insistence upon loving one another in Christian community, showing up in the Epistle at least fourteen times, appears as nothing less than a passion in 4:7-8, 11-12, 20-21. Not only an advocacy of the faith to outsiders, it evokes a winsome vision of the Christian community as those who love one another. Some Christians in their communities put tennis shoes on the idea of loving one another. You can hear the love in the happy sound of hammers ringing out in a Habitat project. Volunteer roofers are soaked because of the rain while they nail down shingles; others tack insulation, saw flooring, seed the yard, bring food.

199

200

1 John 4:7-21

Love looks like a Bible and a key presented to the incoming family on dedication day. Loving one another takes other shapes beyond the borders. A Christian envisioned congregations giving bags of rice to starving people in North Korea, our reputed enemies. They lack the essentials of life. Some politely resisted the vision because of the politics and felt the enemy being aided, but others caught the Jesus view, and the sacks of rice in churches grew into mountains and weighted down the ships carrying their precious cargo. Children will eat, families will sit down together, people will survive because of love. What does love look like? It looks remarkably like a sack of rice. Other Christians feel and express solidarity with fellow believers in places like China and India and Indonesia who have been persecuted because of their faith. Missionaries take the gospel story to far-flung places, sometimes “two miles beyond the Great Commission,” out of a love in their hearts.21 For Sue Monk Kidd, her social action grows out of her spiritual retreats. She discovered a burning concern for hungry and homeless people because of her quality time spent alone in the Presence when she sensed “love songs” whispered from God. She recorded her story: “I began raising money to buy seeds for an African village and volunteered in a homeless shelter in Atlanta, cooking, befriending the residents. Now I could do it without the drivenness and need for approval I’d had before. I could do it purely for love.”22 She has found a way to love others that grows out of her relationship with a loving God. In real congregational life, the loving of one another often takes its finest form in groups like Sunday school, all too underrated. There things as profound as the overcoming of loneliness, the finding of family, the discovering of acceptance and inclusion, and the valuing of the individual frequently take place. Personal interest in one another’s lives, enjoyment of each other, valuing of uniqueness, thoughtful telephone calls and e-mails and cards, inclusion of someone of a different racial or economic circumstance, faithful attendance at funerals and Christmas projects do not characterize a good Sunday school class. Classes do their best to reach out to everyone, remembering that Jesus loved the tacky people too. Some people who are as lonely as a sparrow in the rain get up the nerve to come to church by themselves. Classes frequently become “caring fellowships,” as Wayne Oates used to say at Southern Seminary. This love of one another advocated with passion by the First Epistle of John is clearly a reciprocal love (4:7, 11-12), offering and implying the dimension of community. It does not merely picture

1 John 4:7-21

two believers caring for each other but an entire Christian group loving one another. The humble spirit that will receive love as well as extend it is nourished in healing fashion in Christian community. Reciprocal love amounts to nothing less than the Christian secret to meaningful community. Supportive love can carry a Christian through a personal crisis when someone loses someone they cannot do without, experiences an empty chair, a tear-stained pillow. Christians offer understanding during divorce and disease or death. In a Christian marriage, reciprocal love bonds. Rather than just the selfish model of a relationship for what you can get out of it, you can participate in mutual loving where the needs of both are met. When reciprocal love characterizes a marriage, both spouses can live abundantly rather than merely marginally. One wife lamented that her husband loved her but did not cherish her. When a couple offers love generously and receives it humbly, cherishing can thrive. Where prolonged hostility has prevailed, loving forgiveness can pave the way to a renewed relationship. Thoughtful kindness and doing to the other as you would have him/her do to you can transform a relationship. Christians sing, “Lord, I want to be more loving in my heart, in my heart,” but they can also add a stanza, “Lord, I want to be more loving in my relationships.” The obligation to love one another as a response to the love of God shows up regularly in the Epistle, belonging to its ethic. What “ought” we to do for our fellow Christians? We ought (1) to minister to them by sharing (3:17), even (2) lay down our lives for one another (3:16), (3) serve one another humbly (John 13:14), (4) model the Christian life as contagious example (2:6), and (5) take the initiative in extending love rather than hate to each other. Eternal life living comes down to a love existence, a present experience in Christian community. “You can tell they are Christians by their love, by their love” reflects a sentiment the Elder of our Epistle would second. Indeed, love is the essence of being a truly human being created in the image of God. 5. The Expulsive Power of Love

Our Epistle is quite aware of the immobilizing effects of fear in the expectation of divine judgment and the enlivening alternative of love leading to confidence (4:17-18). The concept of accountability, consummation, and divine judgment do belong to the framework of the letter (2:29–3:3; 3:19-21), bringing meaning to human acts and choices.

201

202

1 John 4:7-21

Idi Amin, remembered for his brutality, functioned as dictator of Uganda for eight bloody years. Rights groups believe his regime killed 100,000 to 300,000 people. Thousands of hastily disposed bodies wound up in Lake Victoria. Rev. Alfred Ocur, an Anglican priest in Lira, observed, “He should have lived longer to repent. He’s now gone, he’s dead, and it’s beyond our human control; but he’s going to face eternal judgment.”23 Interestingly, spanking children may be out, but the dreaded “time out” is in. If a preschooler steps over the line, and both terrible twos and terrific threes are skilled at doing so even defiantly, they have to go in time out. They cannot play with anyone or talk to anyone. They have to sit in a lonesome chair. When time out is over, a parent may ask if the child knows E. M. Forster. why he had to go into time out. Sometimes a parent will warn, “If you do that again there will be consequences.” One curious sister not in trouble persisted in wanting to know “what will be the consequence?” They are learning the reality of consequences. Our Epistle goes out of its way to assert that the genuine disciple who loves need not be intimidated by the prospect of divine judgment but may even enjoy confidence (4:17). Fear itself can be immobilizing. The gifted novelist E. M. Forster turned out successful novels at the beginning of his writing career, which were spun off into popular movies such as A Room with a View, Passage to India, and Howards End. He became so (Credit: Barclay Burns) obsessed with the haunting fear that his creativity would dry up that it caused him to lose his confidence. Though he lived to be ninety, some believe that this fear ended his novel writing. Fear can also paralyze a church, keeping it from moving into the future. [Hatred Paralyzes, Love Releases] [An Honest Prayer] In the theology of the Epistle, love expels fear and replaces it with confidence. Andrew Smith paraphrased 4:18: Hatred Paralyzes, Love Releases Hatred and bitterness can never cure the “Fear and love don’t mix. Real love throws fear disease of fear; only love can do that. on its rear, because fear has got it coming. Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred conWhoever still has fear doesn’t really love.” The fuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; presence of love in the life of the believer is a love illumines it. sure sign that fear is not appropriate. A person Martin Luther King, The Words of Martin Luther King (ed. Coretta King; New York: Newmarket, 1983), 90.

1 John 4:7-21

203

in a relationship who feels profoundly loved An Honest Prayer discards more and more insecurity and You alone know the fear and panic that sometimes breaks loose within me. I often feel that embraces confidence. A new hymn by if people could read my thought, they would think that I Graham Kendrick carries the theme “No am silly, neurotic, and so very sinful. I know that my Need to Fear.” The grand hymn “God of potential is being limited and jeopardized by my fear of Grace and God of Glory” includes the failure, my fear of exposure, and, yes—as strange as it prayerful call, “From the fears that long may sound—my fear of success.” have bound us, free our hearts to faith and Scott Walker, Life-Rails (Carmel NY: Guideposts, 1987), 37–38. praise.” We can live in the house of fear or the house of love. [The House of Fear The House of Fear or the House of Love or the House of Love]

6. Blessed Assurance

One day in 1983 at Harvard, Henri Nouwen preached. He spoke about two ways to live—either in the house of fear or in the house of love. He greatly influenced a hearer with the passionate conviction that Jesus was immediately present, here and now, that the house of love was real. The hearer, thinking at the time of leaving Christianity for Buddhist meditation, felt his heart and mind flooded by the reality of Christ.

Though the Epistle challenges and confronts those with only pretensions and boasts of Robert A. Jonas, ed., Henri Nouwen: Writings Selected (Mary Knoll NY: Orbis Books, 1998), xxvi–xxvii. knowing God, this passage, 4:13-16, emphasizes the deeply founded assurance for the genuine believer. Some stir up the insecurities of genuine Christians with uncertainties about their salvation and press for rebaptism, but 1 John provides impressive guides to the assurance of salvation in relation to the spiritual experience of abidance. We know that we abide (1) because of the gift of the Spirit (4:13, 26; 16:7; cf. Rom 8:16), (2) because of the sending of the Son (4:14; John 3:17), (3) because of our confession of faith in Jesus as the Son of God, a sure sign of salvation (4:15; cf. Rom 8:9), and (4) because of our knowing and “Thou Shalt Be with Me in Paradise” believing the love of God among On April 17, 1957, at five o’clock in the morning, trusted physicians in Richmond, Virginia, told my wife and me that our us. How do we know? By the four-year-old son was dead. He had lost an eight-month fight with example and command of Jesus, cancer. At eight o’clock I looked out the front door and saw Dr. Ted his sending witnessed by John, Adams walking to the house. He was God’s gift of an angel to us. On and his expiatory death on the Good Friday we laid our Bryan in the ground. He used to pray with his cross for us. [“Thou Shalt Be with Me eyes open, so he could see, he said, what to thank God for. And he in Paradise”]

Notes 1. Robert Law, The Tests of Life (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909); A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948).

said once in his sickness, “God is the best man in the whole world.” With the dogwood trees a fairyland and the azaleas bright with bloom, we walked across the rich green grass of spring and laid him in the ground. God’s great gift to me that day was Christ’s word to a penitent criminal. “Today thou shalt be with me in paradise.” Surely a God of Grace who opens the gates of paradise to a long life that has been evil will open them to a short life that has been good. On Easter Sunday I preached the gospel of the resurrection. Christ has opened paradise! Hallelujah! Raymond Bryan Brown, “The Promise of Jesus,” The Fire of Truth (ed. Richard Spencer; Nashville: Broadman, 1982), 120–21.

204

1 John 4:7-21 2. Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC, vol. 51; Waco TX: Word Books, 1984), 236. 3. A. T. Robertson, General Epistles and Revelation of John (Word Pictures in the New Testament; vol. 6; Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933), 232. 4. Ibid. Robertson, however, takes it as a timeless aorist. 5. I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John (NIBCNT; ed. F. F. Bruce; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), 212. 6. Smalley, 1,2,3 John, 238. 7. Ibid. 8. Ibid. 9. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992), 196. 10. Rudolf Schnackenburg, Jesus in the Gospels: A Biblical Christology (trans. O. C. Dean; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995), 287. 11. C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932), 112. 12. Edward Malatesta, Interiority and Covenant (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978). 13. H. Peisker, “theaomai,” EDNT 2:136. 14. Judith M. Lieu, The Theology of the Johannine Epistles (New Testament Theology; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 24. 15. Peter Gunther, ed., A Frank Boreham Treasury (Chicago: Moody, 1984), 20. 16. Quoted by Thomas Shepherd in “A House Divided,” Rev. Thomas Shepherd’s Theo-Blog, 25 October 2006, http://revtom-theo-blog.blogspot.com/2006/10/housedivided.html. 17. A. M. Hunter, Probing the New Testament (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1972), 56. 18. Paul Schilling, God and Human Anguish (Nashville: Abingdon, 1977), 255. 19. Fred Craddock, “Praying through Clenched Teeth,” in The Twentieth Century Pulpit (vol. 2; ed. James Cox; Nashville: Abingdon, 1981), 51–52. 20. Frederick Buechner, “The Kingdom of God,” in Great Sermons; ed. James Cox; San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1992), 106. 21. “Two miles beyond the Great Commission” was once a common saying among missionaries in the Philippines. It referred to an assignment beyond the call of duty. 22. Sue Monk Kidd, God’s Joyful Surprise: Finding Yourself Loved (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987), 107. 23. Henry Wassawa, “Notorious Uganda leader remembered for brutality,”Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 17 August 2003, A3.

The Cruciality of Believing in Jesus Christ, Son of God 1 John 5:1-12

COMMENTARY The exhortation to love (4:7-21) of the third movement leads on to the implications of believing (5:1-12). Love and faith are intrinsically linked (5:1). They are coordinate clauses held in tandem by “and,” and not only at 5:1-5, because Jesus revealed and embodied the divine love. Jesus, if you please, incarnated love, indeed divine righteousness as well (3:5, 7). To deny Jesus for our epistolary writer is to reject the love of God, the One on mission from the Father (4:10). Rensberger has it right that “All this love is one love; and love and belief twine inseparably around each other, and work indivisibly within each other.”1 In the final movement love first is displayed as the basis of faith in 4:7-21, and then faith is portrayed as the basis of love in 5:1-12 (Häring). At 5:1-5 the insistence upon loving one another continues (5:1, 2) but is bracketed now by believing (5:1a, 5b), as a skillful transition connects loving and believing, orthopraxy and orthodoxy. Alan Culpepper pointed out that 5:1 and 5 form an inclusion on the analogy of the characteristic two titles for Jesus in the purpose statement of John 20:30, 31.2 Some prefer to package 4:20–5:4a (Brown), but the rather abrupt introduction of believing (5:1) and the inclusion suggest a slightly more decisive albeit interrelated move. The christological brackets may signal an ascending concern, though the language of believing stands in the previous passage (4:14-16) with its emphasis particularly on the Son (4:9, 10, 14, 15), suggesting that one see in the mission and death of Jesus the love of God in revealing and redemptive action. At 5:1-5 the reader encounters a stirring text on “faith, the power that conquers the world.” Not surprisingly, given the christological conflict within the community, but significantly, the passage utilizes the language of credence (5:1a, 5b), but with a dynamism not only of

206

1 John 5:1-12

confession (2:22, 23) but of continuing to believe (present tense at 5:1, 5), hence an “active affirmation, not passive acceptance.”3 This passage also invokes once more “tests,” such as (1) believing Jesus is the Christ (5:1a), (2) believing Jesus is the Son of God (5:5), (3) loving those begotten (5:1cd), and (4) loving God and keeping the commandments (5:2, 3). At 5:1-5 the attentive reader will note (1) the second largest concentration of “everyone who” sayings in the Epistle (cf. 2:28–3:10), (2) the last use in the Epistle of the disclosure formula (“by this we know,” 5:2a; cf. 2:3, 5; 3:16, 19, 24; 4:2, 13) with its implicit assurance, (3) emphasis upon the begotten (5:1bcd, 4a), (4) a return to the insistence upon keeping/doing God’s commandments (5:2,3), (5) the motif of the believer conquering (5:4ab, 5a; cf. 2:12-14), and (6) the telling use of “and” (kai) with the sense of “also” (5:1c, 2d) when the author requires something more, especially concerning his opponents. At v. 1 the Elder insists upon a connection between believing and being actually begotten of God, the believing then becoming a sign of the authentic Christian. The verse does not take a definite position whether the faith preceded or followed the regeneration (cf. John 1:12), but 5:4 points to the vital role of faith. The believing has as its object the conviction that “the Christ is Jesus,” raising the natural possibility that this first affirmation refers to the messiahship of Jesus, the explicit identification of the messiah, especially because of the article “the.” In the Epistle, “Jesus Christ” frequently appears as a unit (1:3; 2:1; 3:23; 4:2, 15; 5:2), at other times a significant issue/assertion is to identify him as the Son of God (3:23; 4:15), yet the separate identification of Jesus as Christ appears twice (2:22; 5:1; cf. John 9:22; 11:27; 17:3; 20:31). Furthermore, Christ and messiah are used interchangeably in John (1:41; 4:25). Some in the community who departed (2:19) wavered concerning the messiahship of Jesus or outright rejected it. The failure to believe bleeds through here and there (2:9, 11; 3:10, 15, 17; 4:8, 20). This positive faith (5:1, 5) represented nothing less than an insight into the true identity of Jesus (cf. John 17:8), particularly in the light of the Johannine gospel (John 3:16; 1 John 4:7-11). What if the christological debate in the Johannine community ranged as broadly as to include messiahship, sonship, salvific atonement, and humanity? The conflict over messiahship vis-à-vis the synagogue naturally played a central role in John’s community (John 4:25, 29; 7:26, 27, 31, 41, 42; 9:22; 10:24; 11:27; 20:31) and presumably was hammered out well before the Epistle. It is certainly possible that the conflict with the synagogue (John) and the conflict with the secessionists (1, 2 John) were not quite the airtight compart-

1 John 5:1-12

ments scholars imply. Some of those with Gnostic leanings may have been Jewish. In any event, in 1 John Christ stands for messiahship reinterpreted in terms of divine sonship. The second major assertion, about loving (v. 1cd), likely was suggested by the mention of having been begotten (5:1b; cf. 4:7), but the dual requirement of believing and loving are what the reader has come to expect (3:23); indeed, the duo stands as the essence of Johannine Christianity. Neither the NIV nor the NRSV translate very literally, both conjuring up the image of parent and child and thereby obscuring the emphasis upon begetting. The actual Greek text pictures the begetter and the begotten. Indeed, the Greek allows for the definite possibility that the begetter intended could be God and the begotten Jesus as 5:18 (cf. Houlden; note the singular “the begotten”4). This fits quite well with the persistent insistence upon the inseparability of the Father and the Son. One can also point out legitimately that the text may be establishing the principle that those who love their parents should love their siblings (Marshall). Indeed, it does assume as much. The next verse, in the typical epistolary style of following on its own assertions, concerns loving the children of God (3:2a), making it most likely that the ones having been begotten (v. 1) were sisters and brothers in Christ. For the Elder, loving God and fellow believers belongs also to his category of inseparability. You cannot have one without the other! The backstory here is a refutation of those who claim to love God (4:20) yet spurn their fellow believers (3:15). The two “everyone who” assertions (pas ho) in v. 1 with their sweeping generalization add a certain authoritativeness sensed elsewhere in the Epistle, and once again they imply a certain openness to change and choice, an implicit invitation, a possibility for anyone. The two assertions each have a deductive outcome. The Elder assures his readers how they can be sure that they love each other (5:2), but the reader is in for a surprise. The author has kept the need and value of loving one another constantly before the reader (2:10; 3:11, 14, 16, 18, 23; 4:7, 11, 12, 21; 5:1). Earlier on he answered how one knows in terms of sharing with needy believers (3:16, 17). In a reversal of his typical way of thinking, he here certifies love of one another by love for God. It appears after all that he has a particular place in his faith for loving God, though he is downright suspicious of those who claim to love God but deny it by their attitude or inaction toward other believers. Adoration of God, a typical dimension of authentic worship, is certainly congruous for a theologian who understands God as light, righteousness, and love. [The Great Commandment]

207

208

1 John 5:1-12

The Great Commandment This is the only New Testament passage outside the Synoptic Gospels where we can be fairly sure of a direct reference to the Great Commandment with equal stress on each of its parts.

Once again the word “and” (5:2c) signals the author’s correction. The loving of God works its way out in terms of obedience to the will of God. He will emphasize again doing the divine commandments, doing being a decisive category V. P. Furnish, The Love Command in the New Testament, for him (1:6; 2:17, 29; 3:4, 7-10, 22). The (Nashville Abingdon, 1972), 151. Johannine Christ himself did the commandments of God (12:49, 50; cf. 5:36; 6:38), and Jesus regularly becomes the model for the believer in John (cf. 13:15). In the Farewell Discourses where the commandments are especially prominent, not surprising with all their other parallels to the Epistle, love and obeying the commandments are held together (14:15, 21, 23, 24, 31; 15:10). In the other Gospels, a commandment is singled out as great and first (Matt 22:36, 38; Mark 12:28). In 1 John the commandments in the plural include believing and loving (3:23). The lone use of the conjunction “whenever” (hotan) carries the possible take that in moments of loving God and faithfully doing his bidding, believers realize true love. The outworking of our love for God (objective genitive) in terms of keeping his commandments is left in no doubt at v. 3 with its explicit exposition (epexegetic). Note the typical expression beginning with “this” (haut∑, v. 3a), notable in the immediate context and indeed from the outset (1:5) and throughout (2:25; 3:11, 23; 5:4, 9, 11, 14). The explanatory clause (5:3b), following up on “this” clause (5:3a) as typically throughout the Epistle, clarifies the practical embodiment of love for God. The believer expresses love for God by obedience, defining Christian existence in relation to God. Here we find the uncompromising ethic common throughout the letter. The necessity to “keep” divine commandments actually is grounded in the Synoptics (Mark 7:9; Matt 19:17; 23:3; 28:20), John (14:15, 21,23; 15:10) and the Old Testament. Clearly our author did not invent his insistence on keeping commandments as a handy antidote to the problems arising with schism but faithfully drew it from the tradition. In Johannine thought, Jesus, himself the model, keeps the word of God (John 8:55). These commandments are not “burdensome” (5:3c), a declaration reminiscent of Deuteronomy 30:11-14 and Matthew 11:28-30. The Greek word can mean “heavy,” “to weigh down,” or “overcome” (cf. Matt 23:4). This Christian life envisioned is not burdensome in comparison with a life of hating when one has the option to participate in a community of mutual love. Loving a world that is fading away is far more burdensome (2:17a).

1 John 5:1-12

Believing and loving do not weigh down those who have been begotten of God and empowered by the Spirit (3:24–4:6). Indeed, as the Elder will develop in the next two verses, believers can overcome the world through (1) obeying God, (2) loving the children of God, and (3) believing in Jesus. At v. 4 a causal clause buttresses the claim of the previous verse with the explanation that whatever (neuter as 2:16, all inclusive) has been begotten of God conquers the world. With great confidence in the power of the new birth, the apostolic writer sees the keeping of the divine commandments as doable. The regeneration that empowers the believer is an act of God. The spiritually privileged “begotten” conquer in a this-worldly context, a hostile world not so easily overcome. The present tense is open to the understanding “keeps on conquering the world.” This conquering presumably includes (1) freedom from the love of the world and its things, including the desires of the flesh and the eyes (2:15-17), (2) liberation from the domination of the Evil One (5:19), the powers of darkness, and (3) freedom to love and believe and obey. One cannot really explicate the first part of v. 4 without the latter half as the author follows up, providing his own commentary (epexegesis). Writing in a decidedly triumphant manner, he indicates with his typical demonstrative “this” clause his claim that faith in Jesus becomes the acclaimed victory. Note that the faith is conceived of from the standpoint of the community, a corporate dimension (“our”). Faith here, most unusually for John, comes packaged as a noun rather than the typical verbal understanding. Even here, though the believing includes intellectual content, faith contains an underlying dynamic aspect. Believing and being begotten lead to a decisive overcoming. The final verse of the first paragraph on the cruciality of faith comes full circle with the rhetorical question, “Who is the one conquering the world?”—a category prized previously by the Elder (2:12-14) and prominent in the Johannine literature. While the question functions rhetorically, the author supplies the identity of the conquerors as those believing. Hence v. 5 becomes a ringing assurance for the faithful readers (cf. 5:13) but stands over against those who deny (2:22, 23). He spells out further the content of the believing: the Son of God is Jesus. We are reminded indirectly of the opponents and the christological controversy between them and the Elder’s party. Jesus himself overcame the world in Johannine thought (John 16:33), especially in the “lifting up” (John 3:14; 8:28; 12:34; cf. Rev 1:5). [Conquering: A Presiding Metaphor in Revelation]

209

210

1 John 5:1-12

Conquering: A Presiding Metaphor in Revelation The book of Revelation, belonging to the Johannine circle but at some remove, develops the motif of conquering while addressing believers under duress. Note the prominence of conquering in the letters to the seven churches in its first movement (1:7; 2:11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21). The author offers conquering as a meaningful selfunderstanding of the Christian life. The theme affirms the divine victory over evil. “It is grounded in the almighty God who made this universe, and whose will cannot be finally frustrated by any power in heaven or earth or hell,” wrote BeasleyMurray. “It is grounded in the God who has wrought redemption in and through Christ, the power of which is experienced in the world now, and the end of which is the subjection of all things to God.”

The identification of the Son of God as Jesus points not merely to transcendence but to a significant role in the thought of the Johannine community. The title “Son of God,” appearing twenty-two times in the Epistle, shows up no less than ten times in this final chapter with its touting of faith. Believing in the Son of God when unpacked can include (1) seeing him as savior of the world (4:14), (2) depending upon his atoning sacrifice (1:7; 4:10), (3) confessing him publicly, (4) abiding (2:24), (5) accepting the witness of those from the beginning (1:1-3; 5:9), (6) experiencing eternal life (1:1-3; 5:11-12), and (7) perceiving the salvific love of God in the sending of the Son (4:7-11). The category of Son of God appears in the Epistle as quite prominent, indeed decisively. As 4:7-21 G. R. Beasley-Murray, Revelation (London: Oliphants, 1974), 46. reflects on the first part of the declaration of John 3:16ab, 5:1-12 expounds upon the promising latter portion of John 3:16cd. Verses 6-12 bear witness to the identity of Jesus as the Son of God. Indeed, there is a “topos” or topic witnessing about “his Son” (5:9d, 10d, peri tou huiou autou). Three witnesses, water and blood and Spirit, are called forward to certify the Son. The assumption of the probative power of witnesses (as 5:8) is obviously drawn from the rules of evidence in a courtroom (see Trites), particularly Jewish insistence upon the necessity for two or even Witness in John 1 In John the reader encounters early on a three credible reports that concur (Deut 19:15). bevy of witnesses to Jesus as Lamb of God by the Baptizer (1:29), the Messiah by Andrew (1:41), the One anticipated by Moses and the prophets declared by Philip (1:45), and the climactic portrayal as Son of God from Nathanael (1:49). The reliability of witness often appears at issue in John (5:33, 36, 39; 7:17; 10:25, 38; 14:11).

[Witness in John 1]

First John actually opens dramatically upon the authoritative basis of apostolic witness to the aural and tangible and visual reality of the “Word of Life” (1:1-3; also 4:14). Here at 5:6-12, however, the method of argument reaches a climactic point, bringing forward several forms of the word “witness” in a dramatic reiteration of ten times in only six verses! The concerned Elder not only buttresses confidence in faith for his struggling recipients, but also takes on the christological denials (2:22-23) he was exercised to combat. He intends to convince. Verses 6-8 concern the testimony of the three witnesses. This mysterious text beginning at v. 6 speaks in symbolic language typical of the Johannine “frequency” but with more indirect

1 John 5:1-12

metaphor than usual for the Epistle. This symbolic code (water and blood) predictably has kicked up an interesting debate. By “water” and “blood,” does the text intend flashbacks to the baptism and death of Jesus, or possibly a reference to the unusual mention of both water and blood flowing from the pierced body of the crucified (John 19:34), or even to the witness of baptism and the Lord’s Supper in the community? Does the writer oppose something like Cerinthian Gnostics who accepted the presence of the Christ at the baptism of Jesus but denied it at the actual death of Jesus? Spirited advocates abound on all sides. Since scholarly consensus does not exist, any approach to this problematic text for the contemporary reader, probably quite clear to the original recipients, must be based upon a clear methodology. The would-be interpreter needs to ask if water and blood in combination appear elsewhere in 1 John or the other Epistles or in the Gospel of John. Do water and blood and Spirit show up in John, are 5:6 and 4:2 parallel in intent, and how does the Elder tend to use the Greek preposition en ? One can begin easily enough with the discovery that water does not appear elsewhere in 1 John, suggesting that the author expected the readers to discern the symbolic import without explanation, perhaps from the tradition of the Gospel of John. On the other hand, blood does appear in the Epistle with the significance of the cleansing blood of Jesus effective for forgiveness (1:7). At least as a working hypothesis, we can begin with the opinion that blood at 5:6 carries a similar redemptive significance. If this is so, then it is likely that the water also carries an important redemptive reference. Not finding water and blood in tandem in the Epistles, we turn to John and find one strange but possibly symbolic and relevant text. At John 19:34-35, also a text, not unimportantly, that seeks to convince by authentic witness, blood and water do show up in combination but not in the order of water and blood at 1 John 5:6. Both of these bodily fluids relate to the same event, that of the crucifixion. In the context of John 19, the blood and water flowing from the spear wound likely were intended either to point to the real death or bodily existence of Jesus or both. If the intention of the Evangelist at John 19:31-37 were to stress an actual death, to be followed by a real resurrection at 20:27, then v. 34 would buttress the notion of a real humanity. If both water and blood are required to demonstrate a real body, then the likelihood that 1 John 5:6 along with 4:2 press for a real humanity of Jesus would be strengthened. One would be left with the problem of why some accepted Jesus coming by water but refused to confess that he also arrived by

211

212

1 John 5:1-12

blood. Since some opponents claimed to have no sin and hence no need for forgiveness (again 1:5–2:2), they might predictably profess no need for a redemptive cross. If furthermore they believed that the Christ descended on Jesus at baptism but withdrew prior to his suffering, they would posture themselves as water only—that is, baptism, yes, but atoning sacrifice, no. They might have focused only upon their conversion/baptism/enlightenment and felt no further need for forgiveness and atonement. Were they subject to what has been named “baptismal triumphalism”? The next logical step, obtainable in any concordance, is to see if and how water appears in John. Not only do numerous usages appear, but some seem intrinsically important. The one that draws attention like a magnet belongs to the Nicodemus discourse in John 3 for the salient reason that water and Spirit show up in tandem. Here water can refer to the waters of birth or to baptism. In any event the new birth transpires as a Spirit event (Culpepper). Nicodemus reflects a Johannine-like faith toward the works of Jesus as signs of the working of the divine (3:2). His reply to Jesus’ abrupt insistence upon rebirth implies that he took the statement of Jesus as requiring a second birth (3:4). The sequence in the dialogue (3:5) opens the distinct possibility that being born of water and the spirit could refer to the waters of physical birth as well as the spiritual new birth via the Spirit. Were one to buy the theory that water here means physical birth, then possibly water in 1 John 5:6 could refer to the physical birth of Jesus and hence to his humanity. If, on the other hand, one were to accept John 3:5b as a single event, then both water and the Spirit are required for entrance into the kingdom, thus water symbolizes baptism, a topic otherwise not under consideration in John 3 but so used by the Baptizer (John 1:31, 33). One certainly finds both water and Spirit implied as present in the baptism of Jesus himself (1:32), though the baptism as such is not recounted in John. Here the Baptizer and the Spirit witness to Jesus as the Son of God (1:34) along with the use of the word “this” to identify Jesus. Martinus deBoer has gone so far as to speculate that both at 1 John 5:6 and John 1:33, the allusion is to Jesus the Baptizer! On this reading, 1 John 5:6 would relate to the baptizing aspect and the atoning death as twin towers in the redemptive work of Christ. Another important development with water metaphorically understood can be found in the familiar story of the Samaritan woman at the well. Ordinary water soon zooms into the metaphoric territory of spiritual or living water (4:10; see 7:37-39). Jesus offers a spiritual water that gushes up to eternal life (4:14).

1 John 5:1-12

One might even hypothesize that the Elder had in mind the coming of Jesus to the distressed disciples on the stormy lake, the walking on the water (6:16-21). Interestingly, the uses of bread and blood appear in close proximity (6:35-59), though bread is featured more extensively than blood. Of these alternatives from the Johannine treasury, the reference to the baptism on the analogy of the Baptizer, the reference to the death of Jesus on the cross as elevated to an equal or greater pinnacle (his bleeding documented by John 19:34), and the sense of its atoning significance implied at John 6 seem the best backgrounds. Verse 6 of 1 John 5 itself opens with the characteristic demonstrative “this” (houtos), which we could render “this very one.” The writer intends to identify Jesus as this very one, as Jesus qualified and defined in terms of water and blood, important to his Christology and deficient in the teaching of the false prophets. This characteristic demonstrative construction functions in revelatory fashion as a disclosure, belonging to his arsenal of argumentation. The text speaks of Jesus as the one “having come” or “who came,” reminiscent of the manner of referring to his mission throughout John and possibly parallel to 1 John 4:2. The Greek aorist tense points to a previous event. This choice of tense tends to eliminate the ordinances/sacraments from primary consideration here. Passages such as 4:2 and 5:6 and even 2 John 7 should be seen in similar perspective with their common stress on the coming. Likely 1:1-3 should also be bracketed with them, the coming there portrayed as revelation. This image of the One coming likely carries the related notions of coming from the Father and coming into the world (1:1-3; cf. John 16:28, 30, 31). The author characterizes the manner of the mission of Jesus as by water and blood, utilizing a preposition (dia), which could be rendered as “through” or “by means of,” or simply “with” (Moule). This preposition means “through” with other prepositional phrases in 1 John (2:12; 4:9), while in tandem with touto it translates as “for this reason,” or “therefore,” or simply “the reason” (3:1; 4:5). In the latter part of the verse (6bc), a different preposition (en) shows up either for stylistic variation or possibly to connote slightly more instrumentality (as John 1:26). Elsewhere in 1 John, this preposition proliferates significantly with the usual translation “in.” When used in a prepositional phrase with the article “the,” as at 5:6, the preposition is naturally rendered as “in” and the article is nearly always translated (18 out of 23 usages). When combined with touto it can be read as “by this” or “in this.” In the Greek text of 5:6, the inclusion of the article “the” before both water and

213

214

1 John 5:1-12

blood (6b) may argue for two different events. Those two events, if we judge from John, are the baptism of Jesus (1:29-34) and the death of Jesus (19:31-37). They both have asterisks of verification as it were (John 1:32-34; 19:35). Both situations for the Evangelist become reasons to believe. They are sealed by witnesses. Having made this identification of Jesus Christ as the very one who came by water and blood, the Elder immediately opposes any reductionism of Jesus’ coming by blood, touching potentially upon both the salvific dimension of the death of Jesus (de Boer) and its reality, even possibly on the continued presence of “Christ” during the death. The fluids reported at John 19:34 could verify a real body and/or a dead body. A real body would point more to the Docetists who taught that Jesus only seemed to have a tangible, fleshly body. See the discussion at 1 John 4:2. The water-only position, clearly combated in 1 John 5:6, could point to a tendency like that represented by Cerinthus, who taught that the Christ descended upon Jesus at baptism but withdrew before the suffering of his death. It could also be a reaction to those “unbelievers” of whom Ignatius warned who took the position that the crucifixion amounted to no more than a semblance or something similar. Both denied the “blood” and hence its salvific import. If John 19:34 is in fact the original source of the terms blood and water, then the Docetists would appear the most likely of the two options. Indeed, 1 John 1:1-3, 4:2, and 2 John 7 potentially or actually oppose the Docetists who denied the humanity most unambiguously. Of course, it may not be Docetists or Cerinthians specifically, but those who centered faith in baptism and thought they had no other sins since. I suspect, however, that both belong to the penumbra of the Epistle. The Greek constructions (v. 6b) are themselves quite telltale, such as (1) the initial “not” to signal an opposition to any version that deletes the atoning death from the equation. Furthermore, (2) the striking use of “only” implies the existence of those false prophets who accept only the coming by means of water. The author also chose the adverb “only” (monon) at 1 John 2:2 to avoid a misunderstanding and to expand a perspective by being more inclusive (cf. John 5:18; 11:52; 12:9; 13:9; 17:20). Additionally, as if to leave no doubt regarding the true Christology, the writer added (3) “but on the contrary” (adversative use of alla) by both water and blood. The apostolic writer claims furthermore the very present witness of the Spirit (v. 6c), either in the sense of the writing of the Epistle itself or more likely vis-à-vis both water and blood, baptism and

1 John 5:1-12

215

crucifixion, the beginning and the ending of the ministry of Jesus. You can package all this by placing the flesh (4:2) in between the bookends of water and blood.5 The author, however, may be resisting adoptionism both at 5:6 and 4:2, given his view of incarnation. The present witness, at least for the Gospel, could be through the testimony of the Beloved Disciple (Brown), itself inspired by the Spirit (John 19:34-35) and true. Earlier in the Epistle, the author has advocated and reminded his readers of the anointing of the Spirit that teaches the The Celebrated Story of the Comma in 1 John believers (4:6; cf. John 16:12-13). Both in After v. 7, additional words appeared for the Epistle (4:6) and in the Gospel (16:13), several centuries in the official Greek text of the Spirit’s reliability is accentuated, here at the NT called the Textus Receptus (the Elzevir text). 5:6d in a causal clause backing up its First, these extra words, “witnessing in heaven, the witness. The Spirit in John witnesses conFather, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one,” provided an explicit Trinitarian formula. Then, cerning the Son (15:26). making a parallelism, these further sentiments added, Verses 7 and 8 bracket with 6, but the “And there are three witnessing on earth,” followed by thought expands to claim three witnesses to the Spirit and the water and the blood of v. 8a. Despite Jesus, the Spirit and the water and the this textual tradition, supporting evidence is virtually blood (v. 7), with all three of them concurinconsequential and support for its absence overring (v. 8), hence meeting the Jewish ideal whelming. These extra words, clearly a later intrusion, do not appear in the Greek Fathers or in the best manuof two or three witnesses (Deut 17:6; script tradition. Furthermore, the extra words read like 19:15). At John 17:23 we also have the an abrupt break, and one would be hard put to explain agreement of the testimonies (eis hen). Here why the text was omitted by hundreds of copyists of at v. 8, distinct from v. 6, the author may Greek manuscripts. think of baptism and communion in the Then how did these words enter the textual tradicommunity, both of which bear witness to tion? The earliest record of this text goes back to the 4th-century Spanish treatise titled Liber Apologeticus, “the mighty acts of salvation” in the minwritten by Priscillian or possibly Instantius. Perhaps the istry of Jesus. If v. 8 does suggest baptism words began as a comment on the margin of the text and communion, could it be that those only to be inserted eventually into the actual text. It was who advocate water only base everything on not included in the Latin Vulgate until after AD 750. It their conversion/baptism and hence believe enjoyed no support outside of Spain until the 10th they are free of sin since that time and have century. Reformers like Luther and Zwingli rejected them, and Calvin went along reluctantly. During the era no need of redemption through the cross of the Reformation, Erasmus produced two editions of (de Boer)? The issue in vv. 10-12 will be the Greek text without these “extra words,” only to be receiving the testimony that Jesus is Son of met by an assault from the editor of the Complutensian God. [The Celebrated Story of the Comma in 1 John] Polyglot and general clamor. Erasmus relented and Verses 9-12, a climax toward which the included it in his third edition after being shown manuauthor has been driving, concern believing script 61, which itself may have been altered. These words went on to become a part of the official Bible of the testimony of God concerning his Son the Roman Catholic Church and of the King James (see v. 10d). At v. 9 the author seems to Version. Critical editions of the Greek Testament since add God as yet a fourth witness, standing Lachmann in 1831 do not contain these extra words. once more in the trajectory of the Gospel See Carroll D. Osborn, “Johannine Comma,” ABD 3:882–83 (John 5:37; 8:18). In the rhetorical spirit of

216

1 John 5:1-12

persuasion, he appeals to general opinion (ad hominem) with “if ” or “since” human witness is accepted, “how much more” then should one accept divine witness, moving from a general practice to a higher plane. At John 5:31-36, self-testimony is dismissed aa inadequate, and the testimony of the Baptizer is recognized yet considered less than probative, so nuanced differently from 1 John 5:9. Both texts do appeal to divine witness as a “greater plateau” of a probative status. This usage of “greater” represents the third and final assertion of the “greaterness” of God (3:20; 4:4). The Elder buttressed his argument with a causal clause “because” (v. 9c), identifying the nature of the divine witness as concerning God’s Son. He does not spell out the witness of God, though one might gravitate to the voice at the baptism and the transfiguration in the Synoptics, but in John the divine witness was given through the “works” or signs that Jesus accomplished (5:36, 37), and the witness is also evident in the Scriptures that offer testimony to the Son (5:39, 46), particularly the prophecy of Moses (see Deut 18:15). One thinks of the answered prayer before the tomb of Lazarus (John 11:38-44). The Father also witnesses through the words of Jesus (12:44-50). In the Epistle, the emphasis falls upon the human response answering as it were to the testimony of God (v. 10). The person believing finds affirmation and interpretation of her or his faith in the inner self or heart. The language of the positive thesis includes the typical Johannine construction “believing into” the Son (cf. 5:13; 36 times in John) with the likely connotation of personal commitment as well as credence. The ones not believing, the antithesis in that much reiterated rhetorical style, make God a liar by rejecting the divine witness itself. While the phrase “the one not believing in God” is not what one initially expects, and alternative textual traditions exist, it makes perfectly good sense since the testimony of God is at stake. Here the polemical thrust balances the pastoral, the opponents being criticized. His opponents have been accosted regularly with the hot accusation of lying (2:4, 22; 4:20). At v. 11 the author makes a second assertion about the witness, typically calling upon his construction originating with “this” as an identifying clause as in v. 9. With an expository follow-up (v. 11b, epexegetical), he discloses that God has given the gift of eternal life, the good news of the Johannine gospel. At John 3:16 the immediate gift is the unique Son, eternal life being the intended purpose. (The further gift of understanding can be found at 1 John 5:20.) Not only has God made available such an extraordinary gift, but eternal life is wrapped up inseparably in the Son (as 1:1-3). The

1 John 5:1-12

Life resides in the Son. Indeed the two are inseparable (v. 12; see Matt 11:27; Luke 10:21-22; 24:16). Though grace as a word does not make an appearance in the Epistle (but see 2 John 3), the idea is all bound up in the gift of eternal life. If revelation is featured at v. 11 (as 1:2a), response is accentuated at v. 12. [Clues to the Positive Content of Eternal Life]

217

Clues to the Positive Content of Eternal Life Inklings about the dimensions of eternal life abound in the Gospel. Among them we name the following: 1. satisfaction of spiritual thirst (4:14; 6:35) 2. everlasting life (4:14; 6:40, 51, 54; 12:25) 3. light for life (8:12) 4. abundant life (10:10) 5. knowledge of God (17:3) 6. transference out of a deathly existence into a new realm (5:24) 7. a gracious gift of God (6:33; 10:28; 17:2)

The great either/or of the Epistle appears cryptically in thesis and antithesis (see John 12:44-48; 15:1-6), presuming an unambiguous accountability. The Son of God has been quite the decisive christological category throughout the Epistle, appearing at 1:1-3 and 5:13, with beginnings and closings being inherently important. Indeed it finds its place in the text 22 times, 10 times in chapter 5 alone, 4 times in chapter 4, 8 times in chapters 1–3. The Elder spells out the mission of the Son variously (1:7 and 4:10; 3:8; 4:14; 5:20). Not surprisingly, the author utilizes the language of “having,” here in terms both of having the Son and thereby having eternal life. Both eternal life and having will be addressed again at 5:13. At vv. 11-12, an implicit evangelism lurks. Implicit Call to Decision A noted past theologian, Emil Brunner, One may choose to believe or not. The imporstressed the necessity for humanity to tance of receiving shows up at John 1:12 and say either “yes” or “no”: “The evasion of decision 3:32. It is in coming to Jesus that one may have does not help him in the least, for the very refusal life (John 5:40). The gravity of the choice to decide is decision.” Again, writing on humanity emerges in John 3 as well (vv. 18, 36). (unfortunately only in the masculine), Brunner Throughout the final movement (4:7–5:12 or says, “He has not the freedom to decide or not to decide, but only that of saying ‘Yes’ or ‘No.’” 13), John 3, as concentrated in 3:16, parallels Emil Brunner, Man in Revolt (trans. Olive Wyon; New York: whatever the literary sequence may have been. Lutterworth, 1939), 222.

[Implicit Call to Decision]

CONNECTIONS 1. Loving God, 5:1-2

Our Epistle stresses reciprocal love among fellow Christians in memorable fashion, but the natural expectation to love God underlies his admonition to care for one another. Our writer understands quite well that “God makes the first move in the game of love” (4:19). Furthermore, the God revealed is decidedly lovable as seen incredibly in his sending and redeeming love (4:7-11). This God of

218

1 John 5:1-12

1 John, who is light, goodness, and love, invites loving response. If more of us imbibed a vision of God like that of the Elder, we would find a more lovable God than some of us presently entertain. In her sonnet “Lord, Dost Thou Look on Me,” Christina Rossetti spoke of responding to the loving look in the eyes of God by launching her heart to heaven. In prayerful tones she wrote, O Lord, that I may love Thee make me wise; That I may see and love Thee grant me sight; And give me love that I may give Thee love.6

One of the psalmists, out of gratitude for God as strength and rock and deliverer and the one in whom to take refuge, declared, “I love thee, O LORD” (Ps 18:1, NRSV). Many learn to love God when they get in touch with their gratitude. Some have learned to love God because they first fell for Jesus. Some love God simply because they exult in the sheer existence of God. Some of us have fallen in love with God because of divine likeness to the father in the Jesus parable of Luke 15:11-32. Some of us have come to love God because of a loving relationship with a Christian, often a parent or pastor or Sunday school teacher. Perhaps the majority of Christians have come to love God because of the crucifixion, struck, even bowled over, that at precisely the time we were enemies God reconciled us (Rom 5:10). Those who love God are fortunate because they are shaped and fashioned by what they love. Jesus urged disciples to love God with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength. Those who love in all these ways have all these faculties shaped progressively by loving. Bernard of Clairvaux realized that the basic reason to love God lies in God, sensitive as he was to what was lovely in God. In his famous setting out of four degrees of love, Bernard suggested first that persons love themselves for their own sakes, then they love God as something necessary to their welfare, then from there some move to love of God as God, and ultimately loving herself or himself for God’s sake.7 These stages imply how loving God spurs spiritual growth. Bernard’s hymn “Jesus, the Very Thought of Thee” reflects his personal devotion. 2. Loving God by Loving Others, 5:1-2

One of the passions of the Epistle lies in its passionate call for reciprocal love (2:10; 3:11, 14, 16, 18, 23; 4:7, 11-12, 21; 5:1), a part of the genius of the understanding of believers in community.

1 John 5:1-12

219

Bryant M. Kirkland shared his Saint Bernard of Clairvaux awareness that people actually die from lack of love. He told a story about the power of love. In Germany a survey was taken of a pediatric group in an orphanage. A Lutheran deaconess of ample proportions and simple garb was pointed out with the explanation, “That is Image Not Available Anna, our miracle drug. When due to lack of digital rights. we have a baby for whom we Please view the published can’t do anything else, we give it commentary or perform an Internet to Anna. She holds it, loves it, search using the credit below. cuddles it, humors it, plays with it. She brings it back to life.” Mutual respect and love can bring a church back to life. Some of us might prefer to love God and be excused from loving those whom God begot. It is far more challenging to love some fellow Christians than to love God. Besides that, some Andrea Sacchi (1599–1661). Portrait of Saint Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux, c. 1650. de Versailles et de Trianon, Versailles, France. (Credit: Jean Popovitch. Réunion genuine saints have been known Chateaux des Musées Nationaux / Art Resource, NY) to be obnoxious. In Christian family life, believers are invited not only to love their parents but their sisters and brothers. Sibling rivalry sometimes robs the joy of loving within the family system. Christianity happens in relationships, not just relating to God from the alone to the Alone, not just a cell phone call to the celestial city. 3. Loving God by Keeping the Commandments, 5:2-3

Our Epistle finds a natural link between obedience and love, a respecting of the divine will that eventuates in lived-out truth. The Apostle Paul perceived the criticality of the obedience of Jesus in his authentic Sonship (Phil 2:8). Dave Timmerman shared a personal story of how he spent seven years devoting his free time to playing the saxophone. He did not do it because of exceptional musical talent. He did not do it even out of a love for music or the sax. He did it because he knew that his father, who had died a few years before, loved music. He recalled the day he brought home the

220

1 John 5:1-12

band sign-up sheet in fifth grade. It included a list of different instruments he could play. He asked his mother what was his Dad’s favorite instrument. “Saxophone,” she replied. Decision made. He wanted to play it too. Even though his dad was dead, he still loved him and wanted to please him. He found out what his father liked and did it. Loving God is much the same. You find out what God likes and then do it. We discover what God likes through his commandments. Fosdick’s classic hymn, “God of Grace and God of Glory,” astutely connects adoring and serving, “serving Thee whom we adore, serving Thee whom we adore.” Living the Christian life is not a bothersome burden but the avenue to true life. 4. Seeing the Invisible God and Realizing Who Jesus Is

While God cannot be observed optically, God can be perceived where Christians love one another, a strong apologetic for God in the world. God can be seen in the inspiring example of Jesus (as 4:7-11) and when signs of the perfecting of God’s love show up in the life of a believer. An AP student in humanities, when exposed to the big questions for the first time, felt she could no longer believe in God. Asked what she thought about Jesus, she beamed, “I really like him.” “God is like Jesus,” her pastoral friend responded. From a parallel passage in John, one can call up witnesses to aid in realizing who Jesus is, including the testimony of a contemporary unusually sensitive to the will of God, John the Baptizer (5:32-35). The very works of Jesus scattered generously all over his ministry reflect for the spiritually perceptive the activity of God (5:36). God’s testimony itself can be called upon (5:37) at times such as the baptism and transfiguration of Jesus. Not only are these convincing witnesses available, but the Scriptures themselves also bear witness to Jesus, as the prophetic expectation of a prophet like Moses and Isaiah 53. Finally, one may turn to the internal testimony of the heart (1 John 5:10). 5. Overcoming, 5:4, 5

What does it look like for a believer to overcome the world? It looks like liberation from bondage, from secular allurements, from potentially overpowering desires. It looks like liberation for loving. Opting for love, the believer jettisons hate as a way of life. She leaves thanatic existence behind in favor of giving (3:17) and

1 John 5:1-12

221

loving, grounding life in lasting values (2:17). Overcoming happens in those aspiring to live like Jesus (2:6). Overcoming looks like walking in the light, living a righteous life, loving. What it means to win and to conquer has been redefined on the cross (Boring). In Luke we see signs of messianic A Classic Sermon: “The Faith that victory in the outcomes of the ministry of Jesus Overcometh” (7:22) and in forgiving love for enemies (6:27; John Keble in his sermon preached that “to overcome this world is really to turn 11:4; 23:34). In John one sees victory over peraway from the things that seem desirable in it secution (16:33) and over death (11:25). In and give them up for the sake of better things out Revelation overcoming involves victory over of sight . . . .” He pointed to Stephen on his knees death and sin (5:5). [A Classic Sermon: “The Faith that Overcometh”]

6. Choose Life, 5:10-12

praying for his murderers while rocks flew into his face, to the Apostle Paul faithful while imprisoned, and to the resistance of Jesus to the prince of this world as when he routed him, “Get behind me Satan” (Luke 4:8; cf. Jas 4:7). Keble called to mind the temptation of Joseph (Gen 39:9). He urged the resisting of the sins of elder life such as covetousness and discontent and greediness.

Clearly committed to the uniqueness of Jesus and linking belief in him as Son of God with life, our apostolic writer calls for decision and John Keble, Sermons for the Christian Year (selected and introduced by Maria Johnson; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 127, commitment. Though God offers the gracious 128–30. gift of life, he does not fling it at us but tenders it to us through an invitation. The uniqueness of Christianity is Jesus Christ, the one who deserves to be the goal for all humanity. In other religions we can affirm what is Christlike. In Amsterdam one morning, a wide circle of young people gathered in the courtyard in front of the Centrum just beyond the last canal. College-aged students had slept outside on the wharfs. There were knapsacks, bicycles, and sleeping bags all around. Some of the crowd sat on the concrete or reclined on their luggage. Most were standing. Three singers stood at microphones backed up by two electric guitars and a terrific drummer. They had great sound. They came on strong. The singers were compelling. Then a soprano in faded jeans went to the mike and belted out “Choose Life.” “When it’s all over, it is counted up,” she sang, “choose life.” Then she gave her Christian testimony and said a good word for Jesus. She had an obvious passion for her audience of international students to wake up to how important their lives were, that it does matter what you do with it, that in Christ is life. 7. The Relevance of the Comma

The apparent addition to the text of 5:7-8 treated above stands out as an embarrassing example of dishonesty in religious scholarship. Even though the rudiments of a doctrine of a triune God can be

222

1 John 5:1-12

found within the New Testament, including 1 John, this forgery of Holy Scripture by ecclesiastics remains profoundly unacceptable. This represents the kind of theological dishonesty that keeps skeptics skeptical. There must be intellectual honesty, academic freedom, and careful research in order to achieve integrity in Christian faith. The Scriptures should not be used as an arsenal of prooftexts for beliefs already held. We should rather go to the biblical texts in expectation of fresh truth breaking forth. 8. Seven Scriptural “Fundamentals”

Morgan Patterson, a distinguished church historian, sought foundational insights into the nature of God, the mystery of redemption, and the way of the Christian life. He dared to call them “fundamentals.” During a divisive conflict within his denomination, he arose as a wise and gracious spirit to bring a potentially unifying breadth of perspective. It could one day bring people together. His seven core beliefs, three of which are found in 1 John, are grounded in 1 John 4:8 (character of God is love), 2 Corinthians 5:19 (reconciliation through God in Christ), 1 John 5:12 (the Son and Eternal Life), 1 John 1:9 (confession of sin), 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (inspiration of Scripture), John 13:34-35 (love for one another), and Matthew 28:19-20 (the Great Commission).

Notes 1. David Rensberger, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1997), 130. 2. Alan Culpepper, “The Pivot of John’s Prologue,” NTS 27:25, 26. 3. James L. Houlden, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (BNTC; New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 122. 4. Ibid., 123. 5. Ibid., 127. 6. Christina Rossetti, “Lord . . . ,” in English Poetry of the Nineteenth Century (ed. G. R. Elliott and Norman Foerster; New York: Macmillan, 1958), 556. 7. Bernard, On Loving God (London: SCM, 1959), 61–62.

Epilogue: Celebration of Certitude 1 John 5:13-21

COMMENTARY The latter segment of our Epistle can be read as a miscellaneous jumble and as further evidence of an unformatted flow. I contend otherwise, however, that it bears considerable resemblance to a classic epilogue. Indeed, 5:14-19 and 21 move away from the thematics of the third movement (4:7–5:12) and return to earlier concerns regarding sin in the community particularly and its remedy (as 1:5–2:2; 3:4-10), pointing to a purposive conclusion of the entire Epistle. These final verses do not represent a “postscript”1 or an “appendix.”2 This final pastoral concern to protect the traumatized community from further erosion gives away the probable threat of losing believers not only through the influence of the so-called antichrists or secessionists but through moral defection (see 2:15-17), a predictable problem in second- and third-generation congregations (cf. Jas 5:19-20). These twin threats are not always separable. If 1:1-3 is an exordium or prologue stating the subject, 5:13-21 meets several of the Aristotelian ingredients for a good epilogue. Throughout the letter the Elder has sought to prove his tradition’s credibility and the lack thereof of his opponents, as Aristotle and Cicero recommended. Here in these latter verses, the author not only scores a central conclusion (5:13) and chastises his opponents indirectly (5:16-19) but excites the emotions of his readers and recapitulates some of his main points as Aristotle requires (Rhetoric 3.19.1). Many of the trunk line themes of the Epistle show up in the epilogue, summing up (see Cicero, On Invention 1.53.99). A kind of celebration of certitude characterizes this conclusion. On this model, the explicit absence of the love command admittedly is notable.

224

1 John 5:13-21

Similarities/Distinctives between 1 John 5:13 and John 20:31 There are 18 Greek words in 1 John and 23 in John, with 14 words overlapping. Believing, eternal life, and Son of God are bound up together. Both texts speak for writings with the rhetorical intent to persuade. Nearly all the components are present in both texts, but the constructions remain distinct. The purpose constructions “in order that” are pivotal for intent, the Gospel text possibly translated “that you may come to believe” reads more like an evangelistic intent. The epistolary text with its assurance of knowing is more pastorally oriented to believers. The Gospel text alone contains the assertion that Jesus is the Christ, to which it gives considerably more emphasis. Commentators on John recognize subsidiary purposes. Other lesser differences between these two purpose texts exist. One does wonder whether to bracket v. 13 with 5:1-12 (Smalley) or with 5:14-21 (Haring, Law, Painter).

The Purpose of 1 John, 5:13

Verse 13 of chapter 5 plays a key role in the Epistle clearly parallel to a similar passage in content and position in John (20:31), the differences in turn conveying a sense of the distinctive purpose of Gospel and Epistle. This striking parallel to John suggests either commonality of authorship or a conscious emulation of the Gospel of John or conceivably of 1 John, probably from a Johannine circle or school. [Similarities/Distinctives between 1 John 5:13 and John 20:31]

On the other hand, the verse not only enjoys connection with 5:14-21 because of Son (5:20) and Life (5:16, 20), but more impressively it inaugurates a fresh round of reassuring claims of knowing (5:13, 15, 18, 19, 20). One could maintain that 5:18-20 in particular extends, comments, applies 5:13. The believing of 5:13, for that matter, finds implementation in the confidence in prayer at vv. 14-15. Placing the verse with 5:14-21 furthermore allows one to see 5:13 as in a sense the primary purpose statement of the entire Epistle, while not denying how interwoven it is with the immediately preceding and proceeding. The verse is climactic in the sense of achieving what the Epistle promised. The paragraphing of 5:13 by itself, additionally, visually has the advantage of giving the impression that the verse (1) plays a larger role, (2) preserves the flow from 5:10-12, yet (3) leads into 5:14. The special role of 5:13, with its obvious ties to the opening verses at 1:1-4, can be tested further as we develop an exegesis drawn from the entirety of the Epistle. The first word in the Greek text rendered “these things” (tauta) could refer to the immediately preceding (5:11-12) in a limiting fashion. At 2:26 the writer used exactly the first three words as at 5:13a, where it seems to refer to the immediate context, both preceding and following. The usage with “we write” in the prologue (1:4), however, may be more pertinent in that both at the beginning and at 5:13 the Elder thinks of the entire Epistle. Early on in the Epistle, the author utilizes the present tense in speaking of his writing (1:4; 2:1, 7, 8, 12, 13), but later on he prefers the aorist tense ”I wrote” (2:14; 26) as at 5:13. Some designate the usage here as an epistolary aorist, that is, as it will be by the time of reading rather than writing. One could say that the writer has climaxed his

1 John 5:13-21

225

own development of 3:23-24 at 5:11-12. Indeed, one should probably say so. Perhaps then it would not be so disingenuous to posit that “these things” refers both to the immediately preceding (5:11-12) but climactic set of assertions and hence to the entire Epistle. Significantly, a purpose construction “so that” (hina) introduces the assurance signaling conscious rhetorical intent. The stress upon knowing at v. 13 underlines the pastoral assurance so characteristic of the Epistle, especially emphasized by Pheme Perkins and Ruth Edwards.3 Sprinkled throughout the Epistle, one finds not only tests but disclosure formulas, “by this we know” or “this is how” (NIV). Often in 1 John the emphasis falls upon knowing God (2:3, 4, 13, 14; 4:2, 6, 7, 8; 5:20), and elsewhere the believer knows herself indwelled by God (3:24; 4:13). This knowing of God includes a relationship, fellowship, experience. The sentiment that knowing assures our hearts appears at 3:19. Tokens of assurance are ample throughout (3:2, 14; 5:11, 12, 15, 18, 19, 20). It should not be forgotten, even in the context of 5:13, that a contest of knowing underlies the Epistle. At 5:13 the author lays claim, as it were, to a persistent thrust all through the Epistle, enhancing the legitimacy of the verse as the primary purpose statement. The verse takes on far more import because it picks up potentially all the preceding texts of knowing. Some of the readers may have felt intimidated by those posturing in supercilious fashion from a position of spiritual superiority. In effect the author in steely fashion urges the readers not to underestimate the historical faith or their personal faith. The Epistle rhetorically conceived not only engages in polemic to expose the secessionists (2:19) and invalidate their influence but also builds up the confidence of upset believers. Indeed, in my How the Elder Has Made His Case along the view, in no small part because of 5:13, we Way should characterize the Epistle as pastoral1. By persistence, a certain magnificent polemical in that order as I have maintained for monotony, since the first sentence several decades. The author consistently wants 2. By deductions from the character of God good things for his readers from 1:3 forward and 3. By appeals to the Johannine tradition (“from beginning”) is imbued with genuine pastoral motivations. [How the Elder Has Made His Case along the Way]

4. By appeals to experience 5. By a profound centering on love for one another 6. By proclaiming Jesus as the Son of God

The assurance consists in nothing less than “having” eternal life (3:15; 5:12). This personal “having” (echei) in the present tense suggests a present possession. Hence the author proffers eternal life as something the believer participates in while alive and not just after death. Since the verb “have” is so common, one easily can miss its

226

1 John 5:13-21

vital significance in the Epistle and in John as well. “Having” includes an interior dimension, something within (3:15; cf. John 6:53). See further comments at 5:20. The Epistle regularly calls attention to the present spiritual possessions of believers. Eternal life itself in 1 John is (1) inseparable from the Son who is eternal life (1:1-3; 5:11, 12, 13, 20), (2) a gift of grace (5:11, 16), (3) interior (3:15), (4) a present possession (3:15; 5:12), The Essence of Eternal Life and (5) a transformed human existence, oppo. . . for Johannine dualism eternal life is site of death (3:14). Eternal life then is not qualitatively different from natural life merely everlasting in the durative sense. John (psyche), for it is a life that death cannot destroy 17:3, perhaps the nearest thing to a definition (John 11:26). Duration (everlasting, or even with its characterization in terms of knowing without beginning) is not the primary issue; it is a God, offers a superb beginning place to an life from another eon (aiøn, whence aiønios) or sphere. Indeed, it is the life of God Himself; and enlarging understanding of eternal life. Many since only the Son has come down from that commentators, such as Judith Lieu,4 see eternal sphere and from God, he is the only one who can life as the starting point and basic framework of communicate that life. More simply, Jesus Christ the Epistle. [The Essence of Eternal Life] is the eternal life (I John 5:20). The latter part of the verse, concerning Raymond Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982), 168. present believing in the name, is often rendered in contemporary translations first, stressing the necessity of believing. While this is not materially objectionable, assessment in the sequential order of the Greek text allowed us to emphasize the “knowing for sure” that is critically central for this pivotal verse and the entire Epistle. The expression believing “in” or “into,” unlike propositions about Jesus introduced by “that” (5:1, 5), means personal trust.5 This expression, so characteristic of John (as 1:12) with its thirty-seven usages carrying overtones of mystical union, strikingly shows up in 1 John 5:13 to define the saving relationship with Christ. This construction “implies complete surrender of the person,” as Hartman put it, “to the divine revelation in Christ.”6 The “name” in the generic sense points to the essence of a person, the name and the person virtually interchangeable. For the Elder and his community, the name of Jesus took on particular significance (see 3 John 7), coordinated as it is with forgiveness (2:12) and Life (5:13; John 20:31). Of course, the Son embodies Life (1:1-3). The exalted title Son appears as the dominant designation in the Epistle of the true identity of Jesus a full twenty-two times, ten times in this final chapter alone. The Son is unique (4:9), an expiatory sacrifice (4:10), savior of the world (4:14), eternal life (1:1-3; 5:20), and possibly true God (5:20). The Elder’s theology requires not only believing in God but believing in the Son of God as well. [The “Name” in the Gospel of John]

1 John 5:13-21

227

The “we know” of v. 15 connects The “Name” in the Gospel of John with “you may know” of v. 13 and 1. In sections where the Evangelist clearly speaks, his words are definitely about believing in the name of with the impressive series of “we Jesus (1:12; 2:23; 3:18; 20:31). know” in vv. 18-20, hence bringing 2. In passages unrelated to chapters 14–16, when the together the entire section. If witness Johannine Christ speaks in his role as revealer, it is consisunited 5:6-12, assured knowing ties tently about the Father’s name (5:43; 10:25; 12:28; 17:6, 5:13-21 together. With cumulative 11, 12, 26). rhetorical effect, the author closes on a 3. In chapters 14–16, Jesus speaks about prayer in his name with the promise of answer by the Father (14:13, 14; 15:16; rather resounding litany of ten certi16:23-26). tudes in addition to the primary 4. Jesus speaks of the Holy Spirit sent in his name (14:26) and assurance of eternal life (v. 13). There persecution in his name (15:21). are two certitudes in vv. 15-16, three in v. 18, two in v. 19, and three in v. 20. The certitudes recall earlier themes and texts, though there are a few new words not heretofore mentioned. This pattern unearthed reflects the conscious artistry of the author. Some have tried to make a case that 5:14-21 is an interpolation by another hand but had to resort to some theory of intentional imitation because of the obvious stylistic similarities. Signatures, such as “we know,” “everyone who,” “if anyone,” and “out of God,” along with typical terms such as “boldness,” “children,” “begotten of God,” “sin,” and “Son of God” make this untenable. It grossly underestimates the rhetorical success of the epilogue. Confidence in Prayer for the Wayward, 5:14-17

Verses 14-17 belong together despite variety in topic; indeed sin in the community plays a considerable role throughout the section from v. 16 right into 21 and uncovers a concern. The notion of “having” in a realized sense, typical of the Epistle, actually binds vv. 12, 13, 14, and 15, having the Son, eternal life, boldness in prayer, and answers to prayer. Recapitulation can be found also regarding sinning and not sinning, the role of the Evil One, being begotten of God, the advent of the Son of God, being in the truth and in the Son, and knowing. The spirit of assurance bleeds over into 5:14 from 5:13, the two verses linked by “and” (kai). The verse opens with a promising disclosure utilizing the demonstrative identification construction scattered plentifully throughout the Epistle, identifying here the boldness believers have toward God in prayer (see John 11:41-42). The reference “to him” (5:14a) most likely refers to God, as at 3:21 explicitly, rather than to the Son of God at 5:13, though it stands in close proximity as a potential antecedent. One could argue that its antecedent would not be the entire chris-

228

1 John 5:13-21

tological title but “of God.” The reference to “his will” (5:14) and “the requests made of him” also refer to God. The primary intention here may not be simply a confidence in prayer taught and claimed (3:22), dominical in nature (Matt 7:7-12), but a pastoral concern to recover straying believers. The RSV does well to paragraph vv. 14-17 together. The Elder sees prayer as a potent means of turning erring believers back to faithfulness. So in effect he addresses potential persons of prayer as a way to bring some people back into the community. He hopes to encourage receptive readers to be involved in a ministry of prayer that will stem the tide of moral relapse and defections. Of course, praying for straying believers stands in sturdy continuity with the new command to love sisters and brothers. The argument here is that vv. 14-15 belong with 16-17, vv. 14-15 not being a simple reiteration of a previous declaration. Specifically the verb “ask” (ait∑sei) in v. 16 is the same as the one used once in v. 14 and three times in v. 15. The Elder returns to a place where he has already been (3:18-21) but takes it a step higher (spiral). See the comments on prayer at 3:18-21. There the qualification for answered prayer is that of a life of obedience, here a prayer accorded to the divine will. At John 16:23-26 prayer in the name of Jesus is stressed. The Elder urges the receptive to pray according to the will of God (5:14b), the will of God being an important and explicit category for the writer and the community (2:17). The “will of God” not only qualifies the content of answerable prayer but purifies the process of praying itself. Most certainly praying for erring brothers and sisters falls within the province of the will of God. Such prayer avoids selfishness and takes responsibility for others within the community. It raises the level of prayer and alters the content. This once again reflects the meaningful ecclesiology of believers belonging to one another, caring for one another (3:17), and being bonded; 5:16 is a significant “second seeing” of one’s fellow believer in the Epistle. Perhaps the Elder hoped to challenge the congregation itself to make bold prayer for the wayward a priority. He presents the section at vv. 14-15 in hypothetical terms using “if,” reflecting his common tendency to think in terms of conditionalities and building his argument in stair steps. Verses 14-15 function foundationally to support his important appeal toward intercessory prayer for the relapsing. The reader should take note not only of the fantastically crucial qualification of prayer within the orbit of the will of God but also of the added dimension of being heard (5:14), a profound aspect about Johannine prayer. Being heard by God offers an extraordi-

1 John 5:13-21

nary gift to these traumatized disciples. The Elder, who portrays God as love, thinks of God as One who listens to his children. One wonders if the apostolic author made his distinction between sins that lead to death and those that do not (5:16-17) because of misunderstanding in the community. The people may have needed urging to pray for straying fellow believers, not only because erring itself represented a manifest threat to the community but also because some may have labored with the misconception that all sin disqualifies, making such intercessory prayer superfluous. Indeed the absolute language of Johannine theology with its claim that the truly begotten no longer sin, as nearby as v. 18, may have become a deterrent to this kind of prayer for some. Though the attention of the modern reader fastens upon the ominous and mysterious sin to death, our author may be more exercised to speak to his category of sin not to death, mentioning it twice in one verse. Since literally the sentence indicates a believer or community who saw another sinning (aorist), one could delineate this category of sin as outward, public sin (Westcott). Some have taken the position that there are no intrinsic distinctions among sins (Calvin), but this text fails to support that familiar position. It is most likely that the writer has in mind sins such as those at 1:8–2:2. These latter sins are not defined, but the passage does realistically recognize that believers sin, though it is no longer their essential character. While specificity about those sins at 1:8–2:2 or at 3:16 are denied the modern reader, they would not have included hatred of fellow believers and failure to believe. In any event, these sins are something done for which a person is accountable, and something forgivable because of the atoning sacrifice of the Son, his atoning death (2:2; 4:10). The category of sin unto death may have been a common belief already in the community. Apparently these sinning believers, to whom the Elder directed prayer, have not crossed the line into mortal sin. The text (5:16b) promises the gift of eternal life to those prayed for who have been sinning. While the promise could be read as an answer to prayer without any involvement by sinful believers, the author likely thought of contrition and confession (like 1:9) as outcomes of the praying. Perhaps prayer for repentance was in mind. Some have preferred to identify those for whom to pray as nonbelievers, though they might have thought of themselves as believers (Stott). Verse 18 in such close proximity could be marshaled in support. In the broader context, it is far more likely that fellow Christians are envisaged, given the use of the word “brother” (adelphon). Our church leader fondly hopes for a rekindling of Life

229

230

1 John 5:13-21

within the wayward person. The literary positioning of this concern regarding sin in the community and confession, in the first paragraph after the prologue or exordium (1:5–2:2) and in the final paragraphs of the Epistle, is quite telling. While 1 John never mentions the word “grace,” one is instructed by taking full note of important usages of the word “give.” God has given (1) love (3:1), (2) his own Spirit (3:24, 4:13), (3) eternal life (5:16-20), (4) answer to prayer (5:16), and (5) the Son of God has given understanding (5:20). The word “grace” appears quite sparingly in John as well (1:14, 16, 17), not at all in 3 John, and only once in 2 John 3, but its essence is by no means missing. As to “the sin unto death” itself, one suspects from contextual considerations that it has to do with the adversaries, with those who become antichrists by denying that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (2:22-23). The writer then may not be so much introducing a new idea as reflecting the outgrowth of an assertion such as 5:12. The failure to love one’s fellow believers likely comes into play as well. First John, and for that matter the Gospel of John, does not contain the idea of hell or Hades. The Gospel does think of spiritual death, of cessation, as an alternative to eternal life (3:16). The word often translated “perish” does not appear in 1 John (but see 2 John 8). Interpreters have reacted to this notion of a mortal sin with a variety of theories, and similar ideas are present elsewhere in the Bible. One finds in the Old Testament the distinction between inadvertent, unconscious sin, and deliberate sin with a high hand (Lev 4:2, 13, 22, 27; 5:15, 17-18; Num 15:27-31). The synoptic Jesus warns about being ashamed of and denying the Son of Man and his words (Mark 8:38; Matt 10:33; Luke 9:26; 12:9). Both a Jewish heritage of deliberate sin and the Christian unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit are potential background (Brown). John 3:18 seems critically important as a Johannine parallel with its requirement of believing in the Son of God. We have encountered already in 1 John a firewall of judgment on those denying that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (2:22-23), having the Life and believing in the Son being inseparable (5:11-12). The primary thrust of the sin tending toward death most likely focuses on the orthodoxy of belief in Jesus as Son of God and the orthopraxy of loving one another (3:23). The absence of these two aspects signals life in the world dominated by the Evil One (5:19b), an existence embracing death rather than life. Scholarly identification of the sin unto death runs a considerable gamut, which is understandable

1 John 5:13-21

since the author did not spell out its precise nature. [Typical Identifications of the Sin unto Death]

231

Typical Identifications of the Sin unto Death 1. Acceptance of heretical doctrine or wanton transgression of divine commandment (Bultmann) 2. Heinous sins for which there is no pardon, such as murder (3:15), idolatry (5:21), injustice, apostasy, adultery, fornication (Tertullian). (See Jub. 33:12-18.) 3. An over-rigorous application of the unpardonable sin (Mark 3:28-29) in the heat of controversy (Dodd) 4. Christ-rejecting behavior and implicit rejection of the atonement. See Tim Ward, “Sin ‘Not Unto Death’ and Sin ‘Unto Death’ in 1 John 5,” Churchman 109 (1995): 236–37. 5. The secessionists who denied Jesus Christ come in the flesh (Brown) 6. Mortal sin as distinguished from venial (less serious, pardonable) sins (Roman Catholic tradition) 7. Any sin that deliberately rejects the claims of Christ persistently (Brooke) 8. Sins incompatible with being a child of God: denial of Jesus Christ as Son of God, refusal to obey commands of God, love of the world, and hatred of one’s fellow believers (Marshall)

Whatever the sin, the Elder did not say that it was irrevocable. Change on the part of the gross sinner is not excluded. The preposition “toward” (pros, 5:16) can have the idea of “tending” in the direction of death. Death itself throughout the Epistle is the dire opposite of eternal life. This sin places one in the sphere of death. The Elder does not encourage prayer for those sinning so flagrantly, but neither can one absolutely say he forbade it. The realism of the schism and the ongoing competition influence his contextual stance. Later Ignatius would call heretics “beasts” to avoid entirely, yet he recommended, “only pray for them, if perchance they may repent, difficult though that be . . . ” (Ign. Smyrn. 4). The text makes two clarifications at 5:17, the first reinforcing the seriousness of all sin by an author with an exceptional abhorrence of sin, the second reinforcing the important distinction of sin not to death. The definition of sin as unrighteousness takes the reader back to the middle movement of the Epistle, especially 2:29–3:10, where sin is antithetical to the righteous character of God. The word “all” functions as emphatically inclusive. Verse 17a represents the third distinction in this paragraph about sin, sin not to death and sin unto, or toward, death being the other two. The writer intends hope, a new way of seeing, a motivation for intercessory prayer on behalf of fellow believers. Closing Crescendo of Certitudes, 5:18-21

We find remarkable the number of times in these closing verses when the author claims with cumulative emphasis, “We know.” Having distinguished between sin that is and is not unto death, the author immediately makes clear that he has not abandoned his core conviction that the one born from God does not sin (5:18a; see comments at 3:6, 9). The writer remains consistent about the absence of sin as the pattern of living for a believer, though he constantly makes provisions for believers who do sin (1:9; 2:1;

232

1 John 5:13-21

5:16-17), caring pastorally as he does for sinners. The agenda for the believer is no longer the world but the will of God, hence the parting warning at 5:21. We find once again the present “does not sin,” which can be rendered “does not keep on sinning,” as at 3:4-10. This ability to avoid sin is possible not only because of the originating new birth and the inspirational model of Jesus, but also because of divine protection, providing an alternative life to that characterized by sin. While we inevitably read this claim as a problem, it must be remembered that it was not so much a problem for the author as a marvelous benefit of being begotten of God. Nor did he consider it an absolute. Indeed he might not have bothered to pen his letter had he thought so (2:1a). This vision of sinless living reflects an aggressive counterclaim the author made in response to his opponents who claimed to have no sin (1:8, 10). The Elder was not blistered into defensiveness by the rival claims of superiority but instead elected to offer a forceful alternative. In this passage alone (5:18-20), he reels off an impressive array of eight certitudes. We have to negotiate both sides of his dialectic thought about sin. A matter of no little difficulty greets the translator in terms of who is protecting the believers at 5:18. Is “the one who was born of God” (NRSV) the Son of God as the one begotten? The participle is aorist in contrast to the perfect participle “those being born of God” (5:18a), the believers. Furthermore, in John 17:12 the Son during earthly ministry kept his disciples. As at John 17:12, 15, one finds in John 10:28-29 both the Son and God protecting. Though at John 17:13 and 11 the Son prays that the Father will take over this role, numerous scholars (Brooke, Bruce, Plummer) take the one begotten to be Jesus who in turn protects his disciples. If the reference is to Jesus or the Son of God, it comes rather abruptly and without clear designation. Some others have suggested “keeps himself or herself,” rendering reflexively the word ordinarily translated “him and her” (auton). From this perspective the one begotten would be the believer, despite the fact that this form is never used of the believer. In this reading, one thinks of 2:13cd and 14h, with the stress upon the believer conquering the Evil One. The personal pronoun “him” (auton) was sometimes used as a reflexive “himself.” One also finds considerable textual support (such as Sinaiticus and the ninth-century manuscript known as 33) that has “himself ”(the reflexive heauton), though this reading could be a later correction. The reading “him” is a very likely interpretation. There is a kind of parallelism, however, between “keeps” or “protects” at 5:18 and “keep or guard your-

1 John 5:13-21

selves” at 5:21 that is more than a little reminiscent of John 17, a passage along with 1 John 3:4-10 part of the orbit of this larger text. At John 17 the emphasis falls upon the Son and the righteous Father protecting. John Painter draws a skillful parallel with 1 John 3:9, also concerning the absence of sin in the life of the believer and being begotten. At 3:9 the divine seed keeps the believer from the tendency to sin. On the basis of John 17:15 and 3:9, Painter favors the idea that God keeps the believer, but he is reduced to using the word “somehow.”7 I feel his pain. A few scholars have offered “the begetting by God” guards, and they supplied God from the verb “God guards him or her.” The undeniable parallel to 3:9 can be taken as an argument against the believer keeping herself or himself, since the emphasis there is decidedly upon the divine begetting. The fact that the Greek construction ho genn∑theis (“the one who was born of God”) was used neither for the Son nor the believer certainly baffles the careful reader. In such a hard call as this, it is unbecoming to dogmatize. This aorist participle in the passive would seem to me applicable only to the believer or Jesus and not to God, though on any reading vv. 18a and b, along with 3:9, recognize the critical empowering role of being begotten of God. Having exposed the issues and shared a variety of interpretive opinion, we come down to the two most viable lines of interpretation. If the subject should be Jesus (Brooke, Bruce, Stott, Schlatter), this begetting could be when the Word became flesh (John 1:14; see 18:37; Matt 1:16, 20; 2:1, 4), the Word’s pre-creational existence in John 1:1 not in view. This promise that Christ protects his own and therefore the Evil One cannot touch them harmfully was undoubtedly heartening to the original recipients. In the portrayal of Jesus as the Good Shepherd at John 10:11-15, this protecting includes laying down his own life. This is no small matter in light of the dark conclusion in the next verse (5:20b) that the world lies under the power of the demonic. The persistent fact, however, that Johannine theology always distinguishes between Jesus as Son and believers as children greatly weakens making Jesus begotten intended here at 5:18. On the other hand, the believer fits the spirit of closing exhortation, especially at 5:21 where it urges imperatively “guard yourself,” actually using the reflexive. The identification as believer represents the more likely candidate, very much in the spirit of 2:12-14 as well as texts like Testament of Reuben 4:8; 6:1. Then most naturally at 5:18c one should translate “the Evil One does not touch him or

233

234

1 John 5:13-21

Spiritual Assets Believers Already Possess (“Having”) 1. Fellowship with God (1:3, 6) 2. An advocate with the Father (2:1) 3. An anointing by the Spirit (2:20) 4. Hope (3:3) 5. Boldness before God in prayer, in the judgment (3:21; 4:17) 6. God’s love in them (4:16) 7. The love command (4:21) 8. The witness within (5:10) 9. The Father, the Son (2:23; 5:12) 10. Eternal life (5:12, 13) 11. Answers to prayer (5:14-15)

her” rather than making a single pronoun “them” as NRSV. The use of two tenses (perfect and aorist) to describe believers at 5:18ab could have been for variation. This identification of the believer represents a distinctive epistolary emphasis due to the circumstances. Comprehensive Johannine thought then would include protecting by Jesus, God, and the believer herself. First John does not contain the Johannine expression “the ruler of this world” (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11), but something like it appears conceptually present at 5:19b. The world seems to have surrendered itself to evil intent, to God’s antagonist. The true believer is assured in the knowledge of his spiritual origin in God (5:19a). [Spiritual Assets Believers Already Possess (“Having”)] [The Human

The Human Condition Summed Up in “World” in the Gospel of John The human condition as reflected in John depicts a state of alienation and condemnation characterized by 1. Darkness (1:5; 12:46) 2. Death (5:19-27; 8:37) 3. Sin (8:21, 34) 4. Slavery (8:34-36) 5. Falsehood (8:44)

Condition Summed Up in “World” in the Gospel of John] [The Power of the Evil One]

The third and final “we know” at 5:20a declares the central conviction of the community and of the Epistle that the Son of God has arrived, returning to 1:1-3 and possibly forming an inclusion (Rensberger). This would be known from the beginning by the eyewitnesses who saw and touched and heard. In turn the Moody Smith, The Theology of the Gospel of John, New Son of God functioned as a revealer of the true Testament Theology, ed. James Dunn (Cambridge: Cambridge God. Everywhere else in both the Epistle and University Press, 1995), 81. the Gospel of John, the verb for knowing Judgment is what this world deserves, “it stands appears, not a noun. The author of both wished in need of being saved.” to avoid portraying faith as some kind of esoRudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, vol. 2 (New teric knowledge, preferring active verbs of York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1955), 2, 15. believing and knowing, perhaps in intentional contrast to opponents. The noun is dianoian, appearing here in climactic position in the Epistle and suggesting understanding, its content divulged in the following clause that we The Power of the Evil One know the true one (God), with the adjective true Bultmann, after discussing optional inter(al∑thinon) connoting real and genuine. Copyists pretations regarding the Evil One, of biblical manuscripts added the word “God” concluded that “he represents in any case the for clarification, no doubt correct as interpretapower to whose domination the world has surrention but not belonging to the original. The dered itself: the power of darkness and falsehood, important motif of the knowledge and comthe power of sin and death. The devil is God’s antagonist . . . .” munion with God (2:3, 4, 13, 14; 3:1; 4:2, 6, 7, Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, vol. 2 (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1955), 2, 17.

1 John 5:13-21

235

8), playing throughout the Epistle, is sounded a final time. This saving revelation through the Son is a gift. Speaking a “we” in solidarity with the believing community (5:20c), the writer claims a being in the true one, an interiority or spiritual relationship with God, reminding readers of the insistent theme of abidance throughout the letter and emphasizing that the community of believers knows itself indwelling with God (3:24; 4:13). Generally in the Epistle the believer abides directly in God, but in John the abiding is through a mediatory relationship via the Son. At 5:20d, however, the author characterizes the spiritual relationship of “being in” through the Son Jesus Christ. A matter worthy of debate concerns the precise intent of the final clarification of the verse (5:20e): this one is the true God and eternal life. To cut to the chase, does our author mean blatantly to identify the Son as God? One first imagines that the true God refers to the Father and eternal life more naturally to the Son. The larger paragraph 5:18-21 focuses upon God rather than Son. Some scholars of no mean reputation take the dual reference to God the Father (Westcott, Brooke, Stott, Smalley), while another cohort of superb scholars favor a reference to the Son (Bultmann, Bruce, Brown, Marshall, Culpepper, Schnackenburg, Talbert, Johnson). In John our word “true” is used of God assuredly (7:28; 17:3) but also of the Son (1:9; 8:16; 15:1). The immediate antecedent in 1 John 5:20e is the Son, being superfluous as a characteristic of God; the “this very one” disclosure typically carries a christological identity in 1 John, the capping identifying of the Son as God is strongly parallel to the climactic Christology at the ending of John 20:28, and the identification of the Son with eternal life suits the nearby connection between having the Son and possessing eternal life (5:11-12; cf. John 1:4; 14:6). Christology is a primary issue at conflict with the secessionists. Furthermore, in John the Son’s equality with God is pervasive (John 5:18; 8:58; 10:30; 14:7-9; 17:11, 22, 23) and coordinate at 1 John 1:3. A stronger Climatic Christological Confession case then can be made for true God and eternal Here the full identity of Jesus with God is life in terms of the Son. [Climatic Christological recognized without reserve . . . . This Confession]

The final verse of the Epistle jolts the reader and is often considered unexpected or abrupt, or even an “afterthought” (F. O. Francis). It is true that idols have not been mentioned in 1 John previously, nor for that matter is there any usage in John. Reference to the hazards of the world, however, has appeared (2:12-17). A fair

seems to occur intentionally at the end of the letter, at the climax of the triumphant expression of faith. It is hardly an accident that it is precisely at the beginning (1:1, 18) and at the end (20:28) of John that the light of Jesus’ divinity shines forth most fully. . . . Jesus Christ is the true God, not a distant God who is out of reach, but in human form, to be grasped by faith. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary (trans. Reginald and Ilse Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992), 263.

236

1 John 5:13-21

number of interpreters have taken the reference to idols as metaphoric rather than literal and as a warning to avoid all contact with the opponents (Brown, Perkins, Smalley) so as not to fall prey to their deceiving teaching, which is rather a reach. Another prominent line of interpretation (Nauck, Schnackenburg) understands the final injunction as a warning to the community against sin. This fits with the context (5:14-17). As anticipated above, the contention here will turn on the contrast between the true God (5:20e) and false idols of the world, also the possible parallel with the believer keeping himself (5:18b) in juxtaposition with “guard yourselves.” So the author envisioned the sin of idolatry. This final sentence begins with the now familiar term of endearment and direct address, “children.” Once more the primary identity of the recipients is given as children of God. This form for children, teknia, most often introduces an imperative or an exhortation in a context of warning (2:1, 18, 28; 3:7, 18), usually coupled with a christological claim (2:1, 12, 28; 3:7; 4:4), often with proscribed behavior. The Elder urges these believers to guard themselves by resisting, or avoiding, these false gods. The preposition apo, generally translated “from” or “away from,” appears nineteen times in 1 John, often related to time (beginnings) (1:1; 2:7, 13, 14, 24; 3:8, 11) or source (1:5; 2:20, 27; 3:22; 4:21; 5:15). At 2:28 the context suggests “not shrink back from him.” At 3:17 the preposition is translated “against” (RSV), which could favor the meaning of against/resistance also at 5:21. First John 3:17, however, can picture shutting up one’s feelings from or away from. Indeed, 1:7 and 9, 2:28, and 3:17 may be loosely parallel to 5:21. In this more likely reading, the idea of keeping oneself separate, keeping away from idols, the words “keep clear of ” should Traditional Antithesis with Idols be preferred. Hence the likely nuance Julian Hills has no difficulty bringing forward lies with avoidance rather than resistnumerous texts from the OT that vehemently warn against idolatry. He also dredges up texts from Hellenistic ance. A likely connection between Judaism condemning idolatry. He can even instance the world and idolatry implies a reentry Hellenistic pagan religious poem, “Hymn to Demetrius into the domain of darkness. The Poliorcetes,” preserved in Athenaeus, The Deipnosophists passage has to do with sin, the sin of 6.253e. These commonplace defenses of monotheism, espeidolatry, a choice of false gods over the cially out of the OT, are transposed by 1 John in defense of true one. [Traditional Antithesis with Idols] the Son. These idols are not references to false teachers but to negative counterparts to Jesus Christ. If graven images are in mind, as at For Christian critique of idols, see Acts 14:15; Rom 1:25; 2 1 Corinthians 12:2 and Revelation Cor 6:16, and 1 Thess 1:9. In Acts 19:26 Paul reacts to the 9:20, and one hypothesizes location in silver shrines to Artemis saying, “gods made with hands are Asia Minor and Ephesus, one may think not gods.” of the glitter of the pagan temples with Julian Hills, “Little children, keep yourselves from idols”: 1 John 5:21 Reconsidered,” CBQ 51 (2001): 285–310.

1 John 5:13-21

237

The Temple of Artemis their portrayal of gods and emperors. Perhaps those most tempted to idolatry were Gentiles who had come into the Johannine Image Not Available church and then left to participate due to lack of digital rights. in idolatry. Our writer might also Please view the published have had in mind the allures of the commentary or perform an Internet world, such as the Roman farces search using the credit below. with their burlesque revues, nudity, and obscene subjects. The Roman theaters also hosted unsavory events Reconstruction of the Temple of Artemis, Ephesus, Turkey. (Credit: © DeA Picture such as gladiatorial contests and Library / Art Resource, NY) animal baiting. For those with Jewish sensitivities, productions in Palestine dedicated to Dionysius smacked of idolatry, and pious Jews were forbidden to attend.

CONNECTIONS 1. The Assurance of Eternal Life

Eternal life plays quite a role in this portion of 1 John (5:13, 16, 20), offering a qualitative as well as quantitative promise. In an era when the quest for quality of life is nothing less than a passion, the Johannine vision of eternal life can become electrifyingly relevant, particularly when the distinctive Christian dimension is brought to bear rather than merely humanistic aspiration. First John suggests mutual love in Christian community as a satisfying model far better than any egocentric lunge for the good life of the rich and famous. Eternal life can also address our human insecurity about death. In the story of the raising of Lazarus in John, Jesus shouts the famous words, “Lazarus, come outside” (11:43). The Greek verb kraugazø means “to shout.” Interestingly, the same Greek verb appears four times during the account of the crucifixion of Jesus, each time by hostile opponents (18:40; 19:6, 12, 15). These later instances amounted to shouts for death. At John 11 Jesus shouts the word of life!

238

1 John 5:13-21 2. The Secret of Answered Prayer: According to the Will of God, 5:14

Wise counselors of spirituality advise that the person praying try remaining in silence until she or he and God are of one spirit. Indeed, silence can become a time not when evil appears, but when it dies. Meditative silence before God can lead to a fresh vision of the will of God. In the “Mitford” series of religious novels, there are passing references to the prayer that never fails. Readers of Jan Karon’s books begin to expect an episode in the story when someone will identify this prayer that never fails. Father Tim does in fact reveal its identity. The prayer that never fails, according to this local Episcopal minister, is “thy will be done.” 3. Recovering the Wayward through Prayer, 5:14-17

Some anguished parents have prayed much of their lives for children who have wandered far from faith and moral living. Faithfully they have prayed even without encouraging signs. Some churches have developed a neglected dimension of being church by making concerted and persistent efforts to recover alienated or inactive members. The Catholic Church has mounted an admirable appeal to their alumni called “Catholics Returning Home.” 4. Opening Our Eyes to Fellow Believers, 5:16; 3:17

At 3:1 the Elder invited attention to the exceptional love of God (“see what love”) involved in the privilege of being called children of God. This privilege and this community identity play out into compassionate implications. If a sister or brother has physical needs (3:17) or spiritual (5:16), the believer is obligated and expected to act redemptively, to be in reality a player in a caring fellowship. 5. Dark Vision of Prevailing Evil, 5:19

Unless we are going to write off this portrayal of widespread evil in the world as merely a gloomy sectarian outlook, we must open our eyes to the signature of evil in our environment. Radical evil prevails in a world where oppression holds down much of the human family. During the twentieth century, no less than 250 wars were waged, with civilians being major victims. Six times as many people were killed per war than in previous centuries, with war profi-

1 John 5:13-21

239

“The Culture of Death” teering being rife. Americans began to dally “More people were killed by violent means in with distant possessions in the aftermath of the twentieth century than in all of the prethe Spanish-American War despite their vious centuries combined—roughly 180 million. In our own revolt against English colonialism. time the ratio of civilian to military deaths has been People languish in hunger and pulverizing exactly reversed: from 1:9 to 9:1. Pope John Paul II has rightly called ours ‘the culture of death.’” poverty. AIDS wipes out populations. One Ralph C. Woods, The Gospel according to Tolkien (Louisville: tribe inflicting genocide names another Westminster John Knox, 2003), 1. tribe “cockroaches.” [“The Culture of Death”] Consider the dark vision of the movies in the Godfather saga based upon the novels of Mario Puzo. The movies tell the story of the Corleone mob family led originally by Don Vito, played memorably by Marlon Brando. The Don’s character is remembered for the line, “I’ll make him an offer he can’t refuse,” but the complex old man also sought to do a measure of good in a brutish world. Michael, his son, started out to reject the ruthless criminality of the family only to embrace violence and become many times worse than his father. Vengeful and vindictive, he set out to kill with preemptive ruthlessness any who offended him. These movies skillfully utilize blackness and shadows to symbolize the converging darkness. [The Godfather’s Vision of the Reality of Evil] We also need to name the demons in our immediate community. What things call for social action by a local church? Is there a disproportionate impact of environmental pollution on minority communities, what has been dubbed environmental racism? [Evil Has Played across My Playground]

The Godfather’s Vision of the Reality of Evil In The Godfather’s searching exploration of Michael’s personal embrace of evil and the toll it takes lies the saga’s lasting brilliance and power. No American film, except perhaps for Citizen Kane, has offered such a compelling depth of insight into the compelling mystery of how personal evil happens. For all the sensation in The Godfather trilogy, a world dense with conflict and violence, the long saga is at its heart an oldfashioned morality tale that features the question of how the individual soul comes to embrace a darkness so devouring that it withers the heart and conscience. In that fatal journey lies its real and lasting terror. The accomplishment of The Godfather is to show that evil is real, mysterious, deceptive, and lethal, despite the elaborate prettifying and apologizing that cloaks its operations. Robert M. Anker, Catching Light (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 30.

John Cazale and Al Pacino in The Godfather, Part II, 1974 (Credit: Photo by Bruce McBroom / MPTV.net)

Image Not Available due to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.

240

1 John 5:13-21

Evil Has Played across My Playground When I was six years old I played on the most marvelous playground. As I remember it now, it was all mine, though certainly other children must have been around to play on it. I still see it through my sixyear-old eyes, and it stretches out forever behind our two-story house in Frankfurt, Germany, but I suppose, in truth it was only as big as several city blocks. I remember it as a place filled with wonderful things. I climbed up and over broken brick walls, and I was a cowboy standing on a mountain. I scaled enormous slabs of concrete that slanted up out of the ground and found a dozen secret places that only I knew about. Raspberries grew on my playground, and gooseberries, and red currants: I picked them right off the vine and ate them and stained my shirt with them. In a shoe box I collected little scraps of melted glass that littered the

earth. You could find all sorts of things on my playground. One day I was digging in my playground and uncovered a little blue rubber motorcycle. I scraped the dirt away. The wheels still rolled. The little blue motorcycle could have been mine. I knew it wasn’t. It belonged to someone else, to another little boy. It belonged to whoever had played on my playground before me. I wondered what happened to that little boy, and as I wondered, a fact I had known, assumed, and taken for granted slipped from the surface of my knowing into the very depths of my awareness. What I had dug up that day was not only a little blue motorcycle, but an awareness of the presence of evil in the world. My world! Patrick J. Willson, “Weeds in our Gardens,” sermon cited by Tom Long, The Witness of Preaching (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1989), 174–75.

Philip Yancey recounts an occasion when the detective story author G. K. Chesterton was contacted by the London Times to respond to the question, “What’s Wrong with the World?” His memorable reply, “Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely yours, G. K. Chesterton.” Chesterton was in Quoted in Roger Green and Walter Hooper, C. S. Lewis, A touch with the reality that each of us contributes Biography (New York: Harcourt Brace Javanovich, 1974), 209. to the evil in the world by action and inaction.8 One should also remember that a kind of dialectic exists in Johannine thought that includes the perspective that God in Christ loves and redeems the world (4:9-10). [A Great Campaign of Sabotage] A Great Campaign of Sabotage Enemy-occupied territory—that is what this world is. Christianity is the story of how the rightful king has landed, you might say landed in disguise, and is calling us all to take part in a great campaign of sabotage.

6. The Widespread Need for Assurance

We need assurance (1) because of dark days of doubt in college or at mid-life when everything comes up for reassessment, (2) because of moral mistakes we have made that haunt us in the night, (3) because we may have adopted long weekends for ourselves and dropped out of church and forsaken the fellowship of Christian people, (4) because we may tend to be insecure and self-doubting by temperament, (5) because we are in the midst of grief that has robbed us of our sense of well-being and put us in touch with our own mortality, (6) because we are terminally ill and shaken by the prospect, (7) because we never had an emotional conversion, (8) because of bruising church conflicts or because of inconsistent morality by church leaders who let us down, (9) because life has dealt us a body blow and we are reeling, or, among many other

1 John 5:13-21

reasons, (10) because of an AP humanities course in high school that kicked up doubts and disturbed our unexamined faith. 7. Assuring Believers

To speak personally, I recall a preaching mission to college students at Union University. Eric Rust, a keen scholar of faith and science, offered strong presentations of both an intellectual and sometimes poetic nature. He fitted time into his schedule for private conferences with students, and as a student, I filed dutifully in for my few allotted minutes, wondering whether I was a Christian for sure or not. After talking with me for a while, Rust leaned over and said to me without a bobble, “Yes,” he thought that I was an authentic Christian. I have never looked back. Here was an act of affirmation reminiscent of the Elder. 8. The Ten Certitudes

One could teach the Epistle almost entirely starting at the ending and expounding the ten certitudes of 5:13-21. These ten provide meaningful assurances to those in need. 1. Being heard by God 2. Experiencing answers to prayers 3. No longer being in bondage to habitual sin 4. Sensing divine protection 5. Feeling shielded from the harm of evil 6. Knowing our identity as children of God 7. Becoming realistically aware of the universal influence of evil 8. Discerning the advent of the Son of God 9. Accepting the gift of the understanding of the true God 10. Enjoying fellowship with the true God through Christ 9. Choosing Your Gods Carefully, 5:21

A church sign featured these words as public thought for the week: “Choose the Gods you worship carefully.” More than one motorist did a double take. Barbara Brown Taylor muses about how deceptive are contemporary idols. She figured that any of us could walk past a golden calf, but what about the idols of health and friendship and patriotism? “But what about, say, the idol of independence—the belief that everything will be all right if we can just take care of ourselves and not have to ask anyone else to look

241

242

1 John 5:13-21

after us?” She adds to her list of idols other things. “Or the idol of romance—the belief that we can face anything in life if we just have one other person to love us the way we are, and to love in return? Or, as a variation on that, the idol of family—the belief that if we can just gather around us a close, committed family, our happiness will be unassailable.”9 We cling to our biases expecting them to be blessed. In our celebrity culture, we idolize sports icons and movie stars and implicitly their values as well. Indeed, should we not see that all counterfeit substitutions for the true God, whether a sleek, black Jaguar, or a bulging Roth IRA, or a second home, or militarism, or religious power all pass away, but those who do the will of God live forever?

Notes 1. C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932), 134. 2. Rudolf Bultmann, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (trans. Philip O’Hara, ed. Robert Funk; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973), 85. 3. Pheme Perkins, The Johannine Epistles (New Testament Message, vol. 21; Wilmington DE: Michael Glazier, 1979); Ruth B. Edwards, The Johannine Epistles (NT Guides; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996). 4. Judith M. Lieu, The Theology of the Johannine Epistles (New Testament Theology; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 22. 5. James H. Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament Greek (vol. 3; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1908), 67–68; A. T. Robertson, General Epistles and Revelation of John (Word Pictures in the New Testament; Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933), 540, 601. 6. L. Hartman, “onoma,” EDNT 2:520. 7. John Painter, 1, 2, and 3 John (SP; ed. Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002), 324. 8. Cited by Marva Dawn, “Not What, but Who is the Matter with Preaching?” in What’s the Matter with Preaching Today? (ed. Mike Graves; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2004), 75. 9. Barbara Brown Taylor, Mixed Blessings (Cambridge: Cowley, 1986), 44–45.

Part two: Orientation to 2 and 3 John 2 John

Though this single-page letter has been known as the second of the Epistles of John, it was most likely penned at approximately the same time as 1 John and sent along with it to one or even more congregations, the contents being rather generic. The two inform one another. Second John casts scenarios for reconstructing the historical situation and 1 John enriches the understanding of the terms of the latter. Second John also partakes of the pastoral-polemical character of 1 John and reflects the same crisis among the Johannine churches. If we tend to refer to 1 John as the Epistle of John, we would do well to refer to 2 and 3 John as Hellenistic letters. Second John, as well as 3 John, could have fit on a single page of papyrus. All of thirteen verses, 2 John runs twelve verses shorter than Philemon and two verses less than 3 John. Too brief to be divisible into chapters, it runs a grand total of 246 Greek words. Ancient Epistolary Format of 2 and 3 John Excluding the conventional salutation On rhetorical analysis of 2 John, Duane Watson, observing that 2 and 3 John and final greetings, the body of the conform to ancient epistolary format more than letter (vv. 4-11) includes only eight any other New Testament epistles, makes a verses. While 3 John amounts to 1,133 worthy effort to merge issues of epistolary format letters, 2 John runs 1,126 (Dana). and rhetorical canons. He categorizes 2 John as [Ancient Epistolary Format of 2 and 3 John]

of the deliberative species of rhetoric (see v. 5a),

Second John utilizes numerous words as a type of letter classified as exhortation and advice. This paraenesis involves the two parts of not found in 1 John, such as “church,” encouragement and dissuasion. He notes the “send forward,” “fellow worker,” “exigence” as something urgent needing to be “gentile,” “stranger,” “receive,” and “do done. The rhetorical constraints he imposes are good/evil” as pertinently pointed out by directed to modifying the hazardous situation or scholars such as Lieu. However, like exigence. Duane Watson, “A Rhetorical Analysis of 2 John,” NTS, 1 John, it makes use of characteristic 35:104–108. means of argument, such as “just as,” “from beginning,” “this is,” “[e]veryone who,” “the one saying,” and thesis/antithesis. It too centers upon the dual commandments of believing and loving (as 1 John 3:23). It too requires doing for truth to be realized. The Elder warns again about deceivers identified as antichrists and insists upon the necessity of confessing Jesus Christ come in the flesh. Terms like “love” and “abide” and “commandment” are more than reminiscent. There is little doubt indeed concerning common authorship.

244

Part Two: Orientation to 2 and 3 John

The three Epistles were likely all written from a large metropolitan area, such as Ephesus, with 2 and 3 John directed to provincial towns with Johannine churches. Some distance can be inferred from the need for financial support as reflected in 3 John. 3 John

This brief personal letter, the shortest book of the New Testament, skillfully juxtaposes hospitality embodied (vv. 5-8) and denied (vv. 9, 10). Hospitality was a necessary component of early missionary strategy and a sign of obedience to the love command (cf. Rom 13:9, 13; Heb 13:1-2; 1 Pet 4:8-10). The letter is about doing for the leading characters, Gaius (vv. 5, 6) and Diotrephes (v. 10), and also for the defining maxim (v. 11bc). The modern reader is allowed a glimpse into early connections among churches, as the writer assumes they should be cooperatively associated. The Elder, presumably the same author as for 2 John, penned a fascinating letter to Gaius, not otherwise known though this common name appears elsewhere in the New Testament (Acts 19:29; 20:4; 1 Cor 1:14; Rom 16:23). This letter to Gaius moves from commendation and appeal (vv. 2-8) to scathing criticism (vv. 9-10) to recommendation (v. 12). It addresses a crisis or “exigence” stirred up by the resistance and expulsive policies of Diotrephes. The letter was drafted because of a glowing report from returning missioners (vv. 3, 6) about the graciousness of Gaius along with a disturbing account of the recalcitrance of Diotrephes. Third John comes across as a letter of request, rather like Philemon, containing implicit warning as The “Exigence” or Conflict Solution well. It partakes of the rhetorical in the sense of Duane Watson writes, “The exigence prompting the Presbyter to write is the concerted efforts at persuasion through three refusal of Diotrephes . . . to extend hospitality to personal addresses begun with “beloved.” The traveling missionary brethren of the Johannine Elder addresses Gaius quite personally Community. This exigence is not only the passive throughout, using the second person “you” fourwithdrawal of hospitality but the active refusal to teen times, ten times explicitly with a personal allow others of the church to extend hospitality pronoun; interestingly, the pronoun is entirely under the threat of expulsion.” Watson readily admits that the ancients did absent in the passage related to Diotrephes. One not coordinate rhetorical theory with epistolary muses in passing that the letter might have come convention, though he makes a credible effort to be known as John’s letter to Gaius, making himself. He also recognizes rightly from the him far better known. [The “Exigence” or Conflict vantage of epistolary convention that 3 John is a blend of such types as friendly, requesting, advisory, commendatory, vituperative, and accusing (482). Duane Watson, “A Rhetorical Analysis of 3 John: A Study in Epistolary Rhetoric,” CBQ 51 (1989): 481.

Solution]

The “story line” for 3 John took its beginning when representatives from the Elder’s church were sent to one or more churches. These missioners or missionaries, the terms here used

Part Two: Orientation to 2 and 3 John

245

interchangeably, were received graciously by Gaius and rejected abrasively by Diotrephes in apparent response to the “something” the Elder had written (v. 9). Diotrephes may not have even bothered to read it, or perhaps he read it and was enraged by its content. The representatives returned and reported to the sending church. The Elder, presumably in conjunction with his church and perhaps as the voice of the Johannine school, writes a letter probably delivered by Demetrius. The letter itself represents an aggressive action, a major event in the story line. Gaius receives the letter and likely stays his course. Perhaps the Elder, dependent upon the nature of the subsequent report, followed up with a visit both to Connections with 1 John and 2 John encourage Gaius and to confront Third John enjoys some connections with 1 John, such as its repeated use of “beloved” Diotrephes. We do not know the outcome (in the singular, vv. 1, 2, 5, 11), a higher number of of the letter or possible site visit. Did usages for comparative length. Third John shares approxfurther conflict ensue leading to complete imately 70 percent of its vocabulary with 1 John (Kysar), schism? Did Diotrephes stand down, was continuing to reflect “the Johannine frequency.” In 3 he deposed, or did he secede? Some John you find a test with thesis/antithesis, a general scholars see in 3 John a marker signaling maxim, and the cruciality of testimony (3, 6, 12) as in 1 John. Testimony and witness appear quite characteristhe disintegration of the Johannine movetically in John and 1 John, but focused on Jesus instead ment because it lacked sufficient structure of an individual Christian (Rensberger). On the other (Brown). Indeed some speculate that hand, common expressions such as “from beginning” and Diotrephes turned out to be the realist references to abiding and believing and explicit mention who led his group into the Great Church. of the love command are not to be found. The word Some see Diotrephes as the earliest monar“church,” not mentioned in 1 John or 2 John, appears a surprisingly high three times in 3 John. Explicit missionary chical bishop of which we have evidence language does not appear prominently elsewhere in the (Hornack) and/or as an independent Johannine corpus outside of 3 John. Little distinctive church leader neither among the deniers Christian teaching about God or Jesus shows up in 3 and successionists group nor loyal to the John (Lieu), but one can argue from v. 11bc that the Johannine branch, offering as it were a author implies the goodness of God, reminiscent of the third alternative (Kysar). Some posit a therighteousness of God in 1 John 2:29–3:10. Furthermore, “the truth” (vv. 1, 3, 4) probably refers to orthodox chrisological conflict (W. Bauer, Käsemann), tological confession and the love command. while others deny it entirely (Lieu) or opt Third John bears definite affinities with 2 John, for the social issue of hospitality rather however, including not only the form of a single-page than church authority (Malherbe). We will Hellenistic letter following recognized conventions and address this issue further in exegesis. The written by the Presbyter, but also such striking verbal fact that all three names featured in the similarities as their final greeting (interesting differences as well), and the prominent presence of truth in both letter were Gentile (Gaius, Diotrephes, and salutations. Both concern hospitality, but 3 John makes Demetrius) suggests a predominantly no overt allusions to the christological controversy of Gentile Christian church, which if true for 1 and 2 John. Numerous scholars have cut 3 John loose the Johannine church in general would from 1 and 2 as not about the same issues, but it is far help to explain the relative paucity of refermore likely that they were connected. Likely the same ence to the Old Testament. [Connections with author wrote 2 and 3 John and probably penned 1 John 1 John and 2 John]

as well, with 2 John being the middle term.

246

Part Two: Orientation to 2 and 3 John

The subject of rhetorical strategy definitely comes into play with 3 John being more in the style of praise and blame (epideictic), which is noteworthy in its juxtaposition of Gaius and Diotrephes. With hospitality, love for one another, the mission of the church, and connection at stake, the author had only positives for Gaius (and Demetrius) and only severe castigations for Diotrephes. The Elder expects that Gaius will continue to receive and support the incoming missioners and that Diotrephes will remain intransigent, requiring an eventual visit. The Presbyter faces a ticking time bomb. Realistically his epistolary counsel may lead to further conflict. He intends (1) to motivate Gaius to continue to act as a coworker in the mission by receiving missioners lovingly and by supporting the missioners as they travel elsewhere, (2) to isolate and discredit Diotrephes or just possibly persuade, (3) to credentialize Demetrius, (4) to advocate selective imitating of church leaders, to “test the spirits as it were” (1 John 4:1), and (5) to hold the churches together in faithful solidarity. Diotrephes stands in violation of the principle of Christian hospitality. A certain accountability is implied by the Elder, forecasting a probable visit but also moral support for Gaius who will not have to deal with Diotrephes alone. The adroit author will bring forward a general maxim (v. 11), possibly developed in the Johannine school. He will utilize thesis and antithesis as a kind of test (v. 11bc) and the authority of testimony (vv. 3, 6, 12). He moves from positive (vv. 2-8) to negative (vv. 9-10) to positive (v. 12), sandwiching skillfully the criticism with commendation. He asks a great deal of Gaius, requesting not only hospitality but also additional support, but given the character and track record of Gaius the author is understandably hopeful. Is he implicitly urging Gaius to cross Diotrephes, to risk being expelled from the church himself? It is not certain whether Gaius and Diotrephes belonged to the same house church or were simply in the same vicinity, but v. 9a could be taken as referencing the same church, though it could have in mind the churches to which the Elder relates (Johnson), especially if the tantalizing “something” written refers to 1 or 2 John. The fact that Gaius evidently is not expelled from the church suggests two different churches in close proximity. Gaius may have been a prominent member or the ministerial leader of a nearby house church. The fact that he is juxtaposed to Diotrephes in the letter and is the recipient of the letter could suggest that he was the minister, but if so we would expect some title. We do not know.

Part Two: Orientation to 2 and 3 John

One wonders how this brief and personal letter came to be preserved. It is a safe bet that Diotrephes did not save it! It could have been retained by Gaius, by the Elder himself, or by Demetrius. Gaius would have treasured it. The skimpy letter struggled to make its way into the canon. Its celebration of Christian hospitality, its association with the apostle John, possibly the success of the letter, and the fact that connection won out over the model of totally independent congregations all contributed to its acceptance. Third John stands not only as a pastoral-polemical letter as 1 and 2 John but also particularly as a missionary epistle. This is the only Johannine letter addressed to an individual.

247

2 John

COMMENTARY The Salutation, vv. 1-3

While the naming of sender and recipient at the outset meets the conventions of a Hellenistic letter, the intriguing question of the role and identity of both strikes the reader immediately. Who is this sender who does not bother to mention his name, and what role does he play? Is the recipient—usually translated as the “Elect Lady”— a metaphor or personification for a congregation, or the proper name of a woman? Could she even have been a minister and/or hostess/sponsor of the congregation? If a woman, could her name have been Electa or Kyria? Is the address directed to two entities, an individual and her spiritual children? The sender identifies his role as “the Elder,” so in this commentary on the letters I have chosen to call the author most frequently by this title. The role or office of the author, unlike in the letters of Paul or Peter, was not mentioned in 1 John at all. Perhaps it was not deemed necessary if delivered along with 2 John. This conventional salutation for 2 John, as in a traditional epistolary format, signals immediately a writing different in kind from 1 John. The author and his role in 2 John, however, seem to need no introduction for the original readers. One would expect that the name of John and certainly the title of apostle were intended to be applied to the son of Zebedee. The word “elder” (presbyteros) could relate to a senior or even elderly Christian leader (“the old man”), but is here more likely a reference to a recognized role of leadership. Only in 2 and 3 John among the letters of the New Testament does the salutation provide the office and withhold the name, adding to the mystery. One could conjecture that this writer was the leading minister in a highly visible congregation who, due to his accrued reputation and strategic location, exerted influence beyond those confines. He may have been a charismatic leader who was simply aggressive enough to intervene before the schism and its concomitant faulty theology spread disastrously. The author could have been the leader of the elders of Ephesus (Acts 20:17-38), if one accepts Asia Minor as locale. The author might have functioned like the author of Revelation vis-à-vis the

250

2 John

Map of Ephesus

seven churches (2:1–3:22), also set in Asia Minor. The writer does define the singularity of his office with the definite article “the.” He neither identifies himself as a presbyter nor a bishop. He might have held regional responsibilities like those of Timothy (Asia) and Titus (Crete). Perhaps his role was like that of Polycarp who opened The Epistle to the Philippians with the greeting, “Polycarp and the Elders with him to the Church of God sojourning in Philippi.” At least the third person plural “us” at 2 John 2 could refer to those with the Elder as well as the recipients, making it at least possible he spoke for fellow elders. [The The Elder’s Scope of Authority The fact that the writer of 2 John speaks with an air of authority to a congregation other than his own possibly suggests that he had general responsibility for all the Johannine churches in his area (so Williams, 66). Stephen Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John (WBC; vol. 51; Waco TX: Word Books, 1984), 336.

Elder’s Scope of Authority ]

Furthermore, the author most likely belonged to “the disciples of the apostles,” mentioned by the church historian Eusebius, who also identifies them as presbyters (Hist. eccl. 3.39.3-4). The church father Irenaeus, who came from Asia Minor himself, earlier spoke of this category of

2 John

251

disciples of the apostles who were elders (Haer. 5.36) and even referred to “the Elder” (4.46.1; 47.1). One is left with the impression that the author of 2 John was the leading elder. In the instance of both 2 and 3 John, one is inclined to posit also that our author was indeed a disciple of the Beloved Disciple (Culpepper). Possibly the Elder played a role roughly like that of James in Jerusalem (Acts 21:18) but with less formal authority (Acts 15:13-21). The Presbyter’s primary weapon is persuasion, not official power. The necessity of persuasion, however, may have improved his Epistles. We most definitely do not find in the Elder the type of bishop as advocated by Ignatius (Ign. Eph. 2:2; 4:1; 5:3; 6:2; esp. Ign. Smyrn. 9:1). A parallel with 1 Peter does comes to mind, though the scope of that writing likely covers a much wider territory (1:1). Whichever analogy applies, he played a role Roles of Elders wider than merely local, most especially at 1. A corporate term; elders work in 3 John. One attractive hypothesis makes John groups the Elder both the author and the “principal” of 2. Jewish officials who led synagogues and constituted the Sanhedrin (Matt 16:21; 21:23) the Johannine School (Hengel).1 [Roles of Elders] 3. Governing bodies of Greco-Roman villages Equally intriguing is the issue of the 4. An authoritative position in the local community addressees. Are we to picture a Christian leader (Acts 20:17) by the name of Electa or Kyria or even Electa 5. Ruling elders in Egypt Kyria and her spiritual converts who may meet at her house, parallel in idea to spiritual children Bornkamm goes on to observe that had the elder been an apostle, his opponent could not have of the Elder reflected in 1 John (2:1, 28; 3:7, postured as he did (670–71). Furthermore, if the 18)? Early on, Clement of Alexandria suggested author were an apostle in this contested circumthat the Elect Lady was some influential woman stance, he would have relied on his status. More by the name of Electa in a church in the vicinity questionably, Bornkamm concludes that the title of Ephesus. Other scholars such as Deissmann cannot be integrated into an Episcopal or and Ebrard opted for an individual, some of Presbyterian form of govenment. them thinking of Kyria or Curia as a proper See Günther Bornkamm, “presbus, presbuteros,” TDNT name, “elect” being the modifier. Still others 6:651–72. reckoned simply with “Dear Lady.” Of the two possible names, Electa and Kyria, only the latter is well attested. The author has even been associated with Ruth in the Old Testament (Rendel Harris). It is more likely that the expression “elect lady,” apparently an honorific title, serves as a metaphor for the church addressed, as groups of believers are often called “elect” in the New Testament (Rom 8:33; Col 3:12; 2 Tim 2:10; Rev 17:14).2 A good parallel is 1 Peter’s feminine reference to elect exiles (1:1-2; 5:13). Verse 13 of 2 John seems to settle the matter with its reference to believers in a sister church that is also elect, unless one conjures up two sisters by the same name. Since the letter was directed to the church and her children, the letter was intended to be read by all, most likely presented aloud to the

252

2 John

gathered assembly. It was not intended for a single recipient as the regular use of the plural attests, perhaps helping to explain why it survived. The idea of election may not be pronounced in John, but it does appear in terms of Jesus as the Elect One of God (1:34) and his disciples as chosen (6:70). Indeed, rather emphatically we find the Johannine Christ saying, “You did not choose me, but I chose you” (15:16). One suspects from the perspective of 1 John regarding the world and from John 15:19 and 2 John 7 that the Elder means to infer that the believers addressed were chosen out of the world. This election does encompass receptive believing and obedience to the commandments (v. 5). This election (Credit: Courtesy of the Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University) is corporate, experienced in Christian community This late 17th C. woodcut captures the theme of truth (Latin veritas) that the (vv. 1, 13). author of 2 John highlights in a triple reference to truth (Greek al∑theia) in the The opening verse also letter’s opening sentence (2 Jn 1-2). In the woodcut, the truth breaks exemplifies the love of through the clouds to enlighten those who gladly receive it below. Christians for one another, which is ardently espoused in 1 John with this caring Presbyter expressing his Christian love for those with whom he shares the faith, in particular the communities chosen by God. The expression “in truth” could simply underline his sincerity of love, but given the prominence of truth in the letter as shorthand for Christian belief, specifically in Jesus Christ come in the flesh (v. 7), the intent here concerns love among fellow believers. Once again we find orthodoxy and orthopraxy. The word “truth” appears twice in v. 1, once in v. 2, and again in v. 3, in effect announcing one of the themes of the letter. The Elder enlarges upon his personal attesTruth Breaks through the Clouds

2 John

tation of love, envisioning all believers who share faith loving the recipients as well. This includes not only the children of the sister church from which he writes (v. 13) but also a larger circle of associated churches out of the Johannine movement or even a worldwide ecumenical vision. Contrasting “alone” (monos) quite effectively with “all” (pantes), he intended the word “all” inclusively. A sense of solidarity among all the genuine believers pervades this writer’s outlook. Since the Elder identifies the believers as those who have known the truth, it is highly likely the full Johannine freight of knowing is intended, including believing and obedience (cf. 1 John 2:3). Such characteristic knowing encompasses experience of God and belief in the Son of God (1 John 5:20), a relationship and fellowship discerned by one’s lifestyle (1 John 2:3, 29), an active, verbal discerning. The use of the perfect participle implies an initial knowing of God with a continuing relationship. Thus the author enhances the recipients’ sense of being beloved, already having affirmed that they were elect of God. The members of the small house churches would feel affirmed significantly and beloved, belonging as it were to a new religious movement in which believers empowered one another. At v. 2 the first sentence continues with its causal claim that this Christian truth abides among Christians. This truth, disclosed in Jesus and now about the faith as well, then indwells presently and is eternally lasting. Once again he draws upon the rich levels of meaning inherent in the Johannine use of the word “abide,” a presiding metaphor in 1 John, as well as other expressions of spiritual interiority. The present experience of indwelling truth becomes a sturdy basis for eternal security. By means of vv. 1 and 2, the recipients would have experienced a sense of assurance and receptivity in preparation to hear the remainder of the letter. As the Elder (1) called upon the full ecumenical breadth of all genuine believers (v. 1c) and (2) referred to the everlasting duration of eternal life (“forever,” v. 2c), he not only underscored the importance of the letter to the recipients, adding a definite gravitas, but also offered a clue to how he thought. Having predicted the indwelling truth as lasting forever, the Elder also promises that grace, mercy, and peace (v. 3) will continue to be with genuine believers, using the verb “will be” (estai) in both cases. The Elder’s personal faith shines forth; his having experienced these three spiritual realities previously leads him to anticipate their continuance always. One expects the writer to say “with” or “to you” rather than “with us.” This promissory form, though roughly similar to Paul’s typical wish for grace and peace

253

254

2 John

(see also 1 Pet 1:2; 2 Pet 1:2; Rev 1:4), is distinctive and is more a confident assurance of spiritual blessings from God predicted for all Christians. It reads like an act of faith on the part of the author, something fully expected, not merely blithe assurance. This promise is quite a significant one on which the readers can count. The letter is immediately lifted out of triviality. It is likely that we have here a piece of primitive liturgy, introductory greetings with which a church service began; they characterized the assembly with the expectation of an experience of grace, mercy, and peace. The grace and peace, though baptized with Christian meaning, are conventional enough, grace reflecting the typical Greek greeting and peace (shalom) the Hebrew. While the word “grace” is scarce in John (1:14, 16, 17) and missing in 1 and 3 John, the notion of divine giving is widespread in 1 John. Furthermore, grace can be seen throughout 1 John in forgiveness of sins (1:5–2:2), in the loving sending of the Son (4:7-11), and in the taking away of sin (3:5, 8). Peace does not appear in 1 John but shows up at 3 John 15. In John, peace is the opposite of being troubled and afraid, the gift of the departing Christ to disciples (14:27; 16:33; 20:19, 21, 26), and is prominent in appearances of the Risen Christ. Mercy and grace from God would certainly eventuate in peace. The great commentator Westcott wrote that “the succession ‘grace, mercy, peace’ marks the order from the first motion of God to the final satisfaction of man.”3 The greater interest attaches to the middle term “mercy” since it is less traditional in the greetings of early Christian letters. Most interestingly, it does appear in this triad form in the Pastorals (1 Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2), possibly suggesting a later currency of the three. At 1 Peter 1:3, the new birth is understood as a gift of great mercy and life everlasting as seen at Jude 2. Neither the verb nor the noun shows up in John, or in 1 or 3 John, making this usage singular, possibly suggesting a liturgical influence. Mercy functions as a divine attribute in the Old Testament. “I am Yahweh who shows mercy” (Jer 9:24). It is often translated ˙esed as the following parallelism implies: “Yahweh’s steadfast love does not cease; his mercies never come to an end” (Lam 3:22, 32, NRSV). It appears prominently in the famed formula of benediction at Numbers 6:25. In the Synoptics, Jesus portrays mercy in terms of extravagant forgiveness (Matt 18:27, 33), and in terms of compassionate action for the wounded (Luke 10:36-37). A tenderness toward humanity is implied. For the early church, mercy, along with grace and peace, belong to the character as well as the gifts of God. The Elder makes

2 John

clear that the source of all three is the Father and the Son, not merely well wishing from a sanguine correspondent. Truth and love, the two terms that capsule Johannine faith (as 1 John 3:23), are bundled into this magnificent, affectionate salutation. Both find their origin in the Father and the Son. The love is certainly a mutual love (v. 5d). It represents not merely the duty of an individual believer but reciprocal love in community, which is a privilege as well as a responsibility, and, as always, the test and the signature of their unique community. Truth and love not surprisingly are bound together in typical terms of Johannine orthodoxy, especially Christology, and orthopraxy, particularly obeying the love command of John 13:34-35. These two non-negotiable aspects dominate the upcoming central section of 2 John and anticipate his purposive rhetorical strategy. The naming of truth first, pursued first tentatively at v. 4 and then developed beginning at v. 7, is not incidental but a subtle sign of its preeminence in this letter. Love and Truth, vv. 4-11

This central section of this sliver of a letter, like 1 John, highlights believing in the incarnate Christ and loving fellow believers (vv. 4-6; cf. 1 John 3:23-24). As in 1 John (2:18-27; 4:1-6), the Elder is exercised as well to warn about deceivers (vv. 7-11). These few verses may disclose the primary concerns of 1 John as well as 2 John. The reader should note that the writer offered three guidelines: (1) love one another (v. 5d), (2) be on your guard (v. 8a), and (3) do not receive those who fail the tests of love and truth. We find a progression from exhortation (vv. 4-6), to warning (vv. 7–9), to command (vv. 10-11). The Cruciality of Walking in Truth and Love, vv. 4-6 Verses 4-6 (especially v. 6) and vv. 7-11 (especially 7 and 9) activate two of the main “tests” of Johannine Christianity, not surprisingly for readers of 1 John (as 3:23). The Elder registers his delight (v. 4; cf. 3 John 3) in a spirit of a thanksgiving, expressing his deep satisfaction that some of the believers to whom he writes stand in strong alignment with the faith characteristic of the beginning. The “rejoiced” or “overjoyed,” expressed in the aorist tense, recalls the moment when he discovered that certain of the Lady’s children were faithful to the divine and defining commandment. The addition of the word “greatly” (lian) underscores the joyous emotion. He likely learned of this good news from believers/missioners traveling from one church to another (cf. 3 John 3). Similar reports

255

256

2 John

were given before the church and not just to the Elder (3 John 6). The “some” believers, a partitive construction, implies that others are wavering or leaving; the Elder’s greatest fear is allayed, but his need to write is justified. The impression that some were not remaining loyal may imply that emissaries had already arrived, though the “if ” at v. 10 could be taken to suggest that their baleful influence was more of a hypothetical possibility for the future. I suspect that the report was the catalyst that motivated the letter. Reference to walking in the truth reflects the Semitic perspective that truth is truth only when activated (cf. 1 John 2:6, 11; 3 John 3, 4), but likely also refers to the Christian revelation, especially the incarnation. Making use of the familiar “just as” (kathøs), so particularly pivotal for the Johannine ethic, the author refers to the divine commandment incumbent upon all believers, including himself. It is somewhat surprising that he identifies the source of the commandment as the Father rather than the Son, but in passages such as 1 John 3:23-24 and 5:3, the explicit source is the same. Furthermore, Jesus is presented as the revealer of the will of God, and at John 10:18 Jesus divulges, “This commandment I received from my Father.” Likely a similar understanding obtains here. The depiction “we have received” as a commandment suggests a particular moment of previous revelation, whereas at v. 6 “you have heard” has in mind the hearing of the preached word by the recipients of the letter. Having reflected his intense joy and given the occasion for the letter in a transitional sentence, the Elder cuts to the chase in v. 5. With dramatic immediacy he makes an impassioned appeal telegraphed by “now.” For the second time he addresses the church directly as “dear Lady,” a passionate appeal of a direct character in the making. Choosing his words carefully, he first states clearly that the defining love commandment he is about to bring forward is not of his making. Risking no misunderstanding, he introduces the language “not as” (ouch høs). It is not as though I am writing you a new commandment, he says in effect, but on the contrary (adversative alla), one believers have had “from the beginning.” “From the beginning,” a frequent and pivotal baseline for 1 John as well (cf. esp. 2:7), points to the beginning of the Johannine church, likely not referring to the original utterance by Christ since he carefully distinguishes that it was not new to them. Jesus explicitly characterizes his commandment as “new” (John 13:34). See the commentary on 1 John 2:7. The defining commandment urged believers to love each other, giving and receiving love. This special Christian love was modeled on the way Jesus loved his own disciples and upon his self-giving death for others (as 1 John 3:16 and

2 John

257

4:9-11). The love command apparently belonged to the first elements that oriented would-be believers. One might even speculate that it was a part of the Johannine missionary preaching, allowing listeners to understand this new faith community. The love commandment belonged, as it were, to the covenant of understanding from the outset. Love enjoyed equal footing with christological belief in the Johannine gospel. Love and belief are both litmus tests of fellowship (1 John 3:23-24), and are among the inseparables, along with the Father and the Son, though belief is primary in 2 John. At v. 6 the Elder clarifies his intent by using the demonstrative “this” construction, ever so characteristic throughout 1 John, here to delineate love. Love here could be love for God (1 John 5:3; cf. John 14:21, 23; 15:9, 10) or love for one another as at v. 5 on the analogy of 1 John 5:2 (von Wahlde). Both are possible, but the former, though a minor shift from v. 5, is the more likely. The author does return at v. 6e to his metaphor of walking (v. 6b) first mentioned at v. 4. Walking in it could refer to commandment or love or truth. While there are no exact parallel passages to walking in love or in the commandment (de la Potterie), one certainly finds in 1 John 2:9-11 being and abiding and hating (the opposite of love), explicitly in terms of walking. One must embody this love commandment, not merely learn it. With a second clarification via a demonstrative “this” (v. 6c), he reiterates the complete necessity to design one’s walk in terms of mutual love. Resources for Detailed Analysis of Verses 4-6 These commandments (v. 6b), plural as at Raymond Brown, The Epistles of John (AB 30; Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1 John 3:23, have in mind both believing and 1982), 660–68. loving. The original revelation received and Ignace de la Potterie. La Verite dans Saint Jean. then heard remains reliable and constant, and AnBib 73–74 (1977): 646–55. it is imperative to live it. Be faithful to what is U. C. von Wahlde. “The Theological Foundation of already known. Verses 4-6, the first step in a the Presbyter’s Argument in 2 Jn (2 Jn 4-6).” three-step rhetorical progression, lay the founZNW 70 (1985): 209–24. dation for vv. 7-9. So far as the Elder is concerned, both here and at 1 John, the “deceivers” transgress both commands. [Resources for Detailed Analysis of Verses 4-6] The Eschatological Crisis of the Moment, vv. 7-9 This stage of the letter, so informed by 1 John 2:18-27 and 4:1-6, reflects a momentous crisis for the church calling forth “last hour” language (1 John 2:18). At v. 7 “deceivers” does not refer to all unbelievers but specifically to those previously within the fellowship who seceded and then functioned as architects of the tragic misconstrual of Johannine Christology. The deceivers appear to operate within the Johannine network, yet teach in a heterodox

258

2 John

manner. Perhaps they mislead others and themselves (as 2 Tim 3:13). Once again, as at 1 John 2:18 and 4:1, the Elder portrays the numerical magnitude of this group as “many,” a considerable reason for alarm. The exodus seems to be more than a trickle of discontents. Some scholars see a majority of believers reflected in the word “many” and mark a critical stage in the eventual disintegration of the Johannine community (Smalley). It would appear that the dissidents not only exited the church but went on a mission of propaganda of their own. In the Greek text v. 7 actually begins with an abrupt “because” (hoti ), generally not reflected in the translations and likely indicating he had the deceivers in mind as early as vv. 4-6, those not loving as in 1 John 3:11-18. Indeed, the Elder wrote 2 John to combat the spreading deception. These deceivers have both abandoned the church and gone out into the world, the use of the aorist tense suggesting a disruptive particular crisis during which many bolted simultaneously. They have entered the worldly realm dominated by the demonic (so 1 John 5:19). The “many” correspond to those not confessing Jesus Christ as incarnate. Verse 7b seems to be parallel to v. 7a and defined by v. 7c. See the comments on 1 John 4:2, 3 where you find the same christological controversy, the same exodus, and similar derogatory labels. “Jesus Christ coming,” present participle, may have messianic overtones but also has in mind corporeal reality (1:1-3; cf. John 1:15, 27; 3:31; 6:14; 11:27), once more suggesting a docetic and possibly gnostic threat. One line of interpretation, taking the participle “coming” as future, raises the possibility that the controversy swirled around the physicality of Jesus in a second Advent (Westcott) or even had in mind a bodily return of Christ to reign on earth.4 First John does evince an interest in the consummation (2:28–3:3). Its clear parallel at 1 John 4:2 and 3 is not concerned with the future. Here in 2 John the future interpretation may be defensible grammatically but not contextually. The argument that the present “coming” disproves any reference to docetic or gnostic tendency and is not a reference to incarnation (Lieu) does not seem to take “in flesh” weightily enough. It has also been suggested by a distinguished grammarian that it is intended rather as past, “having come,” given the context (Moule). It is most likely that the writer picked up on not only the characteristic expression in John but also the confession of faith of the Johannine church, “Jesus Christ come in flesh.” Interestingly, Ignatius spoke of the one Physician in present tense as fleshly and spiritual (Eph 7:2), thinking of the Christ event in holistic terms. That the incarnation continues to be true for the community could be in mind (Smalley,

2 John

Schnackenburg), but the provocative suggestion that the Elder had in mind the continuing mode of the Redeemer’s existence (Brooke, Brown, Marshall) seems to outrun the context. (See also Polycarp’s To the Philippians 7:1.) At v. 7c the text changes to the singular “any such person,” both to identify unmistakably and to generalize. The conceptuality of the antichrist derives from the world of Jewish apocalyptic and defines the crisis as eschatological. The strongest links are likely to Daniel; Mark 13; 2 Thessalonians 2; and Revelation 12, 13, 17. The term in the context of 1 and 2 John may have emerged because of the denial of the incarnation (see 1 John 2:22, 23). These opponents deceive by misrepresenting themselves and by advocating an inadequate Christology (see 1 John 2:27), apparently offering a reconstruction of their own. For the Elder it was not simply a matter of his views versus alternative opinions but fidelity to the revelations given the community from the outset. At v. 8 he follows up the warning of v. 7 with a call to alertness reminiscent of 1 John 5:21. Warning is stock in trade in 1 John (1:6, 8, 10; 2:1, 4, 11, 15, 18). He wants them not to be swayed or led astray to become disobedient to the two essential hallmarks of mutual love and christological truth. The purpose of his imperative “[b]e on your guard” explicitly is to safeguard them from losing their full reward, making an emotional appeal to awaken them (pathos). This type of warning is often used in the New Testament regarding false teachers (Mark 13:5, 9, 23, 33; Col 2:8). Some scholars, seeing apostasy lurking in the wings, take the full reward to refer to eternal life (as Schnackenburg) while others wonder if the loss is less than everything (Painter). The word “full” opens up the possibility of the latter. With this second option the analogy of 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 comes to mind. John 4:36 seems to favor this latter option. The context represented by v. 9 supports the first option, perhaps decisively as does 1 John 2:25, though breezy answers to baffling questions are less than convincing. At v. 9 the apostolic author brings forward a typical maxim introduced by “[e]veryone who” along with characteristic thesis and antithesis alternatives. These kinds of broad statements in the letters are generally applicable. The author makes it clear that those leaving the Christian teaching lose claim to having the Father or the Son. The participle translated “going ahead” is further understood in terms of not remaining in the teaching. The picture is that of leaving a christological faith rather than being faithful, likely disregard for the love command as well. It stands in contrast with

259

260

2 John

“remaining,” a persistent insistence or sign of the true believer throughout 1 John. Of considerable interest is whether to interpret the teaching as about Christ (objective genitive) or of Christ (subjective genitive). Of course, one finds the teaching of Jesus in the Synoptics (Mark 1:22, 27; 4:2; 11:18; 12:38; Matt 22:33), and in John (7:16, 17; 18:19), where it concerns his role and identity. The noun “teaching” (didach∑ ) does not appear in 1 or 3 John, yet it appears strikingly three times at 2 John 9-10. A few ancient texts sought to solve the issue either with “of the Christ” or “his,” but the strongest attestation favors “teaching.” Since the usage in John favors “of Christ” but centers in christological belief and also makes room for the love command, it emerges as the more likely. Lieu takes the position that the question whether the teaching is from Christ or about Christ makes little difference. She takes note rightly of a growing concentration on the tradition of the community. She entertains options concerning the identity of the teaching as the tradition just summarized, a written document such as the Gospel or even 1 John.5 In either rendering, the “Progress” upfront issue contextually is the physicality of One could almost take this verse as a Jesus Christ. The Elder assures those who perslogan for that sort of ultraconservatism severe in the teaching of Christ that they have which reacts to anything and everything which both Father and Son (cf. 1 John 5:11-12). In smacks of “progress.” Obviously, such an attitude John one can know the Father through the would lead to a stagnant church. . . . Christianity will always find herself in a position of having to discrimSon who is the way and truth (14:6). inate carefully between what is real progress under Some modern interpreters, perhaps identithe guidance of the living Spirit and what is only fying sympathetically with those “going apparent progress and a threat to the integrity of the ahead” (v. 9a), take the side of the progressives faith. in this ecclesiastical battle. While I don’t think John Polhill, “An Analysis of II and III John,” RevExp 67 (1970): 465. “progressive” represents the character of the secessionists but rather their leaving behind the original faith, I do believe this passage is not a proof text for closed thinking. The picture is not of progress in the faith but a leaving of it (Stott; cf. 1 John 2:19-20). They certainly abandoned the community with its mantra of mutual love. Here the matter historically turned out to be a grave danger, likely a drift toward Gnosticism (Schnackenburg). [“Progress”] A Necessary Response to the Unfolding Crisis, vv. 10-11 This third step in the progression, the bottom line toward which the entire letter has been moving, stands in no little tension with vv. 4-6, not to say his dismay expressed in 3 John 10, nor to mention modern sensibilities. This church strategist transitions at

2 John

v. 10 to a recommended course of action to cope with the crisis, having sounded the alarm during vv. 7-9. Having laid foundation for the two classic tests of genuine Christianity, truth and love as announced as early as v. 3, the author of 1 John was convinced that the false prophets were unloving (3:14-15). The strategy of 2 John is one of containment, to curtail the spread of a diluted, docetic faith. He sees himself as fighting for the faith. That he works with a rhetorical strategy cannot be doubted when v. 3 is correlated with v. 10. He coaches his receptive readers. The policy he pushed in this context was an emergency measure (Dodd), not carte blanche for discourtesy among Christians who differ. Two parties were locked in a power struggle over Christology, with the Presbyter’s insisting upon incarnation. The writer did not have the luxury to be passive and hope the problem would go away. Anticipating spreading trouble from traveling missionaries advocating a deficient doctrine and a divisive spirit, the Presbyter recommends that his readers not proffer traditional hospitality and receive such false teachers into their homes, probably house churches. This is reminiscent of his passionate advice at 1 John 4:1 not to believe just anyone but to test the spirits. He puts it to his readers as a hypothetical “if anyone comes.” He has written the letter in order to pen these words. To receive them into one’s home would be tantamount to supporting their cause by giving them a platform and respectability, running the risk of being personally misled and even inadvertently participating in evil works (v. 11; cf. Titus 3:10; Rev 2:2), a partial rationale for v. 10. Ordinarily hospitality amounted to a badge of honor in the early church (1 Clem. 1:2; 10:7; 11:1; 12:1) but came to be regulated (Did. 11:4-6). The admitted problematic stems from the proximity to a stout insistence upon loving one another at vv. 4-6 since ordinarily hospitality represented one tangible expression of love among Christians. The policy of vv. 10-11 can be read as an overreaction of rigid orthodoxy of a mean-spirited variety. The course of action is unattractive and tough. The reality may have required it if indeed these false teachers repudiated the bare but basic essentials of love and truth. At least the Elder did not direct excommunication as Diotrephes at 3 John 10. Closing, vv. 12-13

Having made his firm recommendation, the Elder closes in conventional letter form with an expressed hope to visit and greetings from the sister church from which he writes. While his comment

261

262

2 John

about the much more (polla, v. 12a) he might add to his letter is itself a natural way to end a letter, remarkably the same word appears at the close of John (20:30) in a context where indeed other things on the subject (signs) could have been added (see 16:12 as well). Is he just signing off at the bottom of his single page of papyrus? It certainly is the case that he wrote, “I hope.” Perhaps there were delicate issues or personalities best dealt with in person rather than with words that might be misconstrued. Verse 12bc leaves the definite impression that he wanted a face-to-face exchange and mutual joy, hearkening back to v. 4a. The word “but” at the beginning of v. 12b suggests a preferred alternative (alla), not necessarily a faint sentiment. The possibility of an upcoming visit may have been intended as further inducement to appropriate response. The sentiment of fulfilling joy at v. 12c is not only a Johannine idiom (John 15:11; 16:24; 1 John 1:4) but a rabbinic expression (Strecker). What then if the Presbyter wrote 2 John before 1 John, thinking initially that he would make a visit? When the visitation became impractical, he may have decided to write 1 John in lieu of the projected journey (Houlden). This is an ingenious suggestion that takes seriously the avowed intent to make a personal call. Perhaps he preferred a face-to-face visit to have more impact and rekindle the relationship. Perhaps his desire to travel grew out of his anxiety emerging from the gravity of the situation. The Presbyter could have been effective in personal diplomacy and had some confidence in this ability. That this elder made site visits to other churches as the Presbyter offers a further window into his role. He would go to whatever lengths to head off this disaster in the making. It is interesting to know that 2 John was written with black ink on papyrus and apparently without an amanuensis or secretary. These details provide a certain tangibility. This verse represents the only biblical reference to the use of papyrus. The Greek word chart∑s pictures a roll of papyrus used for writing a letter. The final verse of the closing is warm, with the children of the sister church of which he is a part greeting the children of the dear Lady (cf. Phil 4:23). This implicitly recognizes an attempt at fellowship among churches. The language of family, as evidenced in “sister” and “children,” suggests commonality and relationship. At v. 1 he had spoken in his own voice but here communicates from one church to another, the presumption being that his congregation was aware of and agreed with his letter. Should we envision several in the room as he composed? The mention of elect again at

2 John

v. 13 reflects that the Johannine believers knew themselves chosen of God through faith in Jesus Christ.

CONNECTIONS 1. How Else to Pray for Fellow Christians?

Modeling on the Presbyter (v. 3), pray expectantly for them to receive mercy into their personal beings and to become merciful in their relationships (see Matt 5:7; 18:21-35). Pray for fellow Christians to accept gifts of grace, opening their eyes to the Gracious Presence as they remember from their past lives and look around in their present lives. Pray also for the experience of peace, a kind of christological shalom (see John 16:25-31) that eventuates in breaking down barriers and building bridges (see Matt 5:9). See remarks at connections for 1 John 5:13-21. 2. A God of Mercy

Mercy is the basis of the covenant (Hos 2:19), the motive for providence (Isa 49:10), the source of salvation (Ps 6:4), of liberation from enemies (Ps 143:12), of pardon for sins (Sir 16:9), of comfort (Isa 12:1), and of joy (Ps 31:8). The healing miracles of Jesus were acts of mercy often in response to pleas for mercy. 3. Christian Truth, vv. 1-4

This redolent take on truth is something to know, is centered in Christ, actually indwells the believer, and lasts forever. You can wrap your life around it. Obviously then this thought-through notion of truth was no indulgence in gauzy generalizations. The Elder did not fire blank cartridges in a conventional salute to miscellaneous piety. See also 3 John 1, 8, 12 and John 14:6. 4. Being Genuinely Progressive, v. 9

Understandably, scholars and others identify with progressives over against heavy-handed ecclesiastics who often possess far more power and far less information. When one German scholar visited Louisville, he was still fuming about “those bischops” who lacked the courage and integrity to be “partisans” during the ugly era of

263

264

2 John

Nazism. At the same time we may agree that A. T. Robertson was not shoveling smoke when he wrote, “Jesus Christ is still ahead of us all calling us to come on to him.”6 5. Tips for the Newly Baptized

(1) Begin to love fellow Christians (vv. 4-6). Find a church and small group where people care not only about the gospel and social ministry but also for the well-being of one another. Perhaps actually start such a group based on fresh premises. If situated in a scene where people are embittered and distanced from one another, where grudges are guarded and people only distantly polite, become a thermostat for agap∑ rather than a thermometer, injecting a spirit of love as possible. Let love become the characteristic of your home and relationships. (2) The newly baptized can also be on orange alert for counterfeit forms of faith (vv. 7, 8), whether it be an innocuous “religion in general” of being “kind to granny and the cat” or spurious offers of health and wealth, prosperity and personal success, shibboleths instead of substance, consumer religion about me rather than about Jesus. The real Jesus indeed may dig us out of our comfortable burrows and send us on mission. Counterfeit faith can present ethereal conceptualities of a Jesus that fail to engage our culture. (3) Another Johannine tip is to choose carefully what you invite into your home (vv. 10-11), practicing alert homeland security. A new believer need not buy into a bunker mentality but can monitor online contacts from predators and pedophiles, protect from too much TV reflecting shallow or bad values, allow quality time when TV is not on. New Christians can avoid unsecured guns and secondary smoke and can seek to make homes drug-free zones. 6. At an Informal Youth Bible Study

Teaching the unlikely choice of 2 John to youth, the leader talked about the Old Man and the Elect Lady (vv. 1-3), the Good News first (vv. 4-6), then the Bad News (vv. 7-9), followed by “Bolt the Door, Baby” (vv. 10-11), closing with a P.S., “See ya” (vv. 12-13).

Notes 1. See Judith M. Lieu, The Second and Third Epistles of John: History and Background (Studies of the New Testament and Its World; ed. John Riches; Edinburgh:

2 John T & T Clark, 1986), 52–64, for an informed evaluation of options regarding the identification of the Presbyter. She considers the model of ruling elder, the Old Man, bearer of tradition, patriarchal authority over a whole province, and charismatic figure with pastoral authority. She concluded that some seniority was implied in the title yet the title remains oblique. 2. Ibid., 65–66, also taking this position pointing out that Jerusalem is portrayed as a woman in Isaiah, Baruch, and 2 Esdras and in Gal 4:21f, Rev 21:1, 2 Cor 11:2 and Eph 5:25f. Lieu goes on to note that the use of this imagery in the address of a letter is without parallel. 3. Brooke Foss Wescott, The Epistles of St. John (London: Macmillan, 1892), 225. 4. Georg Strecker, Johannine Letters (Hermeneia; ed. Harold Attridge; trans. Linda M. Malony; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996). Strecker, given the present participle coming, entertains the possibility of a denial of the real presence of Christ in the sacrament but discards it because in 2 and 3 John there is no evidence of conflict regarding the sacraments. Considering then the present tense reading improbable and the future reading promising, he takes the line of interpretation of an intervening messianic reign on the basis of texts in Ep Barn (15:4-5; 6:9; 7:9). 5. Lieu, Second and Third Epistles of John, 94–95. 6. A. T. Robertson, General Epistles and Revelation of John (Word Pictures in the New Testament; vol. 6; Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933), 254. Some contemporary theologians depict God out before us in the future beckoning. Wolfhart Pannenberg, Systematic Theology (vol. 2; trans. Geoffrey Bromiley; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 297, singles out the Pauline vision of Jesus Christ “as the eschatological form of humanity . . . ,” the definitive form of humanity.

265

3 John

COMMENTARY Salutation, v. 1

Following epistolary convention the author identifies himself as the sender and the beloved Gaius as the recipient. Immediately, he makes love personal, declaring his personal love for Gaius within the Christian truth, the “I” standing out in the Greek text (ego). Gaius was a beloved figure within the community, admiringly reported on at v. 3. Though a special relationship appears to obtain with the Elder, calling a fellow Christian “beloved” has permeated the community, as seen in the frequent address in 1 John to the “beloved” (2:7; 3:21; 4:1, 7, in these instances plural), and the Elder will address him in this pastorally affectionate manner three times, using only this appellation, with “my children” mentioned indirectly (v. 4). This is the kind of love urged by Christ in his new command to love one another, defined by the example of his love for his disciples (John 13:34-35), and so thematic in 1 John. For comment related to the title “the Elder” and loving “in truth,” see notes at 2 John 1. The Elder sees in Gaius the embodiment of authentic faith, sure signs of the Christian reality. First Personal Address: Being a Source of Joy, vv. 2-4

Verse 2, addressed personally to the “beloved” Gaius, continues to reflect epistolary convention of the era, especially the traditional health wish (v. 2). He wishes or prays for Gaius that all will go well, the word “well” prominent (the Greek prefix eu notable in the sentence). On the basis of what he recounts at v. 3, he is quite confident about the spiritual health of Gaius and wishes comparable physical well-being also, not merely offering a routine pleasantry. The spiritual well-being may include the peace of v. 15a. Interestingly, the author leaves out the usual greeting as at 2 John 3, plentifully present in his

268

3 John

closing (v. 15), though thanksgiving is present in his expression of joyful satisfaction (vv. 3-4). The Elder divulges a particular pastoral satisfaction in the report from the brothers, and possibly sisters as well, who had returned to the home church with glowing accounts about Gaius. He lets him know that his name has been called with great respect in Christian assembly. The returning missioners have “witnessed” favorably about him. While their witness here did not center on Jesus as typical of Johannine literature, it was nevertheless a witness from Christian witnesses about a Christian particuThe Truth larly faithful to the Johannine gospel. This The “truth” includes (1) something you vaunted faithfulness to the truth most likely know (2 John 1), (2) walk in (2 John 2; 3 included the vital christological component. John 3, 4), (3) abide in as a believer forever (2 John 2). This Christian truth, furthermore, (4) finds definition in the commandments (1 John 3:23). Believers are (5) challenged to become coworkers with truth (3 John 8).

[The Truth]

The Elder, good pastor, was given to enthusiasm as well as affection (2 John 4). He gave a high priority to the well-being of the church. The witnesses did not simply give a private report to the Elder but spoke before the entire church, as the church was likely involved in the original sending, possibly “members.” There seems to be a common practice of reporting to a church about missionary activities with other churches (Acts 14:27; 15:4; 20:17-36; 21:17-19; Gal 2:2). These references along with the Epistles of John provide for us an invaluable window that demonstrates how the churches networked through emissaries. The same witnesses of 3 John must have been the source for the less happy news about Diotrephes (vv. 9-10). The Elder singles out from the church report that Gaius was walking in the Christian truth, an ethical truth of loving and a christological truth of believing, especially the latter. Here “walk” is related to Christian truth, whereas in 1 John 1:6-7 and 2:6, 11 the alternative is one of darkness or light, although there darkness is related to the absence of love and light is related to the sphere in which Jesus walked. “Walk” has to do with how one conducts oneself. Given the parallel in 2 John 4, following the truth includes confessing what the deceivers deny (v. 7). Living the Christian truth is not merely a matter of ossified creedal orthodoxy. At v. 4 the Elder generalizes about his standing attitude in response to his children who faithfully walk in the truth. This pastoral writer who offers assurance so regularly values and appreciates it personally when someone like Gaius becomes such a source for him. This walking in Christian truth represents the basic text/sign of authentic Christianity. Since he refers generally to “my chil-

3 John

dren,” he may be referring to those converted by him as we picture Christian colonies spinning off from a mother church. This great Johannine joy of satisfaction appears at 2 John 12 and also at 1 John 1:4 (cf. John 15:1) in relation to other believers. This truth walker, faithful Gaius, stands out as source of joy and hope for mission. Second Personal Address: Becoming a Coworker on Mission, vv. 5-8

This great missionary text starts out as a sterling commendation of Gaius (vv. 5, 6) but transitions into recommendation of the missionaries deserving support (v. 7), leading to further appeal (v. 8) to this distinguished believer who does everything well. Rhetorical intent becomes increasingly apparent. The Elder hopes to accomplish something for the furtherance of the mission through his letter. Advancing the affirmation of v. 2b, he praises the kind hospitality of Gaius, especially since the itinerant missioners began as strangers to him. The New Testament church encouraged and depended upon hospitality (Rom 12:13; 1 Pet 4:9; 1 Tim 3:2; 5:10; Titus 1:8; Heb 13:2). Christian hospitality transformed strangers into friends (cf. v. 15) for both the one welcoming and the ones receiving, creating fellowship. These strangers are to be treated with love because of a preexisting commonality. The Elder employs the present tense, “you are doing faithfully,” as characteristic and in hopeful expectation of immediate reception of the church representatives. Gaius, whether he was a well-to-do layperson or a minister, must have had a sufficiently commodious home in which to house these missionary guests. The Elder felt an urgency to counter the baleful influence of Diotrephes. At v. 6 the Elder returns to his report about the good witness concerning Gaius in the church assembly, this time specifically in terms of his love. Now, as at 2 John 3, we have the full Johannine dyad of truth and love embodied in this sturdy believer, faithful both in truth and love. Gaius incarnated both orthodoxy and orthopraxy, so highly prized by the Elder. Gaius has learned the lesson of love and is obedient to the love commandment through the act of hospitality; love and hospitality are placed in parallel in this verse. The Elder has the audacity to urge this doer to yet more in the immediate future. In his positive request for provisioning of the traveling missionaries (v. 6b), he qualifies in terms of “doing well” (kaløs) and “worthily” (axiøs) of God (cf. Col 1:10; 1 Thess 2:12).

269

270

3 John

He appeals for more than a bare minimum: be generous rather than parsimonious in support of missions. Other indications of financial sponsorship for traveling expenses in early Christianity can be found (Acts 15:3; Rom 15:24; 1 Cor 16:6, 11; Titus 3:13-14). Interestingly, in the early Christian writing the Didach∑, problems with itinerant missioners led to regulations, such as a limited stay of two days and provision of bread, but critical suspicion about anyone who asked for money (11:5-6). At v. 7 the Elder effectively utilizes the conjunction “for” in a causal fashion to introduce two rationales for generous support, the motivation of the missionaries themselves and their legitimate need. They embarked on their mission on behalf of the name, almost certainly the name of Jesus or Christ (NRSV). Of course, one finds a rich tradition in the Old Testament regarding the name of God and in John (5:43; 10:25; 12:28), but in texts where the Evangelist clearly speaks it is definitely about believing in the name of Jesus (1:12; 2:23; 3:18; 20:31). It is far more likely here in 3 John that the name of Jesus is intended. The New Testament generally seems to have transferred focus on the name of God to Jesus (as Acts 5:40-41; 9:16; Rom 1:5; Phil 2:9). The New Testament speaks of being baptized in his name (Acts 8:16; 10:48) and forgiven in his name (Acts 2:38). In John one finds prediction of believers suffering for the name of Jesus (15:21). More importantly, at 1 John 2:12 appears allusion to forgiveness of sins through his name, Jesus being the likeliest candidate for the reference. This becomes the only overt mention of the Son in 3 John. Since the construction with the preposition “in behalf of ” (hyper) does not appear in John or 1 John, one wonders if it has become a technical term portraying missionaries. Most likely then the description of going out in behalf of the name reflects a technical term for evangelistic activity with existing churches functioning as bases from which to start new house churches. In this context these missioners probably insist upon the classic Johannine Christology in their visits to existing churches. The Elder includes in his case the vital fact that these missioners were apparently preaching to unbelieving Gentiles but were not mendicants begging from them. This eschewing of begging reflects a decisive operating principle for the missionaries but highlights their undeniable need. If believers do not support them, who will? With a deft “therefore” (v. 8a) the Elder not only uses logical argument, so prevalent in the letters, but becoming hortatory he draws upon the language of obligation. In his assertion of general responsibility for welcoming of missionaries characteristically he includes

3 John

himself: “we owe it to them.” The “we,” associative in use, would include the Elder, the Elder’s children (v. 4), and Gaius, but beyond the letter would indicate a generally recognized obligation in the Johannine community. This earnestly advocated Christian hospitality reflects a spirit of welcome as well as a duty. It is about receiving, and Diotrephes represents its antithesis (vv. 9, 10). The Elder goes beyond obligation to offer the future satisfaction of becoming a fellow worker with the missionaries, an actual participant through generous hospitality (v. 8b). The Greek word literally means “working together with.” Particularly in the Pauline writings, reference can be found readily to those helping to spread the gospel (Rom 16:3, 9, 21). At 1 Corinthians 16:16 you find the idea of working together in common cause. As a coworker Gaius can choose to be cooperative, to join in common purpose. Judith Lieu observes that “to help such brethren is to align oneself fully with the spirit of Johannine Christianity.”1 So the Elder holds forth the meaningful prospect of further spiritual advance in motivational fashion. These missionaries are (1) admired by the author, (2) trusted by the congregation (vv. 3, 6), (3) motivated for the sake of Christ (v. 7), (4) dependent for support (v. 8a), and (5) workers for the truth (v. 8b). Gaius has the power through his means to send them on mission, embodying, as it were, the love command (cf. 1 John 3:17). Discrediting Diotrephes, vv. 9-10

Sandwiched between a glowing commendation of Gaius (vv. 5-8) and another for Demetrius (v. 12), the Elder puts forward a scathing critical expose of one Diotrephes, whose name means “fostered, cherished by Zeus” (Liddell and Scott). This passage belongs to the rhetorical intent to further the mission that Diotrephes impedes and to dissuade Gaius from imitating him. The Elder sets the table by informing Gaius of a letter previously written to the church to which Diotrephes reacted, either to the letter itself or representatives delivering it. Does the writer mean the network of Johannine churches in a province (Johnson) or the church to which Diotrephes belongs? It is at least the latter. The indefinite “something” is tantalizing with its lack of specificity, but it is clearly a letter penned in the past. Does he refer to 1 John or to 2 John (Grayston, Strecker)? Some say he refers to 2 John since it was directed to a church. Did Diotrephes overreact to the advice about rejecting certain missionary representatives (2 John 8-10)?

271

272

3 John

This latter option falters on the high probability that Diotrephes would not accept the prescriptions of the Presbyter. On the other hand, Diotrephes may have taken exception to the insistence upon Jesus come in the flesh (2 John 7; also 1 John 4:2) if he were of a gnostic, docetic tendency. He may have been offended by castigation of secessionists (2 John 7; 1 John 2:19). Perhaps Diotrephes himself had gone beyond the teaching of Christ (2 John 9). We must also reckon with the natural possibility that the “something” was simply a letter of recommendation for some bearer of a letter of commendation and introduction. In any event, we must reckon with two rival groups of itinerant representatives competing for the existing house churches. We do know that Diotrephes reacted to the representatives from the Elder quite extremely, and any reconstructive hypothesis must make sense of his radical response. The Elder depicts Diotrephes’ characteristic leadership style with a fascinating word not used elsewhere in the New Testament, a hapax legomena, which he may have minted for the occasion. Utilizing a present participle, suggesting a typical and continuous attitude, he dubs him “the liking-to-be-first Diotrephes” (Brown). One translation freely renders “their would-be leader” (NEB). Diotrephes had a passion for preeminence, a love of the chief place (contra Mark 10:42-45). This characterization governs or explains the ensuing actions. Though the Presbyter issues a harsh value judgment, the policies pursued by Diotrephes tend to substantiate it. Diotrephes responded to the previous letter from the Elder likely with a double refusal, both the letter/Elder and the representatives. One wonders whether he even read the writing. The renderings “will have nothing to do with us” (NIV) or “does not acknowledge our authority” (NRSV) are indefensible as translations even though both may point rightly to the existing situation. The key descriptive Greek verb meaning to “receive” or “accept” a guest occurs in both v. 9 and v. 10 and should be translated similarly in both, since the issue clearly concerns hospitality. The “us” does not refer to the author editorially or to the followers of the Presbyter within the community of Gaius (Strecker) but relates to missioners who carry the Johannine message and those who send them, perhaps including the voice of the Johannine school as likely in v. 12 as well. This could argue for Diotrephes being counted among the alternative group, hence a theological difference. I suspect that not only the letter but also its contents offended Diotrephes. In any event, he went to great lengths to seal his congregation from the influence of the Elder. [Evident Error in Derivation of Word Meaning]

3 John

273

Because of such uncooperative Evident Error in Derivation of Word Meaning behavior, the Elder, at v. 10, raises the Margaret Mitchell, in a most carefully argued article, had the brass to berate Bauer, the tradipossibility of a personal site visit when tional authority on Greek meanings. Other scholars have he will call the hand of Diotrephes who followed Bauer, but Mitchell demonstrates that his entry has been undermining the mission. Is was inaccurate and misleading. There simply exists no the Elder issuing a threat and giving support for “to recognize one’s authority.” Rather the Diotrephes fair warning indirectly? Does meaning of hospitality (“receive”) should be understood he intend to speak before the church or both at v. 9 and v. 10. She recognizes how her translation in the community? The Greek verb has favors Malherbe’s sociological reading in terms of inhospithe meaning of “bring up” or “call atten- tality and possibly the analogy of diplomatic envoys as well. Margaret Mitchell, “‘Diotrephes does not receive us’: The Lexicographical and tion” to his deeds, particularly a whisper Social Context of 3 John 9-10,” JBL117/2 (1998), 299–320. campaign. The Elder will bring this to light, with Diotrephes’ acts of rejection and expulsion already public knowledge. Diotrephes was destroying credibility by talking nonsense with malicious words, a sharp contrast to the integrity of Gaius (v. 3). What undermining criticisms might Diotrephes have spread? The Elder likely faulted Diotrephes’s materialistic Christology, his interference in other churches, his harsh assaults on opponents. This aggressive Elder seems to be setting the stage for a future confrontation, possible escalation of conflict, or a forcing of Diotrephes to retreat. His assertiveness appears in his (1) writing the letter itself, (2) commending Gaius for hospitality, (3) urging Gaius to sponsorship, (4) forging a case against Diotrephes, (5) threatening a possible visit, and (6) exposing Diotrephes more publicly. The Elder is letting Gaius know he will not have to face Diotrephes alone. The Elder continued to pillory Diotrephes, who did not let his opposition go with malicious words, but made a policy of rejecting the missioners and even preventing others from offering them hospitality. Most strikingly, Diotrephes expelled those sympathetic to the Elder’s cause who wished to receive representatives (cf. John 9:34). These strong actions were a matter of public knowledge, but the Elder calls them into question. Diotrephes possessed the authority, seized power, or pressured the remainder of the congregation to excommunicate. This makes it evident that Diotrephes wielded considerable authority and likely was indeed the head of the church. Division did exist within the church, and Diotrephes acted tyrannically against fellow believers as well as toward the Elder, though both the external and internal actions related to the same issues. Ironically, the one upset about the aggressiveness of the Elder takes harsh measures toward his fellow believers. Without doubt, furthermore, we have a power struggle between two strong

274

3 John

personalities, a regional and a local church leader. But was there further agenda? In my judgment, recognizing other opinions, we have a conflict between the incarnational party and the more docetic, gnostic side, as in 1 and 2 John. Two rival groups with traveling representatives are vying for the support of the churches, the Elder the leader of one and Diotrephes an advocate of the other. While the personal temperament of Diotrephes must be considered, more than his distemper is at stake. He is intent to close off influence, both theological and territorial. While 3 John makes no overt statement about theological difference, the stress on faithfulness to the truth by Gaius (v. 3) and the subsequent connection between his faithfulness and hospitality and the lack thereof by Diotrephes, tips the scales in favor of theological difference. Those expelled by Diotrephes likely recognized the authority of the Elder, made the confession of Jesus come in the flesh (1 John 4:2; 2 John 7), and hence were amenable to receiving exponents of their common view. Diotrephes, for his part, did not merely want his own shop but was determined to barricade his community from the viewpoint of the Elder and those for whom he spoke. Was he in the process of seceding? Is that what secession looked like? Diotrephes, obviously a controlling personality, did not do so merely in a generic fashion. The apparent common authorship of 2 and 3 John also supports the likelihood of a theological fracas. The Third Direct Address, v. 11: Do not imitate evil

For the third time the Elder addresses Gaius directly as “beloved” in the body of the letter. One senses that the warning here reflects a primary reason for writing, given the Elder’s concern to curtail the apparently malignant influence of Diotrephes. It is unmistakably personal to Gaius, given the second person address along with the imperative (“do not imitate”), which is not just a general teaching, though the rudiments of the entire verse could have been preformulated in the Johannine school and/or in previous sermons. Have confidence in who and what you are and do not follow Diotrephes seem to be the contextual thrust. The strong negative “not” (m∑ ) leaps out from the Greek text. The negative example of Diotrephes alerts readers. The author does advocate emulating good models, possibly Demetrius among them (so Lieu), though this moral c ommonplace is abstract as well: “what is good.” The issue here is not the legitimacy of imitating but the choice of object, and 1 John urges imitation of Jesus (2:6), indeed the love command of

3 John

John 13:34-35 itself insists upon loving fellow disciples as did Jesus, and 1 and 2 John lift up loving one another. In the Pauline mission we find encouragement to imitate Christian leaders (1 Cor 4:16; 11:1; Phil 3:17; 4:9). The writer offers a rationale for v. 11a in terms of a maxim composed of thesis and antithesis, as is frequent in 1 John. It amounts to a test, a trademark of the letters, and not surprisingly a test based upon doing. Beginning with the positive, he declares that those doing good give away their spiritual source or origin or realm— that they are begotten “from God” (cf. 1 John 4:1-6). The Elder believes you can discern one’s “source” by behavior. The usage of the present participle suggests an habitual pattern of doing good. Once more we find the characteristic theological ethic, here based upon the vision of God as good or righteous. This calls up texts out of 1 John such as 2:29; 3:6, 9, 10 where you find similar dualities. The believer should reflect the character of God (cf. 1 John 3:7). This demonstrates that the insistence of the middle movement of 1 John (2:28ff ) was not incidental in the community, that Robert Law’s insistence upon moral behavior in 1 John was not misplaced.2 God as righteous or good represents a core category. Doing good includes hospitality in particular. The antithesis declares the alternative as well that those habitually doing bad things have no rightful claim to having seen God. What do these bad things entail? From 1 John one gravitates to loving the world (2:15-17), sinning (3:4), leading astray (3:7), hating one’s brother or sister (3:15), and idolatry (5:21). Here in 3 John bad things may include lack of cooperativeness, selfaggrandizement, inhospitality, and expulsion of fellow believers. Seeing God belongs alongside other Johannine categories such as begotten of God and knowing God (cf. 1 John 3:10). Gaius was faced with a choice, a duality of decision (Strecker), but he was empowered to make his own theological assessment. Recommendation of Demetrius, v. 12

Imagine Demetrius sitting in the same room hopefully while Gaius reads for the first time the personal letter from the Elder. Demetrius as a stranger (see v. 5) stands in need of a credentializing recommendation that will lead to his reception of hospitality and acceptability to speak to the church (cf. Rom 16:1-2; 1 Cor 16:3; 2 Cor 3:1; Phil 2:25-30). We have no evidence to link him to the silversmith of Acts 19:24, 38. He most likely was not only the bearer of the letter but a missioner, the head of a small entourage or

275

276

3 John

the lone representative. The positive profile of missioners as well as the request for financial support (vv. 7, 8) likely applies to Demetrius too. As an emissary of the Elder, he represents faith of the sort found at 1 John 1:1-3. The Elder probably anticipated opposition upon the arrival of Demetrius (Brown), but he refused to give up when Diotrephes rejected his first messengers. Three different kinds of testimony are offered in support of Demetrius, perhaps in deference to the Jewish rule of evidence (Deut 19:15). Demetrius enjoys an unqualified reputation in the Johannine community, spoken of well by all. The “all” refers not only to human testimony (1 John 5:9a) but to true Johannine Christians. The perfect passive “has been testified” implies that he has stood the test of time. The second testimony, intriguing and mildly mysterious, asserts that he also enjoys the testimony of the truth. This “truth” could simply mean that his life and integrity speak for themselves, but likely more specifically refers both to his christological confession and his love for fellow believers, his consequent fellowship with the Presbyter. The third testimony derives from those for whom the Elder speaks, the tradition bearers, the “we” of 1 John 4:14-16, a dissociative usage of augmented authority. This recalls the certifying testimony of John 19:35 and 21:24, though in these two texts it concerns Jesus. The credibility of the Presbyter transfers, as it were, to the stranger Demetrius. Gaius is assured and undoubtedly accepted Demetrius. The Elder pulled out the stops to commend Demetrius as much as he castigated Diotrephes. Demetrius, so seconded, will do more than hand over the letter. He will represent those who sent him, will stand up for both commandments, teaching from the baseline of Christian beginnings. The decision on the part of the Elder whether to make a site visit will depend on the report from Demetrius. While conventions appropriate to a recommendation are reflected at v. 12, the style of testimony bears a recognizably Johannine stamp. Closing Greetings, vv. 13-15

Having completed his immediate agenda for the upcoming visitation, the Presbyter confides that he has much more to communicate (cf. John 8:26; 16:12; 21:25), but he prefers not to use pen and ink. He has just finished a handwritten letter, dipping his reed pen in the ink several times in the process. The parallel with 2 John 12 not only bespeaks courteous epistolary convention of a friendly letter but likely typical church communications within

3 John

the Johannine network. We likely lack other similar letters from this same penman. One difference with 2 John 12 may be significant. He says at 3 John 14 that he hopes to come “soon” or “immediately” (eutheøs), suggesting an understandably more pressing situation (v. 10) and a greater likelihood of a visit. This represents the second mention of a visit that would include confrontational and supportive components. The Elder may have more advice he prefers to share orally in person where interchange can take place. He relishes a conversation with this valued friend. The final verse includes two greetings to Gaius and another to the other Christian friends. The peace or shalom he directs toward Gaius personally is a peace of the sort provided by the resurrected Christ (cf. John 14:27; 16:3; 20:19, 21, 26) and known within the Johannine koinonia. More of his well wishing for Gaius, this sending of peace is reminiscent of the peace forwarded at 2 John 3. In the tumult, Gaius needed it. Drawing upon the language of friendship, especially as exemplified by the Johannine Christ (11:11; 15:13-15), the writer additionally sends greetings to Gaius from the friends out of his circle or congregation. Most probably then, other believers knew of and approved the contents of 3 John, some of the “we” of the letter. The Presbyter urges Gaius to give personal greetings to the friends at his church, and to do so by individual name. We recognize here the embodiment of the love command, pastoral affection, thoughtfulness in individuating disciples, the intimacy of the still small Johannine movement, and conventional greetings between churches. We see furthermore the intention to extend the arc of influence of the letter and to keep these friends securely in the fold. Presumably but not certainly, the Elder knew the individual names himself. We find here a community understanding of the relationship of believers to one another, even when in different congregations, another interesting insight into the ecclesiology of the Johannine church. The commonality of the faith makes friends of strangers.

CONNECTIONS 1. Models and Mentors, v. 11

Words like “mimic” and “imitate” do not play well in our parlance, but models and mentors do. Baseball fans see prominent names of

277

278

3 John

iconic players in the history of a franchise memorialized in stadiums. Sports goods stores sell merchandise through the images of great women tennis players. Girl Scout leaders, soccer coaches, parents, teachers, and youth ministers become models. The need and choice of a model or mentor is crucial in modern life and in the Christian journey, whether heroes or idols. The author of Hebrews knew well the value of imitating persevering Christians (6:12), whether Abraham and Sarah by their abandoned lives with an adventurous God (11:8-12) or Moses for his disdain of materialistic values (11:26). The Elder urged passionately the imitating of the good. The third letter brims with alternative models and a mentor. 2. A Menagerie of Ministerial Models

Upon reflection, one notices a bevy of models for believers and ministers, and upon further consideration recognizes contemporary counterparts. We should not be this: a. Oppositional Diotrephes (vv. 9-10). He appears egocentric, reactionary, uncooperative, controlling, undermining with malicious assault, on a power trip, autocratic. He had not bought into the model of “servant to the servants.” You could run out of gas driving around his ego. Alexander Souter came up with the adjective “diotrephic” to describe an overly ambitious ecclesiastic, someone staying in the objective case all the time.3 Diotrephes may have been deceiving himself, operating in a glandular fashion from his shadow side, totally lacking in a self-critical faculty, governed by his need to be first. Some ministers are on a power trip. The diotrephic attitude can be contagious. One can fashion one’s personal fiefdom and be unreceptive to the overtures from the larger church. Megachurches can devolve into mini-denominations with no desire to cooperate. The misuse of ecclesiastical power for self-aggrandizement, particularly excommunication, has sobering analogues in church history. The diotrephic minister does not work well with people, as his or her interpersonal skills are a disaster area. He or she has the charm of a storm trooper. If one remains a rebellious teenager in adulthood, living out of an oppositional streak and lacking self-awareness, that individual can get coaching and harness energy into constructive outcomes. Some people in our competitive culture buy into the “King of the Mountain” syndrome. It is one thing to work hard and make your way to the top, but it is quite another to keep others from

3 John

279

joining you! Some people not only shove their way to some lofty peak but also push others off the ledge. Some make of this girls’ or boys’ game the theme of living—zealous to be first. Jesus said something rather about aspiring to be a servant (Mark 10:43). Also, the will to put oneself first can originate from pew as well as pulpit. We should try to be this: b. Cooperative Gaius (vv. 3, 5-7). Whether he is lay leader or minister figure, Gaius offers a refreshing alternative to the diotrephic. Diotrephes rejects, Gaius loves. The one expels, the other receives; one does bad and the other good; one is recalcitrant, the other cooperative. As a believer or church minister, one cannot only cooperate in a spirit of receptivity but also with a generosity of spirit buy into a larger vision than that of the immediate church. The Gaius model amounts to far more than being malleable and pliable. Gaius embodied the best in Johannine Christianity. Become like Gaius. Young ministers through clinical pastoral education or as interns or in new staff positions can learn to accept supervision from good mentors and coaches and accelerate their growth as ministers. c. The Stalwart Elder. He knew who he was. The Presbyter was grounded, thought theologically, had a baseline, was ethically oriented, an advocate of missions, supportive, sensitive to individuals. A good regional leader or bishop forwards the faith, defends it, puts out fires, and pastors the pastors as a wise mentor. A meaningful regional leader retains a certain fondness for people despite administrative demands, makes supportive site visits, “The Consequences of Putting Yourself and relies on persuasion. First” d. Promising Demetrius (v. 12). Such a person 3 John may continue to serve . . . as proclaims the Name, is ethical about personal both a call for cooperative efforts and a finances, reflects an undeniable integrity of life reminder of the dissension which so often strikes churches when harsh measures are taken to and faith, and enjoys a sterling reputation. exclude certain beliefs, when communication He or she has the strength to take a difficult between individuals and churches is broken, or assignment outside his or her comfort zone when church leaders allow personal ambitions to and enjoys the backing of discerning leaders. influence their actions. [“The Consequences of Putting Yourself First”]

R. Alan Culpepper, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1985), 135.

3. Names: Naming the Name that Is above Every Name, v. 7

Missioners, likely including Demetrius, went out spreading the gospel, preaching a christocentric message, and teaching about the Son come in the flesh as well as about mutual love. Some today accept the call to preach this gospel and go to distant places.

280

3 John

a. Name them name by name (v. 15). We are reminded not merely of the value of calling someone by name in personal fashion, but also of not taking any believer for granted. While it can be a manipulative technique, it usually reflects genuine interest. The Elder cared not only about nickels and noses and institutional survival concerns. All too many in and out of the church feel like anonymous attendees, perhaps belonging to that long gray line of faceless folk who are just a Social Security number or a zip code resident or a PIN number. We do well to remember the warmth of a personal greeting. No wonder these believers sharing a common truth loved one another and thought of themselves as “friends,” reminiscent of the relationship disciples and Jesus enjoyed with each other. Quakers took their name and no little part of their distinctive self-understanding from Johannine verses and have born witness to this practice to the larger Christian world. b. Name calling. Some people toss out the epithet “do-gooder” with a snarl. What a pity! Wouldn’t it be far better to become one? Wouldn’t the world be far worse off without them? The Elder held a strong opinion (v. 11), and so did Paul (Gal 5:9-10). 4. The Ministry of Writing

a. The Ministry of Introduction (v. 12). A thoughtful letter of recommendation and introduction can interpret an unknown person and speed their acceptance and a beginning understanding of their gifts. Older persons can sponsor young adults for jobs, graduate school, and churches. It often becomes a transfer of credibility from one already trusted to another, a seal of approval. It is an underestimated ministry. b. The Ministry of Letter Writing (3 John). One-page letters can make a difference, just a thoughtful note with an encouraging or understanding word of sympathy. It could be an e-mail or a note dictated on the way to the hospital. When a new baby comes along, a jolting divorce or diagnosis, an honor, a personal letter can inspire. “I just had you on my heart and mind . . . .” Members and ministers exercise this ministry. Ministers and others do well to keep gracious letters they have received. 5. Missions

a. Patron Saint of Mission Support (vv. 5, 6). Gaius, who comes out of 3 John smelling like a rose, deserves being lifted up as a poster boy for mission support. He stands as a strong masculine example

3 John

281

of mission support. Frequently women have held the ropes and have moved beyond parochial horizons to a vision of a world in need of Christ. b. The Audacity to Ask for Financial Support for Missions (v. 8). The Elder did not blanch at the prospect, not only asking for strategic support and finances, but also urging a response worthy of God. One church funded a minister of missions, provided a missionary house for furloughing missionaries, fostered sensitivity to the children of missionaries, and promoted extensive educational events and full court press requests for substantial amounts of money for mission support. From Hospitality hammers for Habitat for Humanity to money and prayers for missionaries to on site medical missions on the African continent, believers did. 6. A Miscellany of Meanings

a. How to Pray for Fellow Christians (vv. 2-4). Thanksgiving can be expressed when some fellow Christian becomes a source of joy because of love shown. You can get in touch with great satisfaction in the Christian faithfulness of others—like stalwart snowmen still standing when all the other snow has vanished. Mention them in moments of prayer. You can intercede that their lives go well as also their health and their spiritual well-being. b. How to Deal with Difficult People. Diotrephes clearly qualifies as a loose cannon, leaving the Presbyter little choice but to

(Credit: Courtesy of the Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University)

In this 17th C. woodcut, light envelopes a scene of hospitality (cf. 3 Jn 5-6) as the host serves his guests. The figure below in the shadows, wearing a toga and with his arm raised, may represent Diotrephes, who loved putting himself first (v. 9).

282

3 John

take him on. Just being nice was apparently not a viable option. Christians should choose battles carefully. However, a personality and formidable foe like Diotrephes cannot be faced without supportive allies. The Elder held two non-negotiables, love and belief, a balanced pair that not narrow but essential. Of course, in many situations other strategies than the one modeled by the Elder would be more effective. (See Charles Keating’s Dealing with Difficult People published by Paulist Press in 1984.) c. “Passing the Peace” (v. 15a). The passing of the peace in worship ignites response and meaningful interaction. Something of our faith in common draws worshipers closer to one another and leads on occasion to the very experience of peace. The passing of the peace far exceeds just “glad handing.” Worship need not be like a convention of narcoleptics. d. Opening Your Home (vv. 5-6, 8, 10). The New Testament affirms the practice of hospitality, the love of strangers (Rom 12:13; 1 Tim 3:2; 1 Pet 4:9; Heb 13:2). Jesus demonstrated hospitality in his eating with sinners (Mark 2:15-17; Luke 15:1-2). In Acts, numerous stories concern both guest and host and show how traveling missionaries and local believers provided a synergy for the advance of the faith.4 Today people can stay in touch with personal friends on mission fields via e-mail. Churches can offer hospitality to returning missionaries and to internationals and can welcome college students away from their homes. Church members can open their homes to the unchurched as outChristian Hospitality in Les Misérables posts of seeking love, offering dinner table evangelism to those open to conversation. One young boy heard the horror of the awful tragedy of his father being impaled, but a loving pastor took him into his home and fathered him. In the acclaimed Les Misérables, along with its haunting music one finds a life-changing scene in which a church leader gives hospitality to Jean Valjean. Some Christians adopt children, often unwanted, and others go out of their way to support children’s homes. Others invite people to dinner who hold opposing religious points of view. This too qualifies as an underestimated ministry.

(Credit: Barclay Burns)

3 John

Notes 1. Judith M. Lieu, The Second and Third Epistles of John: History and Background (Studies of the New Testament and Its World; ed. John Riches; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1986), 109. 2. Robert Law, The Tests of Life (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909), 67–70. 3. According to A. M. Hunter, Probing the New Testament (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1972), 144. 4. See John Koenig, New Testament Hospitality: Partnership with Strangers as Promise and Mission (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985).

283

Bibliography Akin, Daniel L. 1, 2, 3 John. NAC. Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2001. Anker, Roy M. Catching Light: Looking for God in the Movies. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005. Augustine. “The City of God.” In Basic Writings of Saint Augustine, edited by Whitney J. Oates. New York: Random House, 1948. ———. Love One Another, My Friends: Saint Augustine’s Homilies on the First Letter of John. Translated by John Leinenweber. New York: HarperCollins, 1989. Balz, H. “Pseudoprohetes.” In volume 3 of EDNT, edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982–1983. 497–98. Barclay, W. The Letters of John and Jude. Edinburgh: The Saint Andrews Press, 1958. Barrett, C. Kingsley. The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text. London: SPCK, 1958. Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of God. Volume 2. Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1957. Bauckham, R., editor. The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998. Bauer, Walter. Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971. Bauer, Walter, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1957. Baxter, Richard. Saints’ Everlasting Rest. Westwood NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1962. Beasley-Murray, G. R. Revelation. London: Oliphants, 1974. Beecher, Henry Ward. “A Sermon to Young Men.” In volume 4 of 20 Centuries of Great Preaching, edited by Clyde E. Fant, Jr., and William M. Pinson, Jr. Waco TX: Word Books, 1971. 304–18. Bengel, Johann Albrecht. Gnomon of the New Testament. 5 volumes. Translated by W. Fletcher, edited by A. R. Fausset. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1858. Betjeman, John. John Betjemen’s Collected Poems. Compiled by Lord Birkenhead. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1958. Black, C. Clifton. “The First, Second, and Third Letter of John.” In volume 12 of NIB. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998. 363–470. Blankenhorn, David. Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem. New York: HarperCollins, 1996. Bogart, John. Orthodox and Heretical Perfectionism in the Johannine Community as Evident in the First Epistle of John. Missoula MT: Scholars Press, 1976.

286

Bibliography Bornkamm, Günther. “presbys, presbyteros.” In volume 6 of TDNT translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, edited by Gerhard Friedrich. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1968. 651–80. Breck, John. “The Function of PAS in 1 John 2:20.” SVTQ 35 (1991): 187–206. Brokaw, Tom. The Greatest Generation. New York: Random House Inc., 1998. Brooke, A. E. The Johannine Epistles. ICC. Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishers, 1948. Brown, Raymond Bryan. The Fire of Truth: Sermons by Raymond Bryan Brown. Edited by Richard Spencer. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1982. Brown, Raymond E. The Community of the Beloved Disciple. New York: Paulist Press, 1979. ———. The Epistles of John. AB 30. Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1982. ———. “The Qumran Scrolls and the Johannine Gospel and Epistles.” CBQ 17/3 (July 1955): 403–19. ———. “The Qumran Scrolls and the Johannine Gospel and Epistles.” CBQ 17/4 (October 1955): 559–74. Bruce, F. F. The Epistles of John. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1979. Bruns, J. Edgar. “A Note on John 16.33 and I John 2.13-14.” JBL 86 (1967): 451–53. Buechner, Frederick. “The Kingdom of God.” In Best Sermons, edited by James W. Cox. San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1992. 101-108. ———. Wishful Thinking: A Seeker’s ABC. New York: HarperCollins, 1973. Bultmann, Rudolf. A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles. Translated by Philip O’Hara, edited by Robert Funk. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973. ———. The Gospel of John. Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray, edited by R. W. N. Hoare. Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1971. ———. Theology of the New Testament. Volume 2. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1955. Buttrick, David. The Mystery and the Passion. Eugene OR: Wipf and Stock, 2002. Calvin, John. The First Epistle of John. Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988. Campbell, Will. “That You Might Have Life.” In Sermons from Duke Chapel, edited by Will Willimon. Durham: Duke University Press, 2005. 180–85. Campolo, Tony. “The Bible Speaks about the Poor.” Sermon. 31 January 2008. New Baptist Covenant Celebration, Atlanta. Cannon, William. History of Christianity in the Middle Ages. Nashville: Abingdon, 1960. Carver, Gary. Out from the Ordinary. Lima OH: CSS Publishing Company, 1999. Chalmers, Thomas, “The Expulsive Power of a New Affection.” In volume 3 of 20 Centuries of Great Preaching, edited by Clyde E. Fant, Jr., and William M. Pinson, Jr. Waco TX: Word Books, 1971. 300–14. Conner, W. T. The Epistles of John. New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1929.

Bibliography Conrad, Joseph. The Heart of Darkness. Edinburgh: William Blackwood and Sons, 1902. Conzelmann, Hans. “psuedos.” In volume 9 of TDNT, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, edited by Gerhard Friedrich. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974. 594–603. ———. “skotos.” In volume 7 of TDNT, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, edited by Gerhard Friedrich. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971. 423–45. ———. “Was von Angang war.” In Neotestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann, ed. W. Eltester. Beihefte zur ZNW, 21. Berlin: Alfred Toppelmann, 1957. 194–201. Cook, Donald E. “Interpretation of 1 John 1-5.” RevExp 67 (1970): 445–60. Cook, W. R. “Hamartiological Problems in First John.” NovT 28 (July–September 1986): 131–58. Cousland, J. R. C. “Theaters.” Dictionary of New Testament Background. Edited by Craig A. Evans and Stanley E. Porter. Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000. 1218–21. Craddock, Fred. Craddock Stories. Edited by Mike Graves and Richard Ward. St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2001. ———. “Praying through Clenched Teeth.” In The Twentieth Century Pulpit. Edited by James W. Cox. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1981. 47–52. ———. “Today Is Judgment Day.” Sermon, Cherry Log Christian Church, Cherry Log GA, 20 March 2003. Culpepper, R. Alan. 1 John, 2 John, 3 John. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1985. ———. The Gospel and Letters of John. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998. ———. The Johannine School. Missoula MT: Scholars Press, 1975. ———. John, the Son of Zebedee. Studies on Personalities of the New Testament. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1994. Dahms, John. “The Johannine Use of Monogenes Reconsidered.” NTS 29 (1983): 222–32. Dana, H. E. The Epistles and Apocalypse of John. Kansas City: Central Seminary Press, 1947. Dawn, Marva J. “Not What, but Who Is the Matter with Preaching?” In What’s the Matter with Preaching Today? Edited by Mike Graves. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2004. 75–91. De Boer, Martinus C. “Jesus the Baptizer: 1 John 5:5-8 and the Gospel of John.” JBL 107 (March 1988): 87–106. ———. “The Death of Jesus and His Coming in the Flesh.” NovT 33 (October 1991): 326–46. Deissmann, Adolf. Light from the Ancient East: The New Testament Illustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco-Roman World. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1927. von Dobschütz, E. “Johanneische Studien.” Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 8 (1907): 1–8.

287

288

Bibliography Dodd, C. H. The Epistle to the Romans. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1932. ———. The Epistle to the Romans. MNTC. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1946. Dryden, De Waal. “The Sense of sperma in 1 John 3:9. In Light of Lexical Evidence.” Filogia Neotestamentaria 11 (1998): 85–100. Ebrard, Johannes Heinrich August. Biblical Commentary on the Epistles of St. John. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1850. Edwards, Ruth B. The Johannine Epistles. NT Guides. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996. Evans, Craig A., editor. John, Hebrews-Revelation. Bible Knowledge Background Commentary. Eastbourne, England: David C. Cook, 2005. Feuerbach, Ludwig. The Essence of Christianity. Translated by George Eliot. Amherst NY: Prometheus, 1989. Filson, Floyd Vivian. “First John: Purpose and Message.” Int 23 (July 1969): 259–76. Flusser, David. The Sage from Galilee. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2007. Fosdick, Harry Emerson. “The Power to See It Through.” In The Power to See It Through. New York: Harper Brothers, 1935. 1–10. Francis, F. O. “The Form and Function of the Opening and Closing Paragraphs of James and 1 John.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 61 (1970): 110–26. Goodenough, E. R. By Light, Light: The Mystic Gospel of Hellenistic Judaism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1935. Grayston, K. The Johannine Epistles. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1984. Green, James Leo. God Reigns. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1968. Green, Roger, and Walter Hooper. C. S. Lewis: A Biography. New York: Harcourt Brace Javanovich, 1974. Grimm, C. L. W. Lexicon Graeco-Latinum in libros Novi Testamenti. Leipzig: Arnoldische Buchhandlung, 1862. Gustafson, J. M. Christ and the Moral Life. New York: Harper and Row, 1968. Gunther, Peter, editor. A Frank Boreham Treasury. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984. Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Theology. Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press, 1981. Harbour, Brian. “Test the Spirits.” Brian’s Lines, November 1985. Häring, Theodor. “Gedankengang und Grundgedanke des ersten Johannesbriefs.” In Theologische Abhandlungen Carl von Weizsäcker zu seinem siebzigsten Geburtstage. Edited by Adolf von Harnack, et al. Freiburg: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1892. 171–200. Harnack, Adolf von. “Über den dritten Johannesbrief.” In Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, 15.3 (Leipzig 1897): 3-27. ———. What is Christianity? New York: Harper & Brothers, 1957. Hartman, L. “onoma.” In volume 2 of EDNT, edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982–1983. 519–22.

Bibliography Hauck, Friedrich. “katharos.” In volume 3 of TDNT, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, edited by Gerhard Friedrich. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1965. 413–26. Heise, Jürgen. Bleiben: Menein in den Johanneischen Schriften. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1967. Hengel, Martin. The Johannine Question. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990. Hill, D. R. Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings: Studies in Semantics of Soteriological Terms. SNTSMS. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967. Hills, Julian. “‘Little children, keep yourselves from idols’: 1 John 5:21 Reconsidered.” CBQ 51 (2001): 285–310. Houlden, James L. A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles. BNTC. New York: Harper & Row, 1973. Howe, Reuel. Herein Is Love. Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1961. Hübner, H. “teleioø.” In volume 3 of EDNT, edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982–1983. 344–45. Hull, William. “John.” In Luke-John, volume 9 of Broadman Bible Commentary, edited by C. J. Allen. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970. Hunter, A. M. Probing the New Testament. Richmond: John Knox Press, 1972. Johnson, Thomas F. 1, 2, and 3 John. NIBCNT, vol. 17. Peabody MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993. ———. “The Antitheses of the Elder.” Ph.D. dissertation. Duke University, 1979. Jones, Peter Rhea. “A Structural Analysis of 1 John.” RevExp 67 (Fall 1970): 433–44. Käsemann, Ernst. “Ketzer und Zeuge. Zum johanneischen Verfasserproblem,” ZTK 48 (1951): 310–11. Keating, Charles. Dealing with Difficult People. New York: Paulist Press, 1984. Kennedy, Gerald. “One Thorn of Experience.” In volume 12 of 20 Centuries of Great Preaching, edited by Clyde E. Fant, Jr., and William M. Pinson, Jr. Waco TX: Word Books, 1971. 158–63. Kidd, Sue Monk. God’s Joyful Surprise: Finding Yourself Loved. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987. ———. Love’s Hidden Blessings. Ann Arbor MI: Vine Books, 1990. Kierkegaard, Søren. Stages on Life’s Way. Translated by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988. King, Martin Luther, Jr. The Words of Martin Luther King. Edited by Coretta King. New York: Newmarket, 1983. Koenig, John. New Testament Hospitality: Partnership with Strangers as Promise and Mission. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985. Kruse, Colin G. The Letters of John. Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000. Kubo, Sakae. “I John 3:9: Absolute or Habitual?” AUSS 7 (1969): 47–56. Kysar, Robert. “John, Epistles of.” In volume 3 of ABD, edited by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992. 900–12.

289

290

Bibliography la Potterie, Ignace de. “The Truth in Saint John.” In The Interpretation of John, 2d edition, edited by John Ashton. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1997. ———. La Verite dans Saint Jean. AnBib. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1977. Ladd, George Eldon. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993. Law, Robert. The Tests of Life. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909. Lester, Andrew D. The Angry Christian: A Theology for Care and Counseling. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003. Liddell, Henry George, and Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. New York: Harper Brothers, 1846. Lieu, Judith M. I, II, and III John: A Commentary. New Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2008. ———. The Second and Third Epistles of John: History and Background. Studies of the New Testament and Its World. Edited by John Riches. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1986. ———. The Theology of the Johannine Epistles. New Testament Theology. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Lindars, Gospel of John. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1972. Long, Tom. The Witness of Preaching. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1989. Longfellow, “Finale of Christus.” The Chief American Poets: Selected Poems by Bryant, Poe, Emerson, Longfellow, Whittier, Holmes, Lowell, Whitman and Lanier. Edited by Curtis H. Page. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1905. 242. Mace, David. Close Companions. New York: Continuum Books, 1987. ———. Success in Marriage. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1958. Mace, David, and Vera Mace. How to Have a Happy Marriage. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1977. Malatesta, Edward. Interiority and Covenant. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978. Malherbe, Abraham J. “‘Diotrephes does not receive us’: The Lexicographical and Social Context of 3 John 9-10.” JBL 117/2 (1998): 299–320. Marshall, I. Howard. The Epistles of John. NIBCNT. Edited by F. F. Bruce. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988. Martinez, Florentino Garcia, editor. The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994. Menninger, Karl. Whatever Became of Sin? New York: Hawthorn Books, 1973. Michel, Otto. “miseø.” In volume 4 of TDNT, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, edited by Gerhard Kittel. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967. 683–94. ———. “pat∑r.” In volume 3 of EDNT, edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982–1983. 53–57. Migliore, Daniel. Faith Seeking Understanding. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991. Moltmann, Jürgen. Theology of Hope. London: SCM Press, 2002.

Bibliography Moody, Dale. “God’s Only Son: The Translation of John 3:16 in the Revised Standard Version.” JBL 72 (1953): 213–19. ———. “Only Begotten.” In volume 3 of The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, edited by George Arthur Buttrick. New York: Abingdon Press, 1962. 604. Moule, C. F. D. An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek, 2d edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959. Müller, P. G. “phaneroø.” In volume 3 of EDNT, edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982–1983. 413–14. Nauck, W. Die Tradition und der Charakter des ersten Johannesbriefes. WUNT 3. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1957. Nagl, John A. “Die Gliederung des ersten Johannesbriefes.” Biblische Zeitschrift 16 (1922–1924): 77–92. Niebuhr, Reinhold. Children of Light and the Children of Darkness. Upper Saddle River NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974. Noack, B. “On I John II. 12-14.” NTS 6 (1959–1960): 236–41. Nouwen, Henri. Henri Nouwen. Edited by Robert A. Jonas. Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 1998. O’Neill, John C. The Puzzle of John 1. London: S.P.C.K., 1966. Owings, Timothy. “The Concept of Sin in the Fourth Gospel.” Ph.D. dissertation. Southern Seminary, 1983. Painter, John. 1, 2, and 3 John. SP. Edited by Daniel J. Harrington, S.J. Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002. Peisker, H. “theaomai.” In volume 2 of EDNT, edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982–1983. 136. Perkins, Pheme. The Johannine Epistles. New Testament Message. Volume 21. Wilmington DE: Michael Glazier, 1979. ———. “Koinonia in 1 John 1:3-7; The Social Context of Division in the Johannine Letters.” CBQ 45 (October 1983): 631–41. Plummer, Alfred. Epistles of St. John. The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. Edited by F. H. Chase and A. F. Kirkpatrick. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1906. Polhill, John. “An Analysis of II and III John.” RevExp 67 (1970): 465. Raines, Robert. To Kiss the Joy. Waco TX: Word Books, 1973. Rensberger, David. 1 John 2 John 3 John. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1997. ———. Johannine Faith and Liberating Community. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1988. Robertson, A. T. General Epistles and Revelation of John. Word Pictures in the New Testament. Volume 6. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933. ———. Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1934. Robertson, F. W. Sermons Preached at Brighton. 2d edition. London: Kegan Paul, 1889.

291

292

Bibliography Robinson, J., editor. “The Gospel of Philip.” In The Nag Hammadi Library. Revised edition. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988. 139–60. Roloff, J. “hilast∑rion.” In volume 2 of EDNT, edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982–1983. 185–86. Rust, Eric. Faith and Science. New York: Oxford, 1967. Salinger, J. D. Nine Stories. Boston: Little Brown Books, 1953. Scherer, Paul. “The Gospel According to St. Luke.” In volume 8 of IB, edited by George A. Buttrick et al. New York: Abingdon Press, 1952. 320–434. Schillebeeckx, Edward. Christ: The Experience of Jesus as Lord. Freiburg: Herder & Herder, 1983. Schilling, Paul. God and Human Anguish. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1977. Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. “Sermon at Nathanael’s Grave.” In A Chorus of Witnesses, edited by Thomas G. Long and Cornelius Plantinga. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994. 256–61. Schnackenburg, Rudolf. The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary. Translated by Reginald and Ilse Fuller. New York: Crossroad, 1992. ———. Jesus in the Gospels: A Biblical Christology. Translated by O. C. Dean. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995. Schneider, Johannes. “(bainø ).” In volume 1 of TDNT, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, edited by Gerhard Kittel. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964. 518–23. Schweizer, Eduard. “An Exegestical Analysis of 1 John 1:7.” In Theology in the Service of the Church, edited by Wallace M. Alston. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000. 188–95. ———. Lordship and Discipleship. London: SCM Press, 1960. Segovia, Fernando F. The Farewell of the Word: The Johannine Call to Abide. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991. Sheldon, Charles Monroe. In His Steps. Chicago: Advance Publishing Company, 1898. Slater, Thomas B. “1–3 John.” In True to Our Native Land: An African-American New Testament Commentary, edited by Brian K. Blount. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2004. 496–517. Smalley, Stephen. 1, 2, 3 John. WBC. Volume 51. Waco TX: Word Books, 1984. Smedes, Lewis. Forgive and Forget. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1984. Smith, Moody. First, Second and Third John. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1991. ———. The Theology of the Gospel of John. New Testament Theology. Edited by James Dunn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Spicq, Ceslaus. “agap∑.” In volume 1 of TLNT, translated by James D. Ernest. Peabody MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1994. 8–22. ———. “alazøn.” In volume 1 of TLNT, translated by James D. Ernest. Peabody MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1994. 63–65. ———. “Notes d’exegese johannique . . .” Revue Biblique (1958): 358–70. Stagg, Frank. “Orthodoxy and Orthopraxy.” RevExp 67 (Fall 1970): 423–32.

Bibliography Stewart, James. Preaching. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1955. ———. A Faith to Proclaim. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1953. Stott, John. The Epistles of John. Tyndale Bible Commentaries. Edited by R. V. G. Tasker. Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1964. Strecker, Georg. Johannine Letters. Hermeneia. Edited by Harold Attridge, translated by Linda M. Malony. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996. Talbert, Charles. Reading John: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles. Reading the New Testament Series. New York: Crossroad, 1994. Taylor, Barbara Brown. Mixed Blessings. Cambridge: Cowley, 1986. ———. The Preaching Life. Cambridge: Cowley, 1993. ———. Speaking of Sin. Cambridge: Cowley, 2000. Temple, William. Christus Veritas. New York: St. Martin’s, 1924. Toynbee, Arnold. Experiences. New York: Oxford University Press, 1969. Trites, Allison. The New Testament Concept of Witness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Troeltsch, Ernst. The Absoluteness of Christianity and the History of Religions. Translated by David Reid. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2006. Trueblood, Elton. While It Is Day. New York: Harper and Row, 1974. von Wahlde, U. C. “The Theological Foundation of the Presbyter’s Argument in 2 Jn (2 Jn 4-6).”Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der alteren Kirche 70 (1985): 209–24. Vouga, François. “The Johannine School: A Gnostic Tradition in Primitive Christianity?” Bib 69 (1988): 371–85. Walker, Scott. Life-Rails. Carmel NY: Guideposts, 1987. Walters, James. “Egyptian Religions in Ephesos.” In Ephesos: Metropolis of Asia, edited by Helmut Koester, 281–306. Valley Forge PA: Trinity Press International, 1995. Ward, Tim. “Sin ‘Not Unto Death’ and Sin ‘Unto Death’ in 1 John 5.” Churchman 109 (1995): 236–37. Wassawa, Henry. “Notorious Uganda leader remembered for brutality.” Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 17 August 2003. A3. Watson, Duane. “A Rhetorical Analysis of 2 John.” NTS 35 (1989): 104–108. ———. “A Rhetorical Analysis of 3 John: A Study in Epistolary Rhetoric.” CBQ 51 (1989): 479–501. Weatherhead, Leslie. When the Lamp Flickers. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1948. Wesley, John. The Works of John Wesley: Journals and Diaries. Volume 6. Edited by W. Reginald Ward. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1993. Westcott, Brooke Foss. The Epistles of St. John. London: Macmillan, 1892. Westerhoff, John. Tomorrow’s Church. Waco TX: Word Books, 1976. White, R. E. O. Christian Ethics. Macon GA: Mercer University Press, 1994. Wilder, A. N. “Introduction and Exegesis of the First, Second, and Third Epistles of John.” In The Interpreter’s Bible, edited by G. A. Buttrick. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1957. 207–313.

293

294

Bibliography Williams, R. R. The Letters of John and James. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965. Willimon, William. “Let There Be Light.” Sojourners Magazine 30 (Nov/Dec 2001): 31–32. Witmer, Stephen. “Taught by God: Divine Instruction in Early Christianity.” Ph.D. dissertation. Cambridge University, 2007. Woods, Ralph C. The Gospel according to Tolkien. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003. Wright, N. T. The Resurrection of the Son of God. Christian Origins and the Question of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003. Zerwick, M. Biblical Greek Illustrated by Examples. Rome: Scripta Pontifici Instituti Biblici, 1963.

index of modern authors B

F

Barrett, C. K. 67, 187

Feuerbach, Ludwig 159

Bauer, W. 245

Forster, E. M. 202

Beasley-Murray, G. R. 187

Fosdick, Harry E. 94–95

Beecher, Henry Ward 82 Betjeman, John 92, 130

G

Blankenhorn, David 83

Graham, Billy 26

Boer, Martinus de 212, 214

Grayston, K. 271

Bonhoeffer, D. 159 Breck, John 101

H

Brockaw, Tom 79

Harbour, Brian 171

Brooke, A. E. 73, 187, 232, 233, 235, 259

Häring, Theodor 6–7, 154, 205

Brown, Raymond 36, 45, 101, 132, 151, 165, 187, 205, 215, 230, 235, 236, 245, 259, 272

Harkness, Georgia 145

Bruce, F. F. 187, 232, 233, 235

Hartman, L. 226

Buechner, Frederick 199

Hengel, Martin 251

Bultmann, Rudolf 139, 235

Harnack, Adolf von 159, 245

Buttrick, David 145

Houlden, James 167, 207, 262

Harris, Rendel 251

Hübner, H. 54

C Calvin, John 229

Hull, William 65 Hunter, A. M. 106, 160, 197

Campolo, Tony 58 Conner, W. T. 68

J

Conrad, Joseph 69–70

Johnson, Thomas 235

Conzelmann, Hans 39

Jordan, Clarence 128–29

Craddock, Fred 48, 199 Culpepper, Alan 98, 103, 205, 212, 235, 251

K Karon, Jan 238

D

Keating, Charles 282

Dana, H. E. 243

Kidd, Sue Monk 27, 200

Deissmann, Adolf 251

Kierkegaard, Søren 159

Dodd, C. H. 90, 99, 171, 187, 261

Kirkland, Bryant M. 219 Kruse, Colin 118

E

Kysar, Robert 245

Ebrard, Johannes H. A. 251 Edwards, Ruth 225

L la Potterie, Ignace de 257

296

Index of Modern Authors

Lester, Andrew 69

Schnackenburg, Rudolf 41, 89, 98, 167, 235, 236, 259, 260

Liddell, Henry G. (with R. Scott) 271

Selwyn, E. G. 26

Lieu, Judith 9, 103, 190, 226, 245, 258, 271

Sheldon, Charles 57

Long, Tom 26

Smalley, Stephen 3, 137, 178, 181, 235, 236, 258–59

Longfellow, Henry W. 128, 131

Smedes, Lewis 144

Law, Robert 3–4, 109, 164, 178, 275

Smith, Andrew 202

M

Smith, Moody 42

Mace, David 69, 144

Souter, Alexander 278

Maclaren, Andrew 105

Spicq, Ceslaus 86, 89, 142

Malatesta, Edward 77, 188

Stott, John 229, 233, 235, 260

Malherbe, Abraham J. 245

Strecker, Georg 74, 114, 124, 262, 271, 275

Marshall, I. Howard 120, 181, 207, 235, 259 Menninger, Karl 144

T

Michel, Otto 64, 75

Talbert, Charles 235

Moule, C. F. D. 213, 258

Taylor, Barbara Brown 26–27, 127, 241 Timmerman, Dave 219

N

Toynbee, Arnold 159

Nauck, W. 236

Trites, Allison 26, 210

Niebuhr, Reinhold 57

Troeltsch, Ernst 159 Trueblood, Elton 172

O

Tyndale, William 196

Ocur, Alfred 202

P Painter, John 7, 103, 114, 151, 233, 259

V von Wahlde, U. C. 257

Patterson, Morgan 222 Peale, Norman Vincent 196

W

Perkins, Pheme 225, 236

Weatherhead, Leslie 159

Plummer, Alfred 232

Wescott, B. F. 150, 229, 235, 254, 258

Puzo, Mario 238

Westerhoff, John 71 Williams, R. R. 139

R

Willimon, William 49

Rensberger, David 167, 205, 234 Robertson, A. T. 56, 264 Robertson, F. W. 95 Rossetti, Christina 218 Rust, Eric 173, 241

S Scherer, Paul 107 Schillebeeckx, Edward 160

Y Yancey, Philip 240

index of sidebars and illustrations Text Sidebars Ancient Epistolary Format of 2 and 3 John 243 Anointing in The Gospel of Philip Apparatus of Tests, An Augustine on the Devil at 1 John 3:8 Augustine’s Early Comments: All Addressed to Everyone Background and Meaning of “Seed” Background for the Idea of Being Begotten of God Beginnings

100 4 125 75 126 116 20

Connection of Love with the Absence of Schism

Great Campaign of Sabotage, A

240

Connections with 1 John and 2 John 245

Great Commandment, The

208

Conquering: A Presiding Metaphor in Revelation

210

Hatred Paralyzes, Love Releases

202

“Consequences of Putting Yourself First, The”

Herein Is Love

159

279

Cosmic Forces “Culture of Death, The”

99

66

Honest Prayer, An

130

Hostile Environment of the World, The

89

Differences from 1 John

170

House of Fear or the House of Love, The

203

How the Elder Has Made His Case along the Way

225

Human Condition Summed Up in “World” in the Gospel of John

234

“I Have a Dream”

179

Disclosure Formulas: “by this we know” 37

Dualistic Opposition

169

Believing in His Name

Eight Theses

112

Celebrated Story of the Comma in 1 John, The

Elder’s Scope of Authority, The

250

“Essence of Christianity, The” 155 Essence of Eternal Life, The

192

“Everyone who” (pas ho) Sayings (with a participle), The

112

Evident Error in Derivation of Word Meaning

Import of “concerning the word of life”

273

“In the Flesh”

Evil Has Played across My Playground

240

“Exigence” of Conflict Solution, The

244

Clues to the Positive Content of Eternal Life 217

Expiatory Sacrifice, The

48

Faithful and Righteous

42

Community Rule at Qumran

“Falling into Sin”

65

Christological Profile Church Sends, The Classic Sermon: “The Faith that Overcometh,” The Climatic Christological Confession “Closing”

44 196 221 235 143

75

226

If Jesus Had Gotten the Call Implicit Call to Decision

Concept of God

44

Confession of Sin in the New Testament

41

Fellowship at Antioch, The

25

Confession of Sin: From Abyss to Bridge 48

Frank Stagg on Orthopraxy

9

Function of Abiding in 1 John, The

8

58 217 22 166

Johannine Pairing

56

Keeping Commandments in Johannine Tradition

53

Koinonia a Long Way from Home

26

Lack of Love for Fellow Believers Light Versus Darkness

“False” as a Part of the Necessitated Vocabulary of the Early Church

Completing the Love of God 193

203

Identification with Recipients as Fellow Christians 186

215

Christian Theology and Christian Experience

55

Dangerous Illusion of Perfection, The

Dualism in Qumran

Broad Parallels in Apocalyptic Judaism 170

Heretical and Orthodox Perfectionism

23

239

Being Conformed to the Image of Christ 57 156

Greek Meaning

127 5

164

Listen to What God Says to the Believer

152

Love of God for Us, The

186

Loving One Another in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs

66

298

Index of Sidebars and Illustrations

Mainsprings to Loving

188

Man’s True Nature

197

Christ Praying in the Garden of Gethsemane (d’Arpino) 153

Similarities/Distinctives between 1 John 5:13 and John 20:31

224

Sin in the Fourth Gospel

41

Christian Hospitality in Les Misérables

39

Christological Profile

Minority Report for the Declaratory Sense “that,” The

73

Social Context of Division

Mutual Indwelling

23

Spiritual Assets Believers Already Possess (“Having”) 234

Clarence Jordan

129

E. M. Forster

202

Ephesus

11

Fellowship at Antioch, The

25

“Name” in the Gospel of John, The

227

Spread of False Teachings

Only Embodiment, The

183

Step by Step

Parallel from War Scroll

168

Parallel with Qumran Scrolls

170

Parallels between 2:18-28 and 4:1-6

Teachings or Repertoire Held in Common by Author and Recipients

161

Particular Verb of Seeing

22

The Godfather’s Vision of the Reality of Evil

“Perfect Day for Banana Fish, A” Personal Implication of “God is Love” Power of the Evil One, The Preacher as Herald, The Prince of the World and Death, The

93 180 234 26 78

Priority of the Love of God (vv. 10, 19)

194

Proclamation of John, The

183

Profile of the Children of God 111 “Progress” Quoting from Dale Moody in IDB Remarkable Parallels at 2 John 7 Resources for Christian Ethics Resources for Detailed Analysis of Verses 4-6

260 183 167 57 257

“Thou Shalt Be with Me in Paradise” Three Senses of Love in 1 John

Uniqueness of 1 John in relation to the Gospel of John Upper Room and the Book of Acts, The Validation of Abidance Way of the World, The While You Can

231

9

Forgiveness of the Sins

145

Godfather, The

239

Hitler, Adolf

69

Hospitality

281

How to Walk the way of Light (Anonymous)

52

In the Midst of Turmoil and Lust, Man Is Carried off by Death (Rethel)

90

Isis and Serapis

85

John the Evangelist

2

John’s First Epistle

5

Last Supper (Master)

25

Light of the World, The (Hunt)

21

Map of Asia Minor 25 157 94 159

250

Martin Luther King, Jr.

179

Men and Women Building Together Paradise (Saraceni)

210

Qumran

“Words of 3:18, The”

136

Saint Bernard of Clairvaux

Illustration Sidebars 1 John

10

Map of Ephesus

Witness in 1 John

Worshiping this God of Love 197

76

Georgia Harkness

Winsome Outline of 4:7–5:4 176

73

Signs of Abidance in God (How You Know You Are a Christian) 189

6

91

Role of Reiteration, The

Significant Background Parallels to Self-accusations 151

203

268

21

2

239

Two Cities

Resurrection Accounts in the Gospel

Sample of Memorable Sayings, A

98

Truth, The Typical Identifications of the Sin unto Death

44

Five Hearts of Divine Love and Christ Crucified, The 185

236

38

251

58

Traditional Antithesis with Idols

Resources on Light and Darkness

Roles of Elders

164

282

Simeon in the Temple (Cuyp)

68 107 37 219 79

St. Augustine (Pacher)

124

35

St. Paul Strikes the Prophet Blind (Loir)

162

Adam and Eve (Tintoretto)

88

Temple of Artemis, The

237

Beecher, Henry Ward

82

Three Archangels Defeating Lucifer (Oggiono)

77

Truth Breaks through the Clouds

252

Bust of Christ (Rembrandt)

166

Cain and Abel Offering Their Sacrifices (Doré)

135

Chrismatory

100

What Would Jesus Do?

57

World’s Hostility, The

138

index of scriptures GENESIS

DEUTERONOMY

18:1

218

45:15

190

1:1

19

13:1

162

22:31

115

45:21

190

1:3

68

17:6

215

27:1

37

46:26

190

3

88

18:15

216

31:1-2

119

51:5

115

3:6

88

18:20

162

32:5

47

53

220

3:20

155

19:15

36:9

37

53:4

120

4

138

210, 215, 276

40:11-112

47

53:10

141

4:1

179

25:1

151

41:4

47

53:11

120

4:11

155

30:11-14

208

50:4

119

53:12

120

4:17

179

50:6

115

60:1-3

37

4:25

179

1 SAMUEL

51:2-4

47

61:1

182

5:29

155

15

82

53:1-3

42

16

82

80:1-3

37

JEREMIAH

16:7

151

103:12

49

2:36

114

106:14

87

3:1

63

106:30

44

9:24

254

129:4

44

14:8

190

18:23

44

31:33

188 101

EXODUS 3

82

4

82

1 KINGS

82

8:46

42

25:17-22

44

19

82

29:7

99

14

33:20

187

PROVERBS 1 CHRONICLES

7:18

88

31:34

28:9

8:10

163

38:34 (LXX) 101

13:5

114

40:8 (LXX)

42

24:51

88

50:7

115

26:25

149

151

LEVITICUS 4:2

230

NEHEMIAH

4:13

230

1:6-7

4:22

230

47

LAMENTATIONS

4:27

230

ESTHER

5:15

230

4:4

5:17-18

230

3:22, 32

ISAIAH 149

JOB

1:18

49

1:29

114

EZEKIEL

254

6:6

49

36:27

188

15:14-16

42

17:3

163

44:27

44

22:23-27

113

27:21

163

44

22:26

152

41:2

115

HOSEA

6:25

254

27:9-10

113

41:10

115

13:4

11:4

87

42:6

115

15:27-31

230

43:3

190

ZECHARIAH 8:22

16:14-15

44

NUMBERS 5:8

PSALMS 4:7

37

43:11

190

14:1-3

42

44:21

49

190

44

300

Index of Scriptures

MALACHI

9:36

143

27:20

149

LUKE

2

10:5

182

28:19-20

222

1:29

116

10:16

182

28:20

53, 208

1:34

179

2 MACCABEES

10:32

149

1:47

190

4:34

10:32-33

102

MARK

2:25-35

191

10:33

230

1:22, 27

260

3:15

150

3 MACCABEES

11:1

139

2:8

150

4:16-30

79

3:24

11:26

149

2:15-17

282

4:18

182

11:27

217

2:17

191

5:22

150

82

149

149

SIRACH/ ECCLESIASTICUS

11:28-30

208

3:14

24, 182

5:24

150

12:9

139

3:31-35

67

5:38

150

2:5

163

12:22-29

124

4:1-9

174

6:22

64

3:1

3

13:41

65

4:2

260

6:27

64, 221

4:1

3

14:14

143

6:7

182

6:40

56

18:20

44

15:29

139

7:9

53, 208

7:12

182

32:3

44

15:32

143

8:34-38

82

7:22

221

38:30

99

16:1-4

104

8:38

114, 230

7:39

116

16:23

65

10:42-45

272

8:42

182

17:20

139

10:43

279

9:26

230

18:7

65

10:45

141

9:38

182

18:27

254

11:18

260

10:18

124

18:33

254

11:23

150

10:21

149

19:17

53, 208

11:24

152

10:21-22

217

20:34

143

12:2-4, 5

182

10:25

142

21:33-46

182

12:28

208

10:36-37

254

22:33

260

12:28-34

154

11:2

153

22:34-40

195

12:29-31

195

11:4

222

22:36

208

12:33

9

12:9

230

22:38

208

12:38

260

12:18

149

23:3

208

13

259

12:49

104

23:4

208

13:1

116

14:19

163

23:34

182

13:5

122, 259

15:1-2

282

23:37

182

13:9

259

15:1-32

191

24:5

98

13:23

259

15:6

163

24:10

65

13:33

259

15:11-32

218

24:11

164

13:27

182

15:18-21

47

24:24

98, 164

13:32

106

18:9-14

47

25:32

149

14:1-11

49

22:53

46, 63

25:41

125

14:3-9

99

22:61-62

114

25:41-46

114

14:36

153

23:34

221

25:46

193

24:16

217

26:28

49

WISDOM OF SOLOMON 3:6

163

5:8

89

17:7

89

MATTHEW 1:16, 20

233

1:25

179

2:1

233

2:4

233

4:1-11

82, 124

5:6

128

5:8

117

5:21-22

140

6:10

153

7:7

152

7:7-12

228

7:15

164

7:20

123

7:28-29

174

8:27

116

8:31

182

8:34

139

Index of Scriptures

301

JOHN

1:46

189

4:42

102, 190

6:53

226

1:1

18, 19, 20, 75, 102, 233

1:50

121

5:1-12

210

6:53-56

40

1:51

121, 189, 191

5:5

221

6:54-56

7

5:6

211

6:58

75

1:1-18

17

2:16

120

5:10

120

6:59

137

1:4

235

2:23

5:13

216, 217

6:69

1:4-9

36

74, 155, 270

5:18

124, 235

100, 118, 122, 191

1:6

182

2:55

152

5:23b

102

6:70

252

1:9

63, 235

3:3

114

77

1:10

117

3:5b

212

139, 140, 192

7:7 7:11

55

1:10-11

68

3:5-8

114

5:24-25

139

7:13

113

1:11

42

3:7

138

5:27

102

7:16

260

1:12

74, 116, 155, 206, 217, 226, 270

3:9

233

5:28

138

7:17

91, 260

3:11

26, 121

5:30

7:19

111

3:14

209

91, 95, 115

7:22

75

3:15

103

5:31

216

7:23

124

3:16

116, 182, 183, 184, 190, 206, 210, 216, 217

5:32

26

7:24

115

5:34

190

7:26

5:36

26

113, 152, 206

5:37

187, 212, 215

7:27

206

7:28

235

5:37-38

169

7:28-29

182

5:40

217

7:31

206

5:43

74, 155, 270

7:37-39

212

7:41

206

77

6

213

7:42

206

183

8

88, 179

8:12

38, 63, 68

1:13 1:14

91, 114, 183

5:24

17, 18, 20, 39, 163, 165, 167, 182, 233, 254

3:16-17

45

1:15

258

3:17

190, 203

1:16

39, 167, 254

3:18

1:17

39, 167, 254

3:19

182

3:19-21

36, 37

6:12

26

3:21

111, 143

6:14

102, 258

1:26

213

3:29

23

6:16-21

213

1:27

258

3:31

165, 258

6:27

183

8:14

19

1:29

190

3:32-33

26, 121

6:28

124

8:16

235

1:29

45, 184, 191

3:36

74, 155, 192, 217, 230

6:28-29

155

8:18

19, 215

6:32

75

8:19

117

6:35-59

213

8:23

165

4:2

211

6:36

122

8:24

192

4:7–5:12

217

6:38

91

8:26

169, 276

4:20

75

6:39

183

8:28

209

4:22

190

6:39-40

91, 192

8:29

153

189, 121, 252

4:25

206

6:40

103

8:31-32

191

4:29

206

6:45

169

8:34

121

45, 184

4:34

91, 124, 182

6:46

187

8:35

92, 99

6:49

75

259

8:39-44

137

6:51

167

8:40

39, 149

1:18 1:19

1:31

212

1:32

189

1:32-34

214

1:33

19, 189, 212

1:34 1:36 1:39

121

1:41

206

4:36

74, 155, 192, 217, 230, 270

302

Index of Scriptures 123

11:14

113, 152

8:43-44

169

11:24

192, 221

8:44

88, 123, 124

11:25

22

8:41

11:27

102, 206, 258

8:44-46

4

8:45

39, 149

11:38-44

216

8:46

120

11:39

120

8:47

169

11:40

121

8:51

53, 140

11:41

120

8:52

53, 140

11:41-42

227

8:54-55

38

11:52

214

8:55

39, 53, 153, 208

11:55

183

12:9

214

8:58

235

12:25

183

9:3-4

124

12:28

9:12

55

74, 155, 270

9:22

41, 69, 206

12:29-31

195

12:31

77, 124, 234

12:34

92, 102, 209

12:35

9:28

55

9:31

91

9:34

273

9:37

121

9:41

40, 121

10

141, 174

10:7-18

184

10:9

190

10:10

183

10:11-15

233

10:14-18

154

10:16

169

10:18

256

10:24

206

10:25

74, 155, 270

10:25-37 10:26-27 10:28

195 169 183

10:28-29

232

10:30

235

10:38

191

11

232, 237

11:11 11:12

277 190

64, 66, 155,156, 195, 256 13:34-35

13:35

12, 61, 130, 136, 154, 174, 178, 182, 188, 195, 222, 255, 275 63, 178, 195

15:1-6

217

15:3

40

15:3-7

189

15:4

23

15:4-5

187

15:5

125

15:6

192

15:7

103, 154

15:7-17

154

15:9-17

154

15:10

53, 56, 154, 208

13–17

7

14:1

100, 149, 150

15:11

23, 262

14:6

100, 235, 260

15:12

56

15:13-15

277

14:7

117

15:14

111

14:7-9

121, 235

15:16

155, 252

14:7-10

191

15:18

138, 168

14:9

117, 187

15:18-21

117

14:10

156

15:18-25

85

36, 38, 66

14:12

156

15:19

14:13

155

138, 168, 252

12:36

36, 139

14:14

155

15:20

152

12:40

150

14:15

15:21

74, 155, 270

12:42

41, 69, 191

53, 154, 208

14:16-17

189

15:22

40

12:44-48

217

14:17

102

12:44-50

154, 216

100, 121, 169

15:23 15:24

12:46

36, 38

14:21

15:26

12:47

190

53, 154, 208

40, 42, 122

12:48

192

14:21-24

154

100, 169, 215

53, 208

22

153

14:23

15:27

12:49-50

53, 208

69

150

14:24

16:2

13:2

16:6

150

13:10

40

100, 101, 155

117, 277

214

14:26

16:3

13:9

137, 150, 254, 277

39,100

185, 201

14:27

16:7

13:14

16:8-9

42

13:15

56, 105, 208

14:30

77, 234

16:11

77, 234

153, 154

262, 276

165

14:30-31

16:12

13:26

98

53, 111, 208

215

13:32

14:31

16:12-13 16:12-15

104

13:34

14, 56, 62, 63,

15

102, 103

16:13

169, 215

15:1

235

16:16-24

117

Index of Scriptures

303

85

19:14-16

184

10:48

74, 270

8:34

43

16:22

150

19:15

237

13:10

123

9:6

99

16:23-26

155, 228

19:31

120

13:43

124

9:33

65

16:24

23, 262

19:31-37

211

14:19

149

10:9-10

41, 150

16:25

113

19:34

14:27

268

11:15

45

16:28

213

211, 213, 214

15:3

270

11:28

62

19:34-35

20, 211, 215

15:4

268

12:2

171

15:13-21

251

12:13

282

15:36-41

82

13:9

244

18:5

191

13:14

126

18:6

42

15:24

270

19:24

275

16:1-2

275

19:29

244

16:3

271

19:38

275

16:9

271

20:4

244

16:21

271

20:17-36

268

16:23

244

20:17-38

249

20:24

26

1 CORINTHIANS

20:26

42

1:9

41

21:17-19

268

1:14

244

155, 205, 206, 224, 226, 270

21:18

251

1:26-28

142

23:21

149

3:10

259

26:18

139

4:5

151

31:14

149

4:15-17

75

4:16

275

16:20

16:29

113

16:30

101, 213

16:31 16:33

213 76, 85, 168, 124, 140, 209, 221, 254

19:35

214, 276

19:38

120

20:1

120

20:11

170

20:13

120

17

91, 233

20:19

254, 277

17:2

103

20:21

17:3

103, 206, 226, 235

196, 254, 277

20:21-22

189

17:6

43, 155

20:26

254, 277

17:8

43, 191, 206

20:28

235

20:30

74, 205, 262

17:11

100, 155, 235

20:31

17:12

155, 183, 232

17:13

23, 232

20:35

170

17:14

138, 168

21:17

151

17:15

77, 232, 233

21:18

118

ROMANS

10:13

41

21:14

114

1:5

270

11:1

275

21:24

14, 26, 276

1:7

62

11:25

40 40

17:20

43, 214

17:22

235

17:23

215, 235

2:18

163

11:27

21:25

118, 276

42

163

115

3:9-20

11:28

17:25

21:29

118

49

165

23, 155

4:7

12:3

17:26

236

139

119

12:12

18:1

4:7-8 ACTS

198

117

183, 260

5:7-8

13:12

18:19

1:24-25

151

192

118

165

5:9-11

15:44

18:31

2:38

74, 270

270

39, 149, 169, 233

218

16:6

18:37

5:10

2:44-47

145

6:2

42

16:11

270

4:20

23

6:11

126

16:13

275

5:40-41

270

6:12

126

16:16

271

7

75

8:9

203

8:16

270

8:16

203

2 CORINTHIANS

9:16

270

8:26

140

1:18

41

10:38

99

8:33

251

1:21-22

99

18:40

237

19

211

19:5

172

19:6

237

19:11

40

19:12

237

304

Index of Scriptures 140

COLOSSIANS

3:6

190

3:18

120

3:1

275

1:13-14

139

3:10

261

4:8-10

244

3:18

119

2:8

259

3:13-14

270

4:9

282

5:19

45, 222

3:4

117

4:19

41

8:8

163

3:12

251

PHILEMON

5:13

251

8:22

163

4:14

94

1:24

11:19

99

13:5

163

2:16

94 2 PETER

1 THESSALONIANS

HEBREWS

1:3

149

1:3

40

1:2

254

3:10

89

2:4

163

2:14

124

1-2

22

3:9

149

4:15

120

JUDE

2:2

268

5:5

66

4:16

114

2

3:27

126

5:21-22

163

7:25

43

5:24

126

5:24

41

7:26

120

REVELATION

5:25

126

9:14

40, 120

1:4

254

5:9-10

280

2 THESSALONIANS

9:22

40

1:5

209

6:4

163

2

259

9:24

43

2:19–3:22

250

3:3

41

9–10

44

2:2

261

10:19

114

2:14

65

GALATIANS

EPHESIANS

254

1:7

40

1 TIMOTHY

10:23

41

6:16-17

114

2:3

87

1:1

190

13:1-2

244

9:20

236

5:7-8

139

1:2

254

13:2

282

12

259

5:8

66

1:15

45

13

259

5:16

87

2:3

190

JAMES

17

259

5:23

190

3:2

282

2:1-7

142

17:14

251

6:22

150

6:16

187

4:4

86

20:10

125

7:2

258

4:8

118

22:4

117

4:13-14

89

2 TIMOTHY PHILIPPIANS

1:2

254

4:16

89

1:10

163

1:10

190

5:19-20

223

2:1-11

173

2:10

251

2:8

220

3:13

258

1 PETER

2:9

270

3:16-17

222

1:1

2:25-30

275

4:10

85, 94

1:1-2

251

3:13-14

119

4:11

82

1:2

254

3:17

275

1:3

254

3:20

190

TITUS

1:7

163

4:9

275

1:3

190

1:19

120

4:23

262

1:4

190

1:24

89

5:8-14

37

2:10

190

2:21

56, 57

24

94

2:13

190

2:22

120

3:4

190

2:24

120

251

index of topics A Abel 109, 135, 137–38 Abidance 8, 11, 14, 52, 97, 103, 128, 156–57, 187–89, 191, 203, 235 Abide 8, 16, 38, 41, 52, 55–56, 92, 99, 103–104, 113, 126, 130, 140, 156, 188–89, 203, 243, 253, 268, 292 Advocate 12, 43–45, 89, 105, 115, 155, 161, 215, 234, 246, 274, 279 Anger 46, 69, 138, 140, 143–44

Authorship 9, 13, 16, 224, 243, 274

B Baptism 19, 74, 99–100, 106, 165, 211–16, 220 Beginning 2, 4, 6–7, 12, 17–20, 22, 32, 62, 73, 75, 88, 94–95, 101, 103–104, 112, 120, 123–25, 135–37, 144, 170, 182, 202, 208, 210, 215, 224–26, 234–35, 243–45, 255–56, 262, 275, 280

Antichrist 4, 97, 106, 109, 157, 164, 167–71, 259

Begotten 3, 9–10, 51, 74–75, 99–100, 104, 114–16, 125, 128, 131, 140, 164, 179, 182–83, 195, 206–207, 209, 227, 229, 232–33, 275, 290

Antithesis 6, 12, 39, 41, 51, 66, 86, 88–89, 94, 101–102, 112, 119, 121, 138, 161, 181, 216–217, 236, 243, 245–46, 259, 271, 275

Belief 21, 35, 65–66, 77, 90, 110, 112–113, 115, 117, 120, 124–25, 127, 139, 155–56, 179–80, 191, 205, 221, 229–30, 241–42, 252–53, 257, 260, 282

Antithetical 6, 66, 102, 137, 164, 179, 231

Believe 9, 12, 21, 25, 42, 74, 76, 130–31, 149, 154–56, 160, 171–73, 175, 193, 198–99, 202, 206, 209, 214–15, 217, 220, 224, 229, 260–61

Anointing 9, 49, 99–100, 104, 108, 215, 234

Apparatus of Tests 3–4 Asia Minor 10, 13, 76, 85, 165, 236, 249–50 Assurance 4, 9, 13, 39, 41, 43, 54–55, 62, 65, 72, 76, 80, 110, 139, 149–160, 168, 177, 179, 188–189, 191–193, 203, 206, 209, 224–25, 227, 237, 240, 253–54, 268 Atonement 40, 44–45, 119, 128, 141, 177, 183–85, 206, 212, 231 Authority 2, 7, 20–21, 25–26, 36, 63–64, 66, 69, 85, 116, 136, 152, 161, 163, 169–70, 195, 245–46, 250–51, 265, 272–74, 276

Believer 3, 6, 8, 12, 14, 31–32, 44, 46, 52, 54–56, 59, 74, 78, 80, 87, 98, 104–105, 107, 115–16, 118, 120–21, 123, 125, 128, 130, 136, 142, 152, 154, 156, 163–64, 168, 174, 178–81, 185–87, 189, 192, 194–95, 202–203, 206, 208–209, 220, 225, 228–29, 231–36, 238, 255, 259–60, 263–64, 268–69, 275, 279–80 Beloved 10–11, 13, 15, 21–22, 28, 61–62, 67, 72, 75, 90, 94, 108, 117, 152, 163, 178, 185, 195,

215, 244–45, 251, 253, 267, 274, 286 Beloved Disciple 10, 13, 15, 21–22, 28, 108, 195, 215, 251, 286 Bishop 245, 250–51, 279 Blindness 41 Blood 12, 40, 43–44, 48, 74, 120, 172, 210–15 Boasts 1, 31–32, 38, 52, 64, 109, 203 Born of God 3, 5, 78, 131, 179–80, 188, 232–33 Brother 1, 8, 65–66, 109, 112, 116, 127, 135, 137–38, 140–41, 143, 158, 164, 177–78, 194, 229, 238, 275 “By this we know” 43, 51–52, 189, 206, 225

C Cain 12, 77, 109, 123, 135, 137–41, 143, 146 Cerinthus 165–67, 214 Children 3–5, 10–12, 14, 23, 25, 37, 46, 51–52, 67–68, 72, 74–75, 78–79, 83, 92, 97, 111–33, 135, 145, 152, 168, 171, 173, 179, 182–83, 193, 196–200, 202, 207, 209, 227, 229, 233, 236, 238, 240–41, 249, 251, 253, 255, 262, 267–69, 271, 281–82, 289, 291 Children of God 4–5, 10–12, 25, 51–52, 74, 111–33, 135, 152, 168, 182, 193, 207, 209, 236, 238, 241 Children of the devil 4–5, 126–27, 135 Chrism, chrisma 99–100

306

Index of Topics

Christ 3, 6, 8–9, 12, 14, 21–22, 25–28, 36, 38, 40–41, 44–45, 48, 52–53, 55, 57, 61–63, 68, 70, 72–73, 75–76, 89, 91, 95, 97, 99, 101–102, 104, 106–107, 113–14, 116–18, 120, 124, 128, 130, 132, 141–43, 145, 149, 153–56, 159–60, 162, 165–71, 173, 178, 184–85, 187, 194, 196, 198, 203, 205–22, 224, 226–27, 230–31, 233, 235–36, 240–41, 243, 252, 254–56, 258, 260, 263–65, 267, 270–72, 277, 281, 288, 292 Christology 9, 14, 31, 102, 115, 122, 165–66, 172–73, 189–90, 204, 213–14, 235, 255, 257, 259, 261, 270, 273, 292 Church 1, 4–5, 9, 12–13, 18, 20–21, 24–26, 31–32, 40, 47–48, 51, 57–58, 61–62, 67–69, 71, 74–77, 79–81, 83, 85, 94–95, 97–100, 105–106, 123–24, 136–37, 141, 144–45, 151, 159, 164–65, 168, 171–72, 174, 177, 179–81, 189, 196, 200, 202, 215, 219, 222, 229, 237–41, 243–46, 250–51, 253–58, 260–62, 264, 268–69, 271, 273–82, 285, 287, 292–93 Circular letters 2 Claims 1–3, 5, 14, 22–23, 31–32, 36, 38, 41, 47, 52, 54, 56, 71, 75, 89, 99, 101, 109, 115, 122, 164, 175, 187, 189, 194–95, 214, 224, 231–32, 235 Cleanse 1, 40 Coming 19, 64, 74, 77, 97, 113–14, 118, 120–21, 130, 132, 139, 153, 158, 162, 167, 170, 182, 191–93, 202, 211, 213–14, 217, 258, 265, 287 Comma 215, 221 Commandment 20, 53, 61–65, 136, 154–57, 178, 182, 195, 207–208, 231, 243, 255–57, 269 Communion 42, 47, 81, 107, 179, 215, 234

Community 2–3, 5, 7, 10–12, 14–15, 20–21, 23–24, 28, 35–39, 41–42, 52–55, 61–62, 65–67, 69, 72–75, 78, 80–81, 85, 87, 89–90, 97–101, 104–105, 108–109, 112–13, 116–18, 120, 122, 124–25, 127, 129–30, 132, 135–47, 149–50, 156–57, 161–62, 164–66, 168, 170, 173, 175, 178, 180–81, 186–94, 197, 199–201, 205–206, 208–211, 215, 218, 223, 226–30, 234–39, 244, 251–52, 255, 257–60, 267, 271–77, 285–86, 291 Conditionalities 3–4, 228 Confess 1, 39, 41, 43, 47–48, 97, 125, 165, 167, 170, 191, 211 Confession 9, 14, 18, 41, 43, 47–48, 59, 67, 74, 76, 102, 106, 136, 149–50, 155, 157, 161–68, 170, 188–89, 191–92, 203, 206, 222, 229–30, 235, 245, 258, 274, 276 Confidence 5, 13, 23, 26, 44, 66, 73–74, 80, 87, 101, 110, 113, 132, 139, 145, 150, 152–54, 168, 179, 188, 192–93, 201–203, 209–210, 224–25, 227–28, 262, 274 Conquer 76, 86, 89, 209, 221 Conqueror 78 Conscience 40, 42, 130, 150–51, 153, 171, 239 Context 3, 32, 37, 39, 41, 43, 51–52, 59, 63, 65, 72, 74, 78–79, 89, 91–92, 101, 104, 109, 116, 118–19, 121, 123, 127, 133, 136, 143, 149–52, 156, 163, 168, 170, 183–84, 187, 189–90, 195, 208–209, 211, 224–25, 229, 236, 258–59, 261–62, 270, 273, 290–91 Corporeal 1–3, 258 Counter claims 2–3, 32 Covenant 8, 40, 63, 83, 93, 101, 115, 156–57, 164, 188–89, 204, 257, 263, 286, 290

Creation 18, 68, 137 Cross 21, 63, 65, 76, 124, 129, 141–42, 185, 198–99, 203, 212–13, 215, 221, 246

D Darkness 4–5, 17–18, 21, 27, 31–32, 37–39, 42–43, 45–46, 49, 61, 63–66, 68–72, 86, 90, 98, 119, 138, 178, 181, 197, 209, 234, 236, 239, 268, 286, 291 Date 13, 85, 165 Dead Sea Scrolls 31, 37, 168, 170, 290 Death 1, 5, 11, 20, 25, 40, 42, 44, 53, 57, 77–78, 89–93, 120, 124–25, 139–42, 144–46, 156, 167, 180, 184, 191, 196–99, 201, 203, 205, 211–14, 221, 225–26, 229–31, 234, 237, 239, 256, 287, 293 Death of Jesus 40, 124, 141, 156, 167, 199, 205, 211, 213–14, 287 Deceit 164, 170 Deceive 41–42, 97–108, 164, 259 Deny 2, 40, 42, 47, 92, 104, 106, 166–68, 179, 205, 207, 209, 245, 268 Devil 4–5, 88, 119, 123–27, 130–31, 135, 140, 234 Diotrephes 244–47, 261, 268–69, 271–74, 276, 278–79, 281–82, 290 Discipleship 20, 52, 57–58, 106, 123, 128, 178, 195, 292 Docetic 31, 165, 258, 261, 272, 274 Docetism 18, 165 Doing 5, 39, 45, 51, 53, 58, 91–92, 95, 106, 109, 111, 113–16, 118–19, 122–23, 125–28, 143, 149, 153, 174, 178, 186, 191, 194, 201–202, 206, 208, 243–44, 269, 275

Index of Topics

307

Dualism 37, 138, 164, 168–69, 226

Essence of Christianity 154–55, 157, 288

Falsehood 4–5, 39, 42, 164, 194, 234

Dualities 4, 275

Eternal life 3, 5, 7–8, 11–12, 19–20, 22–23, 25, 28, 55, 91, 103, 106–107, 116, 139–40, 182–184, 190–191, 196, 201, 210, 212, 216–217, 222, 224–27, 229–31, 234–35, 237, 253, 259

Farewell discourse 14

E Elder 2–4, 10, 13–15, 22, 24, 32, 35, 37–38, 51–52, 54, 62, 65, 73–75, 78, 89, 97–99, 104–105, 109, 112, 115–116, 118, 120–23, 126–27, 132, 137–38, 141, 143, 150, 152, 156, 159, 161, 168–69, 172–73, 175, 179–81, 185–86, 189, 191–93, 196, 201, 206–207, 209–211, 213–14, 216–18, 221, 223–26, 228–29, 231–32, 236, 238, 241, 243–47, 249–63, 265, 267–82, 289 Elect Lady 249, 251, 264 Ephesus 11, 13, 21–22, 41, 78, 85, 165, 236–37, 244, 249–51 Epilogue 6, 223–42 Epistle(s) 3, 5–6, 8–11, 13–19, 21–24, 28–29, 31–33, 35–36, 38–41, 43, 49–50, 52–56, 59, 61, 63–64, 66, 70–72, 74–77, 80, 82, 83, 85–86, 88–90, 96–97, 104–105, 108, 110–13, 116, 118, 120–23, 125–28, 131–33, 135–36, 138, 141, 145–146, 149, 150, 152, 154–57, 160–61, 162–163, 165, 167, 174–75, 177–80, 182–84, 189–95, 198–204, 206–208, 210–11, 214–19, 222–28, 230–31, 234–35, 241–44, 247, 250–51, 257, 264–265, 268, 283, 285–93 Epistolary 2, 14, 18–20, 27, 31, 42, 54–55, 64–65, 78, 89, 109, 117, 123, 138, 152, 156–57, 169, 178, 180, 184, 194, 198, 205, 207, 224, 234, 243–44, 246, 249, 267, 276, 293 Error 9, 169–70, 272–73 Eschatology 55, 63, 90, 92, 116–17, 161, 168

Ethics 8, 57, 192, 194, 293 Ethos 177 Evil one 8, 72, 75–77, 86, 137, 140, 191, 209, 227, 230, 232–34 Excommunication 261, 278 Exhortation 175, 177–205, 233, 236, 243, 255 Existence 9, 20, 67, 82, 90, 114, 119, 125, 131, 139–40, 158, 166, 172, 181, 184, 201, 208, 211, 214, 217–18, 220, 226, 230, 233, 259 Exordium 1–2, 18–19, 23–24, 31, 33, 223, 230 Expiation 9, 12, 44–45, 120, 155, 186, 190 Eyewitness 19–20, 22, 190

F Faith 1, 3–5, 7, 13–14, 17, 20, 22, 24, 26, 31, 35, 41, 51–52, 57–58, 62, 65, 74–77, 80, 82, 89, 97–98, 102, 106–107, 118, 121, 130–31, 139–41, 154, 156–60, 165, 168, 171–74, 177, 181, 188–89, 191, 194, 197, 199–200, 203, 205–207, 209–210, 212, 214, 216, 221–22, 225, 234–35, 238, 241, 252–55, 257–61, 263–64, 267, 276–77, 279, 282, 290–92 False prophets 9, 32, 38–39, 161–62, 164–65, 168–69, 171, 179, 193, 213–14, 261 False teachers 32, 39, 43, 55, 75–76, 97, 109, 119, 175, 183, 236, 259, 261

Father 3–5, 8–12, 17, 19–20, 22–23, 25–27, 43–44, 49, 53, 56, 58, 67, 72–73, 75, 78, 81–83, 85–96, 100, 102–103, 114–15, 121, 123–25, 152–53, 155–56, 165, 170, 182, 187, 190, 196, 199, 205, 207, 213, 215–16, 218–20, 227, 232–35, 238–39, 250, 254–57, 259–60, 282 Fear 55, 82, 92, 107, 190, 192–93, 201–203, 256 Fellowship 1, 4, 8, 18–19, 21, 23–25, 27–28, 31–32, 35–50, 55, 62, 66–68, 70, 73, 81, 85, 99, 103, 120, 122, 170, 173, 178, 181, 188, 225, 234, 238, 240–41, 253, 257, 262, 269, 276 Flesh 9, 18, 87–88, 91, 121, 162, 165–67, 170, 172, 187, 191, 209, 215, 231, 233, 243, 252, 258, 272, 274, 279, 287 Forgiveness 1, 14, 41–44, 49, 59, 69, 72–74, 76, 78, 81, 121, 150, 154, 167, 184–85, 188, 196–97, 201, 211–12, 226, 254, 270 Friends 24, 26, 56, 67, 75, 83, 106, 158, 269, 277, 280, 282, 285

G Gaius 244–47, 267–69, 271–77, 279–80 Generalizations 2, 72, 121, 126, 263 Gentile 243, 245 Gnostic 32, 55, 99, 126, 166, 207, 258, 272, 274, 293 Gnosticism 116, 260 God 12, 14, 20, 22–23, 25–28, 31–33, 35–55, 57–58, 62, 65–66, 68, 70, 72–78, 80–81, 85–87, 89, 91–93, 95–96, 99–102, 104, 107–33, 135–38,

308

Index of Topics

140–41, 143, 145–46, 149–59, 162, 164–66, 168–70, 172–73, 175, 177–201, 203–22, 224–36, 238, 240–42, 245, 250, 252–54, 256–57, 263, 265, 269–70, 275, 278, 281, 285–86, 288–90, 292, 294 Gospel 2, 6, 8–10, 14–18, 20–23, 25–26, 28, 36, 38, 40–43, 45, 50, 52–53, 55–56, 62–63, 66, 68, 70, 73, 75–78, 83, 91, 94–95, 100–103, 108, 112, 117, 120, 124, 126, 133, 135, 137–39, 141, 144–45, 149, 152–53, 155, 174, 182–84, 192, 195–96, 198–200, 203, 206, 211, 215–17, 224, 226–27, 230, 234, 239, 257, 260, 264, 268, 271, 279, 285–88, 290–94 Grace 18, 25, 27, 39, 72, 74, 80, 95, 151, 156, 194, 203, 217, 220, 226, 230, 253–54, 263 Greaterness 149–50, 216 Greeting 245, 250, 254, 262, 267, 280

H Hate 4, 13, 31, 37, 48, 61, 63–66, 69–70, 104, 124–25, 130–31, 135–47, 175, 193–94, 196, 201, 220 Hearing 13, 18, 20–22, 27, 32, 36, 62, 128, 136–37, 139, 153, 162–64, 168–69, 174, 256 Heart 5, 27, 48, 52, 68–69, 95–96, 102, 138, 140–43, 149–51, 153, 170, 185, 195, 197, 201, 203, 216, 218, 220, 239, 280, 286 Heresy 55, 285 Hina 23, 183, 225 Holy one 47, 100, 118 Hope 24, 49, 64, 69, 96, 112, 118–119, 128, 131–133, 151, 192, 231, 234, 261–62, 269, 290 Hospitality 244–47, 261, 269, 271–75, 281–83, 289

Hoti 52, 72, 118, 120, 125, 135, 151, 153, 161, 164, 183, 258 House churches 188, 253, 261, 270, 272

I Idols 235–36, 241–42, 278, 289 Imagery 31, 36, 71, 75, 265 Imitator of Christ 142 Incarnation 162–63, 166, 172–73, 184, 193, 215, 256, 258–59, 261 Incompatibilities 4–5, 193 Indwelling 23, 55, 102–103, 156–57, 188–89, 191, 235, 253 Inseparabilities 4–5 Inseparable 22, 100, 115, 125, 154, 217, 226, 230 Interiority 8, 10, 83, 191, 204, 235, 253, 290

J Jerusalem 25, 79–80, 182, 251, 265 Jesus 3, 5–9, 14, 18–26, 35–36, 38–58, 62–63, 66–68, 70, 74, 76–78, 81, 91, 95, 97–98, 100–102, 104–106, 109–110, 112–25, 127–30, 136, 138–44, 149, 151–56, 158–62, 164–70, 172–75, 178–85, 187, 189–93, 195–97, 199–200, 203–22, 224–28, 230–37, 243, 245, 252–54, 256, 258, 260, 263–65, 268, 270, 272, 274–76, 279–80, 282, 287, 292 Jews 25, 62, 69, 123, 130, 237 Johannine Christianity 9, 66, 154, 177–78, 207, 255, 271, 279 Johannine Comma 215 Johannine Community 2, 12, 21, 35, 53–55, 73, 85, 98, 138, 156, 178, 206, 210, 244, 258, 271, 276, 285 Johannine frequency 9, 210, 245

Johannine School 14, 16–17, 21–22, 28, 36, 99, 111, 180, 245–46, 251, 272, 274, 287, 293 Johannine theology 17, 54, 229, 233 Joy 23–24, 26, 28, 132, 150, 219, 256, 262–63, 267, 269, 281, 291 Judaism 18, 162, 170, 236, 288 Judgment 7, 12, 36, 42, 48, 54, 64–65, 77, 112–113, 115, 118, 139–40, 149, 151–52, 190, 192–93, 201–202, 230, 234, 272, 274, 287 Just 1, 9, 12, 17, 32, 40–44, 53–58, 64, 80, 91, 93, 97, 103, 105, 107, 111, 115, 117, 119, 122–23, 129, 137, 151, 153, 155, 157, 160, 168, 171, 182, 185–86, 192, 194, 197–98, 201, 219, 221, 225, 241–43, 246, 256, 260–62, 274, 276, 280, 282

K Know 1, 26–27, 38, 40, 42–43, 46–49, 51–52, 55, 63, 66, 72, 74–75, 91, 96, 98, 101–102, 106, 112, 114, 117, 121, 123, 143, 149, 152, 159, 164, 168–69, 172, 179, 181, 188–89, 196, 202–203, 206, 225, 227, 231, 234, 245–46, 260, 262–63, 268, 272–73 Knowledge 3, 9, 15, 23, 53–55, 73, 75, 78, 82, 100–101, 117, 120, 122, 179, 191, 217, 234, 273, 288

L Lady 249, 251, 255–56, 262, 264 Last day 103, 192–93 Last hour 9, 97, 257 Lawlessness 9, 109, 119, 127, 130, 133 Letter 2, 4, 7–8, 11–13, 24, 32, 35, 42, 52, 62, 71–72, 74–75,

Index of Topics 83, 87, 89, 91, 98, 108, 111, 114, 118–19, 124, 126, 136, 145, 154, 177, 181, 189–90, 194, 201, 208, 223, 232, 235, 243–47, 249, 251–57, 260–62, 265, 269, 271–78, 280, 285 Liar 39, 42, 102, 216 Lie 39, 42, 53, 101–102, 104, 194 Life 1, 3, 5–9, 11–12, 14–15, 17–29, 33, 36, 38–39, 44, 46–49, 53, 55–59, 62, 65, 67–68, 76, 79–83, 87–88, 91–92, 95, 98, 103, 106–107, 109–11, 115–16, 118–20, 122–30, 133, 139–41, 143–46, 149, 156, 158–60, 164, 166–67, 169, 171, 173, 180, 182–85, 187, 190–91, 193, 196–98, 200–203, 208, 210, 212, 216–17, 219–22, 224–35, 237, 240, 242, 253–54, 259, 263, 276, 278–79, 283, 286, 288–90, 293 Light 3–8, 12, 14, 17, 21–22, 24, 27, 31–33, 35–40, 42–44, 46, 49–50, 52, 56–57, 61, 63–68, 71–72, 76, 86, 91–92, 97–98, 108–109, 114, 118–19, 123, 126, 128, 131, 135, 145, 149–50, 153, 160, 167, 170, 175, 178, 181, 191, 194, 197, 206–207, 217–18, 221, 233, 235, 239, 268, 273, 281, 285, 287–88, 291, 293 Logos 18, 22, 36, 111, 126, 177 Love 2, 4–7, 9, 11–14, 20, 26, 29, 31, 33, 36–37, 41, 43–46, 49, 51–59, 61–68, 75–76, 78, 83, 85–96, 99, 107, 109–110, 116, 119, 124–25, 127, 129–31, 135–47, 149–50, 152, 154–60, 172–75, 177–205, 207–210, 217–23, 225, 228–31, 234, 237–38, 242–46, 252–57, 259–61, 264, 267–69, 271–72, 274, 276–77, 279, 281–82, 285, 289 Love of God 5–6, 9, 54–55, 68, 76, 96, 116, 125, 131, 137, 143,

145, 177, 181–88, 191–94, 196–98, 201, 203, 205, 210, 218, 238

M Mediator 44, 189 Message 2, 9, 14, 18, 20, 22, 24–25, 31, 35–36, 43, 54, 62, 82, 103, 135–137, 145, 183, 242, 272, 279, 288, 291 Metaphor 8, 12, 56, 66, 99, 103, 142, 156, 180, 188, 209–211, 249, 251, 253, 257 Mind 2, 20, 23, 39, 42, 45, 51–53, 61, 66, 74, 78, 85, 88, 95, 97, 106, 118, 121, 123, 127, 140, 151, 153, 156, 169, 178, 183, 193, 195, 203, 213, 218, 221, 229, 236–37, 246, 251, 256–59, 280 Mission 25, 39, 41, 44, 53, 67, 91, 95, 120, 124, 152, 173, 182, 189–90, 193, 196, 205, 213, 217, 241, 246, 258, 264, 269–71, 273, 275, 280–83, 289 Missionaries 27, 81, 200, 204, 244, 261, 269–71, 281–82 Movements 6–7, 31, 36, 61, 86, 135, 175 Murder 12, 46, 124, 137–138, 140, 143–144, 231

N Name 5, 12–13, 21–22, 25, 70, 74, 80, 106, 116, 128, 154–56, 158, 171, 217, 226–28, 239, 244, 249, 251, 268, 270–71, 277, 279–80

O Obedience 12, 43, 51, 53–54, 58, 67, 130, 153, 156, 158–59, 193, 208, 219, 228, 244, 252–53 Obligation 187, 201, 270–71 Opponents 2, 31, 38–40, 62, 71, 100, 104, 115, 119, 121, 136, 154, 161, 165–66, 168, 179–81,

309

189, 193–94, 206, 209, 212, 216, 223, 232, 234, 236–37, 259, 273 Orthodoxy 8–9, 14, 154, 157, 169, 205, 230, 252, 255, 261, 268–69, 285, 292 Orthopraxy 8–9, 14, 109, 154, 157, 205, 230, 252, 255, 269, 292

P Pathos 113, 177, 259 Paraclete 43 Parousia 8, 114, 192 Pastoral 1, 9, 12, 32, 41, 47, 52, 54–55, 57, 61, 71–84, 98–99, 103, 105, 116, 119, 125, 137, 149–52, 159, 168, 177, 186–88, 193, 216, 220, 223, 225, 228, 265, 268, 277, 279 Paul 25, 41, 62, 68, 75, 87–88, 94–96, 107–108, 118, 126, 150, 160, 162, 166, 192, 204, 219, 221, 236, 239, 249, 253, 280, 288, 291–92 Perfection 13, 23, 55, 118, 130, 158, 187 Peroratio 6 Plural 39, 41, 75, 111, 154, 186, 189, 208, 250, 252, 257, 267 Polemical 1, 33, 52, 97, 103, 105, 121, 177, 193, 216 Prayer 13, 41, 47, 58, 91, 152–55, 157–58, 202–203, 216, 224, 227–31, 234, 238, 281 Preexistence 20, 22, 182 Presbyter 166, 244–46, 250–52, 257, 261–63, 265, 272, 276–77, 279, 281, 293 Presbyteros 249, 285 Prologue 17–19, 21, 24, 36, 63, 102, 116, 167, 187, 222–24, 230 Promise 42–43, 48, 53, 55, 101, 103, 106, 117, 154–55, 157–58, 188, 191, 203, 227, 229, 233, 237, 254, 283, 289

310

Index of Topics

Providence 263 Purpose 7, 9, 19, 23, 39, 62, 71–73, 99, 101, 103, 109, 120, 126, 129, 137, 171, 182, 184, 197, 205, 216, 224–25, 259, 271, 288

Q Qumran 4, 37–38, 75, 98, 116, 164, 168, 170, 286, 290

R Reader 2–4, 7, 10–11, 17, 19–20, 23, 32–33, 35, 39, 51–52, 56, 61, 63, 65, 71, 86, 90, 97, 102–104, 111, 113, 117, 119, 125–26, 157, 162, 174, 178, 186, 192, 195, 205–207, 210–211, 228–29, 231, 233, 235, 244, 249, 255 Reassurance 139, 151–52, 157 Recipients 3, 7, 13, 20, 23, 32, 39–40, 42–43, 45, 62–63, 72, 74, 86, 98, 116–17, 119–20, 124, 137, 150, 152, 161, 177, 186, 189, 191–93, 210–211, 233, 236, 250, 253, 256 Reciprocal love 12, 109, 136, 195, 200–201, 217–18, 255 Reciprocity 136 Reconciliation 222 Reveal 36–37, 120, 125–26, 195, 238 Revelation 12–14, 19–20, 23–24, 28, 35–36, 52, 59, 66, 76, 113–14, 143, 146, 156, 172, 175, 178, 182, 184, 187, 189, 196–97, 204, 209–210, 213, 217, 221, 226, 235–36, 242, 249, 256–57, 259, 265, 285, 291 Rhetoric 4–5, 7–8, 15, 19, 72, 162, 177, 194, 223, 243–44, 293 Righteous 6–7, 36, 41–44, 51, 65, 91, 109–110, 114–15, 118–23,

126–28, 130, 135–38, 154, 175, 193, 221, 231, 233, 275

S

205–22, 224–27, 229–36, 239, 241, 249, 253–57, 259–60, 270, 279, 287, 290, 294

Salvation 36, 51, 53, 59, 65, 72–73, 81, 91, 113, 126, 157, 186, 190, 193, 196, 203, 215, 263

Son of God 3, 8, 14, 77–78, 102, 104, 113, 124–25, 155–56, 165–66, 183, 189, 192, 203, 205–22, 224–27, 230–32, 234, 241, 253, 294

Satan 77–78, 119, 221

Sperma 125–126, 288

Savior 155, 158, 190–91, 198, 210, 226

Spiral 4, 136, 154, 228

Schism 5, 7, 18, 31, 53, 90, 99, 142, 153, 178, 208, 231, 245, 249 Scripture 14, 26, 52, 58, 174, 180, 195–96, 222 Secessionists 4, 9, 54, 65, 75–76, 78, 85, 98–99, 101, 104, 109, 119, 136, 138–40, 142, 150, 166, 170, 194, 206, 223, 225, 231, 235, 260, 272

Spirit 3–5, 8–9, 11, 24–25, 35–36, 43, 47, 52, 56, 91, 99–101, 104, 109–110, 126–27, 132, 151–52, 155, 157–58, 161–75, 188–89, 201, 203, 209–212, 214–15, 222, 227, 230, 233–34, 238, 255, 260–61, 264, 271, 279 Spirit of God 157, 166, 169 Structure 6–7, 194, 245 Symbolism 37 Synagogue 179, 206

Seed 10, 125–26, 199, 233 Shame 113–14, 152 Sin 3–5, 8, 12–14, 31–32, 37–49, 59, 65, 67, 72, 76, 86, 88–89, 92–93, 109–111, 113, 118–27, 129–31, 133, 143–44, 146, 156, 158, 184, 191, 197, 212, 215, 221–23, 227, 229–34, 236, 241, 254, 290–91, 293 Singular 32, 71–72, 79, 154, 188, 199, 207, 245, 254, 259 Sinlessness 4, 42, 121, 127 Sister 1, 66, 112, 116, 127, 140, 143, 158, 164, 177–78, 194, 202, 238, 251, 253, 261–62, 275

T Teacher(s) 3, 8, 32, 39, 43, 55, 56, 75–76, 80, 82, 97, 99, 109, 119, 127, 164, 175, 183, 218, 236, 259, 261, 278 Teaching of Jesus 20, 105, 260 Temptation 78, 124, 130, 221 Testimony 3, 7, 19, 21, 26, 39, 163, 169, 189, 210, 215–16, 220–21, 245–46, 276 Tests of life 3, 15, 33, 83, 110, 133, 160, 164, 203, 283, 290 Thanatic existence 220 Thanksgiving 255, 267–68, 281

Slogans 47

Theocentric 6, 17, 36

Son 1, 3–5, 8–12, 14, 16–17, 19, 22–24, 27, 31, 36, 38, 44–45, 49, 51, 56–57, 67, 72, 77–78, 81, 92, 97, 100, 102–104, 107, 109, 113–15, 121, 123–25, 141, 155–57, 160, 165–66, 175, 177, 181–87, 189–93, 196–98, 203,

Thesis 6, 39, 94, 102, 108, 111–12, 119–21, 135, 154, 161, 216–17, 243, 245–46, 259, 275 Topic 13, 22, 51, 97, 103, 111, 126, 163, 169, 210, 212, 227 Trinity 16, 96, 289, 293

Index of Topics

U Unbelief 150 Unrighteousness 1, 42, 109, 111, 119, 127, 231

V Victory 76–77, 81–82, 89, 130, 140, 209–210, 221 Vine 240, 289 Vocabulary 9, 53, 89, 164, 183, 245

W Walking 5, 18, 38–40, 42–43, 51–52, 55–56, 59, 61, 65–67, 91, 123, 178, 190, 203, 213, 221, 255–57, 268 Warnings 103, 162 Water 173, 210–15 Wesley, John 14, 16, 58, 128, 174, 293 Word of God 8, 22, 53, 73, 100, 108, 169, 208 World 4–6, 13, 21, 27–28, 33, 37, 45, 63, 68–69, 72, 76–78, 80–81, 85–96, 104, 107–108, 114, 117, 119–20, 128–32, 138–40, 143, 145, 155, 158–59, 163–65, 167–74, 181, 183–84, 186–87, 189–91, 193, 196–97, 199, 203, 205, 208–210, 213, 220–21, 226, 230–40, 252, 258–59, 264, 275, 280–81, 283, 287, 290

Y Young men 75, 78, 81–84, 285

311