The Letters of John. Robert D. Cornwall
Читать онлайн книгу.
will have the opportunity to address introductory matters, such as authorship, date, structure, and themes of the letters. They will also have the opportunity, to gain a sense of the core purpose of 1 John, by looking at the first four verses of the letter, and comparing this prologue with that of John 1:1-18.
Reading: 1 John 1:1-4; John 1:1-18
Please read the passage for the day in at least two different translations, a more formal translation, such as the NRSV, CEB, RSV, or NIV, and then read it again in a freer version or paraphrase such as The Message, Phillip’s, or The New Living Translation. As you read pay attention to images that warrant further exploration. If you have access to the internet, Bible Gateway allows you to read the passage in parallel form.
Lesson:
Authorship and Context:
It is usually appropriate to begin an introductory lesson by looking at questions of authorship, context, and destination. When a piece of literature is supposed to be a letter, we look to the opening lines for some hint as to the identity of the author, as well as the identity of the recipient. We would also try to identify the context out of which the document emerged. The three letters attributed to a person named John pose difficulties in this regard. First, regarding the genre, while 2 and 3 John have the markings of a letter, the same cannot be said for 1 John. The first “letter” does not identify the author or context. Instead, it opens with a prologue (1 John 1:1-4), much like the Gospel of John. Therefore, while we will speak of this document as a letter, we do so cautiously.
Both 2 and 3 John will have their own chapters, at which time we will look more closely at the questions of authorship, date, genre, and context of those letters. I will note here, however, that these two “letters” do not offer much information as to the identity of the author, the recipient, or the date of its composing. The only identifier we find in the letters is the word “Elder” (Gk. Presbuteros). Regarding the date of their composition, the only letter with early attestation is 1 John. Questions continued to be raised about the authenticity of both 2 and 3 John as late as the fourth century.
Tradition has long linked these letters to the author of the Gospel of John, and the similarities in vocabulary and style are noticeable. There are differences as well. Whether they have the same author, there are sufficient similarities among the documents to assume that they form what some scholars have termed a “Johannine canon.” That is, even if they do not share the same author, there are enough similarities to suggest that the Gospel and the Letters emerged out of the same community. As we progress through the letters, we will want to be alert to themes and ideas that are found both in the Gospel and the letters.
Despite the lack of either internal or external evidence for determining authorship, tradition has attributed the authorship of the Gospel and Letters to the Apostle John. The author of 2 and 3 John simply identifies himself as the presbuteros or elder, while 1 John remains a completely anonymous book. However, for the purposes of our study, we will refer to the author as John. This does not mean that I am taking a position on the identity of the author, it’s simply easier to use this designation for the author.
Since we lack any identifying authorial marks in the letter, we can take note of its use by the early church. The earliest attestation of 1 John is found in Polycarp’s “Letters to the Philippians,” which offers echoes of what we read in 1 John. That evidence dates to around 135 CE. Eusebius records the words of Papias, who was active in the early second century, referring to the “former letter of John and that of Peter.” What is intriguing, is if this is truly from Papias, it would precede any known reference to the Gospel of John. The next evidence comes around 180, when we find Irenaeus quoting from both 1 and 2 John in Against Heresies. In using these letters, Irenaeus attributes them to the son of Zebedee, the disciple of Jesus, and author of the Gospel. Thus, by the third century 1 John was considered an authoritative text. As for the letters, their status remained uncertain at best for some time. The first reference to 3 John does not appear until the mid-third century, and the scriptural status of both 2 and 3 were still being questioned in the fourth century.2
When it comes to the authorship of 1 John, questions center on its relationship to the Gospel. There are some signs that it could have been written prior to the Gospel, since the letter is less polished than the gospel and the theology seems to be more primitive than the Gospel. On the other hand, there are also signs of dependence on the Gospel by the letter writer. There is no definitive proof either way, but most scholars believe that the Gospel is prior to the letter. One possibility is that the letters depended on an earlier version of the Gospel, rather than the finished product. That would explain the letter’s more primitive theology, as well as the signs of the letter’s dependence on the Gospel. With that in mind, most scholars date the letter to around 100 CE, while the Gospel would have been written around 90 CE.
Not only is the authorship and date of composition uncertain, the same is true for the location of the receiving community. The connection with Polycarp, the earliest attestation, suggests that the letter emerged in Asia Minor or modern Turkey, though some scholars have suggested Palestine or Syria as a point of origin. Ultimately none of this can be verified.
There is a hint to the nature of the authorship with the word “we,” and the reference to having seen and touched the Word of Life. That claim suggests a direct connection to Jesus, which would make sense if the author was the Apostle John. An alternative answer, and one that makes better sense of approximate date and possible context, is that the author(s) are the bearers of a tradition that has direct lineage to the Apostles and thus to Jesus. As Raymond Brown suggests, these would be companions of the Beloved Disciple who figures prominently in the Gospel of John. There have been objections to this idea, but it makes sense of the context, and for our purposes we will adopt this view.3For our purposes, we will speak of the author as being John the Elder (even if not the Apostle).
Structure of 1 John
As we read through 1 John, we need to keep in mind its structure. We have already noted that 1 John lacks the traditional marks of a letter, but whether this is a traditional epistle, sermon, or an early theological essay, there is an undeniable structure present in 1 John. The author appears to be weaving proclamation with moral exhortation. At the same time, the letter seems to lack “a single, tightly reasoned line of argument.”4 This will make our exploration of the letter more complex and perhaps more interesting, for the issues at hand will weave back and forth. We see this complexity of structure in the way the theme of love interplays with John’s concern about the threat of those he views as adversaries, people he doesn’t always speak of lovingly. Indeed, he calls them anti-Christs (1 John 2:18). Although the structure and argument are complex, the author of 1 John appears to have in mind the basic message about Jesus found in the Gospel, that the Word has become flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:1, 14).
The Adversaries
Reading through the letters, we discover that John the Elder is pushing back against adversaries who are undermining the community. It appears likely that these adversaries are people who had once been part of the community but had left it and were seeking to draw others out. Though, in 3 John reference is made to Diotrephes, who appears to remain within the community as an opponent to the author of the letter. The tenor of the arguments suggest that John believed that they threatened the survival of the community and needed to be stopped. As we proceed through the letter, we’ll want to keep these adversaries in mind, as this will help us understand the apparent harshness that the one who proclaims the love of God shows to certain people. In recent decades, certain portions of the Christian community have focused attention on the rise of a person whom they identify as the “Anti-Christ.” While the term “anti-Christ” appears only in the letters of John, the term has taken on a life of its own, being defined through other references to a world-ruling figure, but in the letters, the term is used more broadly for those who deny that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:18ff). Nonetheless, the references to anti-Christs appear in the context of a discussion of the end of days. That means, despite the delightful words about love and hospitality, these are polemical works. We may not fully know who these opponents are, but they are considered “armed and dangerous.”
Among the issues that emerge are the nature of Christian hospitality