The Johannine Letters 1–3 John1

Introduction

First, second, and third are referred to as the Johannine Letters. In these letters, the

Apostle John communicates to churches with clarity during a time of confusion, emphasizing themes like truth, love, obedience, and confidence in Christ. It is likely that 1 John is relatively familiar to most Christians, while the other two letters are largely neglected. The first letter is particularly favored because of the comfort and assurance it provides to troubled Christians.

In this study, we will examine all three letters, though the majority of our study will focus on the first because it contains considerably more material than the following letters, and because those letters likely served as cover letters introducing the first epistle. However, we will still carefully study the latter two letters because they carry on important theological themes that are readily applicable to us today.

As we discussed in our Bible Class on biblical interpretation (hermeneutics) last year at this time (Spring 2019) there are three important elements to biblical interpretation: history, literature, and theology.2 Before we begin working through these elements at the micro-level in the examination of individual units of these letters, it is important to begin with a foundational understanding of the historical background to these letters, the literary plan, and the theological themes running throughout.

History

1 Scripture quotations are from the Christian Standard Bible (2020 Text Edition; available for free in the App store or online at www.read.csbible.com) unless otherwise noted.

2 Andreas J. Köstenberger and Richard D. Patterson, Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2011), 80-81. The historical background includes matters pertaining to (1) authorship, (2) date of writing, (3) provenance, meaning the location of writing, (4) recipients, meaning the intended audience, and (5) the occasion or purpose of writing.

Author

Conservative theologians maintain early church tradition that the author of the three epistles is John, the son of Zebedee, the apostle of Christ (and the author of Revelation and the bearing his name). However, there is considerable debate regarding the authorship of these letters (and the Gospel and Revelation). Some of the debate arises because none of the letters specifically state that they are from John. Alternative proposals include an unknown elder in what has been called the , a follower of the apostle John, or a legendary figure titled John the Elder in Asia minor.3

The particulars of the debate about authorship are outside the scope of our study, but it is important to note that no external or internal evidence has definitively shown that that the

Apostle John is not the author. In this study we will operate with the understanding that the

Apostle John authored these three letters, as well as the and the book of

Revelation.4

Identifying the author, when possible, is important because one of the main goals in biblical interpretation is understanding the message that the author intended his readers to

3 Andreas J. Köstenberger, L. Scott Kellum, Charles L. Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 2nd ed. (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2016), 898.

4 For the authorship of the Gospel of John, see Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 351-354. For more on the authorship of the Johannine Letters, see Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 896- 904. For the authorship of the , see Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 351-354929-933.

2 understand (authorial intent).5 We are operating with the understanding that these letters are inspired, such that as we arrive at John’s intended message, we also hear God’s intended message. As such, we must read the Johannine Letters as part of a larger corpus (all of John’s writings) and as a contributing part of the inspired Scriptures (the Old and New Testaments).

Throughout, we will seek to understand what John communicates in these letters with reference to his other writings and with reference to the rest of the Bible (this is referred to as reading canonically) and at times with reference to how these writings have been understood throughout church history (this is referred to as the Theological Interpretation of Scripture).

Date and Provenance6

Ancient historians record that John lived in Asia Minor (modern day Turkey), apparently sometime following the Jewish rebellion in the year 66. The historian Eusebius reports that the

“apostles and disciples of our Savior, were scattered over the whole world” and that John was in

Asia where, “after continuing for some time, he died at Ephesus” (Eccl. Hist. 3.1.1).7 According

5 For a defense and further explanation of authorial intent as the goal of biblical interpretation, see Robert H. Stein, A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules, 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 5-29; Köstenberger and Patterson, Invitation to Biblical Interpretation, 57-78; Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, 4th ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014), 21-35; Bryan H. Cribb and Channing L. Crisler, The Bible Toolbox (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2019), 55-56; J. Scott Duvall and J. Daniel Hays, Grasping God’s Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005); E. D. Hirsch, Jr. Validity in Interpretation (London: Yale University Press, 1967), 1-23; Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Is There Meaning in This Text: The Bible, The Reader, and the Mortality of Literary Knowledge (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 201-280.

6 Provenance is a term used for the location of the letter’s origin.

7 Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History: Complete and Unabridged, trans. C. F. Cruse (Peabody, MA: 1998), 67.

3 to Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3.1.1) John ministered in Ephesus for some time and, without evidence to the contrary, it can be assumed that John wrote his letters in that city.

The letters were most likely written after the Gospel of John (mid-80s) because the letters seem to assume that the content of John’s Gospel was already known (e.g. 1 John 2:7-8 refers to a “” without explanation. Cf. John 13:34-35). References like this one, along with the possibility that the letters were written to correct misunderstandings or misinterpretations indicate that the letters were indeed written sometime after the Gospel. If John died around the turn of the century, factoring his exile to Patmos (Revelation 1:9), the letters can reasonably be dated somewhere in the early to mid-90s.8

Figure 1 Asia Minor

8 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 904-905.

4 Destination/Recipients

John’s close relationship with his audience is indicated by the way the familial terms with which he addresses them (1 John 2:12-14). However, 1 John appears to have been intended to reach as many believers as possible, which explains the lack of references to specific names, places, or events. The general nature of the letter allows for a broad reception. Most likely, “1

John was a circular letter sent to predominantly Gentile churches in and around Ephesus.”9

However, the author’s own Jewish background in combination with the likelihood of the inclusion of ethnic Jews who also left Palestine following the Jewish revolts (A.D. 66) and the destruction of the temple (A.D. 70) allows for issues addressed in John’s Gospel to resurface in his letters.

Unlike 1 John, 2 and 3 John are personal letters.10 2 John is addressed to “the elect lady and her children” (v. 1) which most likely refers to a local church or several local churches. 3

John is directed to a certain Gaius who is identified as the author’s friend (lit. “the beloved”; tō agapētō/τῷ ἀγαπητῷ; v. 1). We know nothing else about him but can assume that he was a recognized leader in one of the churches.

Occasion and Purpose

Identifying the purpose of writing is important for the interpretation of the letters because it frames the way that the entire book is read. In the Johannine letters, the primary debate about the purpose of the letter relates to the presence of the false teachers (1 John 2:18-19). Different theories about the reason John writes these letters lead to varying conclusion about the major theological themes, the tone of the letter, and how to respond to the truths contained in it. For

9 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 905.

10 Ibid.

5 example, if one concludes that John’s primary purpose in writing is to defend against false teaching (polemical), the letter will be read as more aggressive an analytical. If one concludes that John’s primary purpose is to shepherd a congregation (pastoral) that has been drastically impacted by false teaching, the letter will be interpreted with overtones of reassurance.

Equally important is the identification of the successionist/false teachers mentioned above. Generally, five suggestions have been made about the opponents, identifying them as: 1)

Gnostics, 2) Docetists, 3) Cerinthians, 4) those who downplayed the significance of Jesus’ death, and 5) Jewish/Judaizing opponents.11

Whether John is writing a polemic against them or trying to pastoral engage a hurting congregation with the salve of truth, the theology set forward can be skewed or enhanced by whatever however the false teachers are identified. For example, if one understands the false teachers to be promoting some form of pro-, there will be a focus on the incarnation of Christ that may actually take other important theological themes out of focus.

John does not clearly describe the theological errors in view. And because we can only interpret from what is known rather than from guesswork, we must limit our speculation about these false teachers to what the text provides. There are four specific passages that provide the main features of the false teaching: 1 John 2:18–27; 4:1–6; 5:7; and 2 John 7–11.

1 John 2:18–27 describes those who went out from the church (i.e. left the faith) as unbelievers in opposition to Christ (). Apparently, at one time these individuals had identified with the assembly and the apostolic teaching in some way but did not persevere in the apostolic teaching and departed. This description does little to narrow down the identity of the

11 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 906.

6 false teachers or the content of their teaching, but it does show that there was at least some previous formal recognition of the secessionists as part of the Christian community.

1 John 4:1–6 describes these individuals as “false prophets” that did not confess Jesus.

This failure to confess Christ categorizes these individuals as against Christ (antichrists) and in league with the world. As such, they are not from God. In contrast, those who are from God confess that Jesus came in the flesh. In 2 John 7 a similar claim is made “Many deceivers have gone out into the world; they do not confess the coming of Christ in the flesh. This is the deceiver who is the .” This phrasing has led some to identify the false prophets as pre-

Gnostic.

One pre-Gnostic position took shape in the teachings of Cerinthus who held that Christ’s spirit descended on Jesus at his baptism and left him at the cross (termed adoptionism). Another pre-Gnostic position took shape in the Docetic teaching that Christ only appeared to be human.

While the confession of the incarnation is certainly important and features elsewhere in the

Johannine writings, it is possible that the terminology of confessing that “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” was simply a standard confession of faith in Jesus Christ, such as in the confessional statement of 1 Timothy 3:16:

He was manifested in the flesh, Vindicated by the spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory.

In this case, John’s point is not that the “false prophets” were making a particular claim about

Jesus’ humanity or the incarnation, but that they simply rejected Christ and failed to affirm early

7 Christian creedal language. In other words, John’s description focuses “not so much on refuting a defective fine point of Christology but on the rejection or confession of Jesus as the Messiah.”12

Those who tend to take 1 John 4:1-3 as descriptive of Gnostic teaching tend to interpret 1

John 5:6-7 in the same way. However, not only does this text not specifically identify false teachers who were denying “the blood,” but this text also does not identify a specific false teaching. As a general statement, “It would apply to all who make Jesus a good teacher, a prophet, or merely a historical figure but deny the meaning of his death.”13 Like 1 John 4-13, it is probably better to see the language of 1 John 5:6-7 as a general statement of Christian belief, perhaps emphasizing the importance of Jesus death.

There are two other texts that provide some hint about the identification of the false teachers but are again so vague as to be applicable to a variety of teaching. 2 John 9 warns about those who “do not remain in Christ’s teaching but goes beyond it.” Again, this only shows that the false teachers were at one time formally connected to the apostolic teaching. The other text, 1

John 1:5–10 speaks of those who claim to be “in the light” while walking “in darkness,” apparently while denying having ever sinned. Again, this description could apply to a plethora of false teaching and does not even have to be identified with a particular religious system.

Given the information above, we must limit ourselves to what we can actually know from the text. In so doing, we must reject highly specific historical reconstructions of the occasion that gave rise to John’s letters. What can we say about the identity of the false teachers? First, we can say that John is writing to a church (or a group of churches) dealing with a dispute with false teachers from within the church(es).

12 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 909.

13 Ibid.

8 Second, the dispute apparently escalated with the result that these false teachers left the church(es). This division was both theological and personal, leaving behind some level of relational pain and theological uncertainty.

Third, the secessionists were in the wrong (at least theologically, if not ethically) and those who remained are described as having “an anointing from the Holy One” (1 John 2:20).

Not only did the secessionists defect from the assembly, they also departed from Christ and were separated from God (1 John 4:1-6).

Finally, it appears that the secessionists were not content with simply departing. Instead, they sought to influence those who had remained in the church(es) in an effort to add to their number (2 John 7:10-11).

These descriptions could fit a number of opponents. As such, we should limit the identification of the opponents to those “who deny that Jesus is the Messiah (whether gnostic,

Jewish, or otherwise).”14 If any one group is in view, those who converted from Judaism only to retreat back seem like the most likely candidates given the limited descriptions of the secessionists in the text, providing a level of continuity with John’s presentation of Jesus in his

Gospel. However, it is better to understand that the false teaching and the ensuing divisions that prompted John to write relates to a denial of Jesus as the Messiah.

Having vaguely identified the false teachers, it is necessary to make a determination regarding the tone of the letter. Do the letters serve primarily as a polemic against the false teachers or as pastoral counsel to those who remained? It is best to read the letter with a tone of pastoral care rather than polemic engagement. “In light of the recent upheaval (1 John 5:13; see 1

John 2:19), the Christians to whom John wrote were in need of instruction. More importantly,

14 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 910.

9 they needed to be reassured and comforted. John does this more by defining orthodoxy rather than minutely defining and rejecting the opponents.”15 Although John certainly provides exhortations to his readers, his focus is primarily pastoral.

Finally, we are able to consider the specific purpose of writing within the larger framework discussed above. There are four passages that contain purpose statements in 1 John

(1:4; 2:1, 12–14; 5:13). The statement in 1:4 is speaks not of John’s purpose with regard to his recipients, but with regard to those who represent the apostolic message. The statement in 1 John

2:1 is more reflective of the immediate context (i.e. the discussion about walking in the light and how to deal with sin) than of the larger letter. The statements in 1 John 2:12–14 appear to be less about John’s actual purpose and more about establishing John’s perspective on his recipients.

This is especially important because John will shortly discuss the secessionists and wants to affirm for his readers that he sees them as “of God” and not as “of the world.”

Positioned near the end of his letter, John explains that he has written “these things so that you may know that you have eternal life” (1 John 5:13). The phrase “these things” appears to be the content of his letter (at least up to that point), indicating that the primary purpose of each segment along the way is to provide an assurance of their possession of eternal life based on their belief in the name of the son of God. “Thus, the reassurance of all genuine Christians in the church(es) addressed is the primary purpose of this book.”16

John’s purpose of reassurance, which is primarily delivered through the explanation of orthodox Christian belief, makes his letter immediately relatable and applicable to the Church today. The reality of uncertainty, perhaps caused by the enticement of the world, the confusion of

15 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 910.

16 Ibid., 911.

10 erroneous teaching, or the pain of broken relationships, is not bound by time or location. It may manifest itself in different ways, but it palpably felt by all. Thus, John’s letter provides hope, reassurance, and direction for believer in our day, just as it did in John’s.

Literature

Having discussed general issues related to historical background, we can now consider the literary nature of the texts with respect to genre and structure.

2 and 3 John are both straightforwardly letters, following the common pattern of first- century letters with and introduction, body, and conclusion.17 1 John is not so simple either in its genre classification or in its structure.

1 John lacks a formal greeting or farewell, causing some to classify it as a genre other than letter, such as a paper or a tractate, or even a homily or sermon because of its shared features with Hebrews and James. However, because the structure Greco-Roman letters are considerably diverse, it is best to classify 1 John as a letter—even if it, perhaps, began as a homily or sermon.18 More specifically, 1 John should be understood as a circular and situational letter, “written to instruct and encourage the apostolic Christians in and around Ephesus regarding the nature of the gospel and their part in it.”19

The structure of 1 John is more challenging to discern, particularly because John regularly and seamlessly leads from one topic immediately in the next, only to return later to the initial topic. The subtleties of transition are not purposeless, ultimately serving as an amplification device, allowing John to provide more depth and intensity to the themes he wishes

17 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 915.

18 Ibid., 914.

19 Ibid.

11 to present. For our purposes we will follow the outlines for the Johannine Letters provided by

Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles presented below:20

1 John

I. PROLOGUE (1:1–4) II. OVERVIEW (1:5–2:27) a. True Believers Walk in the Light (1:5–2:2) b. True Believers Keep Jesus’ Commandments (2:3–11) c. Grow in Christ and Do Not Love the World (2:12–17) d. Abiding and Departing (2:18–27). III. ETHICS (2:28–3:24) a. Children of God Sanctify Themselves (2:28–3:10) b. Children of God Keep His Commandments (3:22–24) IV. DOCTRINE (4:1–5:12) a. Test the Spirits (4:1–6) b. The Theological Basis of Brotherly Love (4:7–12) c. Confidence from Correct Doctrine (4:13–21) d. Testimony and Proof (5:1–12) V. EPILOGUE (5:13–21)

2 John

I. INTRODUCTION (1–3) II. BODY: “WALKING IN THE TRUTH” (4–11) a. “Walking in the Truth” Requires Brotherly Love (4–6) b. “Walking in the Truth” Requires Guarding the Truth About the Son (7–11) III. CONCLUSION (12–13)

3 John

I. INTRODUCTION (1–4) II. BODY: COMMENDATION OF GAIUS AND DEMETRIUS, CONDEMNATION OF DIOTREPHES (5–12) a. Gaius’s Godly Behavior Toward Other Believers (5–8) b. The Ungodly Behavior of Diotrephes (9–10) c. Commendation of Demetrius (11–12) III. CONCLUSION (13–14)

20 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 916-917.

12 Theological Themes

Before moving forward to examine the text by individual units, it is important to grasp the larger theological themes communicated in John’s letters. Beginning with the bigger picture allows us to consider the themes in conjunction with John’s Gospel and Revelation, as well as to calibrate our approach to the individual units.

The theology of John’s letters has been categorized and expressed in different ways.

Some treat the theology of John’s letters in combination with John’s Gospel, generally deriving the theological categories from the Gospel with the letters serving as an addendum or as additional support.21 Others consider the letters on their own, while still others treat each letter individually.22 For the purpose of this study, I will consider the three epistles together, drawing primarily from Karen Jobes presentation of key theological themes including: (1) spiritual authority, (2) eternal life, (3) sin and atonement, (4) remaining in Christ, and (5) love for God and love for others.23

Spiritual Authority

Jobes notes that the significance of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection are interpreted by the biblical authors. As such, “the authority and credentials of the interpreter are of paramount importance to those who seek to know the truth.”24 John grounds his teaching in his first epistle

21 Andreas J. Köstenberger, A Theology of John’s Gospel and Letters Biblical Theology of the (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009), 273-546.

22 For a sampling of various categorization of themes, see Appendix I.

23 Karen H. Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Clinton E. Arnold (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014), 339-345.

24 Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 339.

13 in his (and the other apostles’) relationship to Christ. Following in Jesus’ pattern, John did not base his authority in himself (John 5:19-24), but in the person and message of Christ.

The emphasis from the start on the question of authority certainly validates an assumption that John’s first epistle combats some kind of false teaching by individuals presenting themselves as spiritually authoritative but in actuality were resisting the authoritative message of Christ and his representatives. The nature and teaching of these individuals is debated, but it can be accepted that there were individuals who were actively opposing the teaching and interpretation of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection presented by the apostles, and perhaps by the Apostle John specifically (3 John 9-10; 2 John 8-9; 1 John 2:19; 4:1-6).25

What made the apostles’ interpretation of Jesus authoritative? It was Christ’s own commissioning of the disciples where he gave them “the authority to testify about him and promised them that the Paraclete would come – the Spirit of truth (John 14:16-17) or Holy Spirit

(14:26) – would give them the necessary knowledge and understanding accessible only after the crucifixion and resurrection.”26 The apostles’ authority was not grounded only in their experiential knowledge of Christ, but also in the ongoing testimony of the Holy Spirit.

John then equips his readers to identify and combat false authorities with the genuine authority of the Spirit based in their anointing by the Holy One (1 John 2:20).27 As those who have known the truth and who have received the Spirit, these individuals stood in continuity with

25 For an introduction to the possible identity of the false teachers, as well as John’s purpose in writing, see Frank Thielman, Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 537-542, 554-555.

26 Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 339.

27 Daniel L. Akin, 1, 2, 3 John The New American Commentary 38 (Nashville: B&H, 2001), 35.

14 the disciples, sharing fellowship with them, the Father, and the Son (1 :3). Ultimately, that fellowship revolved around right belief about Jesus.28

Eternal Life

John’s first mention of eternal life is a reference to the pre-existence of Jesus Christ with the Father who then appeared to humanity (1 John 1:2). Yet, even here, “the point of his appearance is to bring eternal life after physical death to all who believe in him.”29 The theme of eternal life features throughout the , beginning in John’s Gospel (John 1:4), continuing in his letters (1 John 2:25; 5:13) and concluding in his Apocalypse (Revelation 22:1-

2).30 In John, references to eternal life include both a future, eschatological fullness of existence as well as a present life in the Son.31 Those who are in Christ participate in eternal life now and have assurance that the fulness of eternal life will be enjoyed in the eschatological future.

The theme of truth connects closely with the theme of eternal life, for it is only by knowing (and doing) the truth that eternal life is obtained (1 John 5:13). John is concerned to show that eternal life granted only by true knowledge and belief in Jesus because he is eternal life.32 Thus, “John is zealous to defend and protect the truth he has received from and about Jesus

28 I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1978), 73.

29 Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 340.

30 Colin G. Kruse, The Letters of John The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2000), 184-185.

31 George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, revs. Ed. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1993), 661.

32 For a discussion on the relationship between temporal works and eschatological consequences (reward or punishment) see Robert W. Yarbrough, 1–3 John Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), 345-347.

15 Christ against competing and conflicting claims to truth that have begun to infiltrate the churches.”33 These false claims to truth would ultimately lead to condemnation rather than to eternal life because they were erroneous interpretations about Jesus who is the light and life

(John 1:4).

Bringing together the true message of Christ (as presented by the authority of the

Apostles) and participating in eternal life results in a community of faith in fellowship together.34

In fact, “fellowship with God and fellowship with other believers is impossible.”35 Thus, eternal life is not something enjoyed in isolation from God (for without God there is no life) nor is it in isolation from others. Experience of eternal life is ultimately a communal participation with God and other believers (κοινωνία) and granted only through the redemptive, atoning work of Jesus

Christ.

Sin and Atonement

The confusion about eternal life was a matter of grave importance because of the reality of sin and the need for atonement. Here, John stands in continuity with the rest of the Scriptures in picturing those who are separated by God on the path to eternal condemnation and death. This is because “God himself is the source and sustenance of all life” therefore, “to be a law unto oneself and consequently to walk away from God is by definition to die. When one turns asway form the source of life, there is no other place to go but death.”36 Those who positioned

33 Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 340.

34 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Discipleship Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works 4, trans. Martin Kuske and Isle Tödt (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 227.

35 Herbert W. Bateman IV and Aaron C. Peer, John’s Letters: An Exegetical Guide for Preaching and Teaching Big Greek Idea Series (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2018), 73.

36 Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 341.

16 themselves against the apostolic teaching were really positioning themselves against fellowship with Life Eternal.37 This, of course, is the disposition of every individual without Christ, meaning that everyone needs the atoning work of Christ.

Because sin (and the resulting death) and Christ (and his gift of life) are diametrically opposed, “the topics of sin and the significance of Jesus Christ are inextricably entwined in 1

John.”38 Foundationally, God is depicted as the arbiter between righteousness and unrighteousness and as the only authoritative definer of what is and what is not sin. Pictured as the light (1 John 1:5-10), it is God alone who “defines the moral standard by which the human race is to live . . . Because of that, those who profess faith in Jesus Christ must agree with God that there is such a thing as sin, that those who walk in ways contrary to God’s nature are in darkness and have no fellowship with God, and that each of us is a sinner (1:5-10).”39

Ultimately, John portrays Jesus as the solution to the problem of sin. In an ongoing way,

Christ is the propitiation for the sin of believers (ἱλασμός ἐστιν περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν; 1 John

2:2). As such, Christ stands as the healing measure in the divide between Christians and God in the wake of sin. This ongoing work of Christ testifies to the work of Christ that welcomes the entire world (περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου; 1 John 2:2) into the fellowship of the Father with the Son.

By emphasizing Christ’s propitiatory work for the entire world, John “reestablishes for his

37 For a contrast between “Light” and “Darkness” in 1 John, see Appendix II.

38 Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 342.

39 Ibid.

17 readers that all people, even these deceivers who might claim otherwise, need propitiation, the propitiation that is found in Jesus Christ alone.”40

In John’s view, wherever there is sin, there is need for atonement to bridge the gap between light and darkness. This work is accomplished through Christ faithfully and justly and accessed through repentance and confession of sin (1 John 1:9). Repentance, then, is not only the initial step into fellowship with God, but an active element of remaining in Christ.

Remaining in Christ

Although John’s letters have the effect of a two-edged sword, condemning those who reject the apostolic teaching and assuring those who accept it, the tone of the letter is encouraging. His aim is to exhort those who have already received Christ “to remain in the truth by continuing to hold to the true significance of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection.”41 As such, the letter should not be construed as a presentation of tests of genuine faith (though it could be leveraged that way in discerning the spirit of truth and error, 1 John 4:1), but positively as a word of affirmation to the believing community. The center of John’s letters is his desire to “instill confidence in true believers that their salvation is assured” which tips the tone of the letter towards comfort rather than towards evaluation and testing.42

40 Charles E. Hill, “1–3 John,” in A Biblical Theological Introduction to the New Testament: The Gospel Realized, ed. Michael J. Kruger (Wheaton: Crossway, 2016), 494. Bateman and Peer argue that “atonement” would serve as a better translation than propitiation, because the Septuagint translates the Hebrew Day of Atonement with the word ἱλασμοῦ (Bateman and Peer, 94-95). Also see Smalley on the theological and semantic problems involved in translating the term (Smalley, 38-40).

41 Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 342.

42 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 924.

18 In this affirmation, John encourages and exhorts the church to remain faithful to Christ by abiding in him, a major theme in his gospel. A crucial part of remaining in Christ is maintaining the apostolic message about Christ. Whatever the motivation of those who denied that Jesus came in the flesh, affirmation of Jesus’ entrance into the world as human provided the foundation for abiding in Christ. Any claim to be “of God” or to be “in Christ” with a false conception of

Christ would be nothing more than an empty, ineffectual claim.

Love for God, Love for Others

Abiding in Christ is not merely a matter of the right profession, but also of the right action. The ideas of love for God and love for others permeate John’s letters and serve as (1) the primary expression of obedience to Christ’s commands (1 John 2:5), (2) doing the will of God (1

John 2:17) (3) the companion of genuine belief (1 John 3:23), the appropriate response to God’s love displayed in Christ (1 John 4:7–12), (4) the complements to the activity of the Spirit (1 John

3:24; 4:13, 16), (5) the antidote to fear (1 John 4:17-18), and (6) mutually complementing, meaning that genuine love for God will express itself in love for the other, and that love for the other is only possible as an extension of love for God (1 John 4:19-21). As such, love is not only inherently ethical, but also theological.43

Love for God and love for others, in John’s letters, feature as the natural response to the transformation from identification as a sinner to God’s child (1 John 3:1-2). “Because the clearest expression of God’s love is found on the cross of Jesus, remaining in the truth entails the response of love for God” quickly followed by love for neighbor. John understands that the

43 Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles, The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown, 920.

19 second [commandment] is an entailment of the first and that it is spiritually impossible to love

God but not love others . . .”44 In fact, love for God requires expression in love for one another.45

Love is not only the natural response to the gospel, but it is also a rational response. John explains that Christians can and must love because (1) love is the nature of God that is imparted to all of his children (1 John 4:7-8), (2) because God first loved and demonstrated that love ultimately through his Son (1 John 4:9-11), and (3) because loving one another is an important way to imitate God (imitatio dei) and to make him visible in the absence of the physical presence of Christ (1 John 4:120. Abiding in (and displaying) Christ, then, involves active love for others that serves as the completion of God’s love for the recipient (1 John 4:11).

Marshall’s summation of John’s teaching of truth is helpful and worth quoting at length:46

1. Love has its beginning in God who is so loving that it can be said that he is love. God’s love is shown to humankind in the death of Jesus his Son, which is a sacrifice for sins carried out for their benefit. If we want to know what love is, we shall see it supremely in this action. 2. It is in response to God’s love for us that we should love him. Human love for God is implicitly gratitude. 3. Those who love thereby demonstrates that they are born of God. The implication is that a divine action of begetting has taken place through which the life of God is implanted in people, and this life then expresses itself in love. 4. This love for God must be expressed in obedience to his commandment, which is that we are to love one another. This point is repeated and emphasized in all kinds of ways . . . 5. It is possible to say that one loves in the way we are commanded to do and yet to fail to do so. This happens when love is merely a matter of words and is not expressed in loving action.

44 Jobes, 1, 2, & 3 John, 344.

45 Stephen S. Smalley, 1, 2 & 3 John Word Biblical Commentary 51 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 326.

46 I. Howard Marshall, New Testament Theology: Many Witnesses, One Gospel (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2004), 539-40.

20 6. So integral is love for one another to having a right relationship with God that John can argue from its presence to our belonging to God . . . but of course John would also insist on right belief as well as right behavior.

Marshall’s summary highlights the prominence that love has in John’s writings as an evidence of true identification with God. In essence, the absence of love demonstrates the absence of participation in Light and Life.

Conclusion

These five themes are by no means comprehensive. Other themes, such as assurance of salvation, truth, etc., could be expanded and treated on their own. Additionally, each of these themes could be developed further in conjunction with John’s Gospel and Revelation. However, these five are important themes that provide an important entrance into Johannine theology, particularly as expressed in his letters.

21 APPENDIX I THEMES IN 1-3 JOHN

Köstenberger, Kellum, and Quarles Kruse

1. Ethical Conduct and Christian 1. Nature of God Discipleship Grounded in Proper 2. Eternal Life Christian Doctrine 3. Atonement 2. Assurance of Salvation 4. Born of God Do Not Sin 3. Love Akin Marshall 1. Doctrine of God 1. Truth 2. Doctrine of Sin 2. Love 3. Doctrine of Christ 3. Right Belief about Jesus 4. Doctrine of the Holy Spirit 4. Problem of Sinlessness 5. Doctrine of Salvation 6. Doctrine of Eschatology Jobes Hill 1. Spiritual Authority 2. Eternal Life 1. Theology Proper 3. Sin and Atonement 2. Ethics 4. Remaining in Christ 3. Christ: Atonement 5. Love for God, Love for Others 4. Christ: Incarnation 5. Doctrine of Sin 6. Eschatology 7. Antichrist

Ladd

1. Eternal Life 2. Antichrist 3. Sin 4. Christian Life

Thielman

1. Jesus’ Humanity 2. The Relationship between Christians and Sin 3. The Significance of Jesus’ Death 4. Love as Proof of a Relationship with God

22

APPENDIX II Light & Darkness in 1 John 1-2

1:5 1:6-7 1:8-9 1:10-2:2 2:3–2:6

Message: Darkness Darkness Darkness Darkness

There is no If we say If we say If we say Whoever says darkness in God:

“We we have fellowship with him” and “We have no sin” “We have not sinned” “I know him” but does not walk in darkness keep his commandments

we are lying we are deceiving ourselves we make him a liar Is a liar

and are not practicing the truth. and the truth is not in us. and his word is not in us. and the truth is not in him.

Light Light Light Light

God is light: If we walk in the light If we confess our sins If anyone sins Whoever keeps his word

We have fellowship with one another He is faithful & just to forgive us our sins we have an advocate with the in him truly the love of God is Father perfected.

The blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us And to cleanse us from all He himself is the atoning sacrifice Whoever says he from all sin unrighteousness for our sins abides…ought to walk.

Darkness is a false claim to fellowship; Darkness is self-deception and the Darkness rejects God’s word and light is real fellowship with other absence of truth. attacks his character. believers.

Darkness results in continued sinning Light is honest about sin and revels in Light runs to the promises of Summary: and living in a false reality; Light enjoys God’s faithful forgiveness. God’s word and accepts our need the reality of the forgiveness of sin. of him.

23 Bibliography

Akin, Daniel L. 1, 2, 3 John The New American Commentary 38. Nashville: B&H, 2001.

Bateman IV, Herbert W and Aaron C. Peer. John’s Letters: An Exegetical Guide for Preaching and Teaching Big Greek Idea Series. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2018.

Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Discipleship Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works 4, trans. Martin Kuske and Isle Tödt. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003.

Hill, Charles E. “1–3 John,” in A Biblical Theological Introduction to the New Testament: The Gospel Realized, ed. Michael J. Kruger. Wheaton: Crossway, 2016.

Jobes, Karen H. 1, 2, & 3 John Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Clinton E. Arnold. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014.

Köstenberger, Andreas, L. Scott Kellum, and Charles L. Quarles. The Cradle, The Cross, and The Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. Nashville: B&H Academic, 2016.

Köstenberger, Andreas J. A Theology of John’s Gospel and Letters Biblical Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009.

Kruse, Colin G. The Letters of John The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2000.

Ladd, George Eldon. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Marshall, I. Howard. New Testament Theology: Many Witnesses, One Gospel. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2014.

______. The Epistles of John. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1978.

Smalley, Stephen S. 1, 2 & 3 John Word Biblical Commentary 51. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008.

Thielman, Frank. Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.

Yarbrough, Robert W. 1–3 John Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008.

24