Getting Up to Speed: An Essential Introduction to 1 John Barry Clyde Joslin Barry Clyde Joslin is Assistant Introduction and Purpose of Article nal recipients of the epistle; the epistle’s Professor of Christian Theology at Over against our own evangelical culture, overall purpose (i.e., why did John write?); Boyce College of The Southern Baptist in which compromise, political correct- various issues and theological emphases Theological Seminary. He received his ness, spiritual lethargy, and cultural in 1 John; and the general outline/layout Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary relativity are common, stands the short of the book. These fi ve parts will then be and his Ph.D. from The Southern Baptist letter of 1 John. Few have poured over followed by a brief conclusion. Theological Seminary. its pages without being personally con- fronted with the apostle’s boldness and Authorship and Date stark delineation between those who are These two issues can be treated together “in the light” and those who still walk in since they are so closely related. For most the “darkness” of the world. None should readers who study 1 John, the identifi ca- miss the author’s clear description of what tion of “John” in the title is suffi cient for it means to believe and confess the word ascertaining the author’s identity.1 In addi- of life as those who have been “born of tion, this has been the traditional view of God.” A faithful study of 1 John yields a the church. Yet within New Testament treasure trove of riches for the soul and studies there are many who refute Johan- mind as the reader is confronted by the nine authorship and make alternative apostle’s message in its fi ve short chapters. arguments for the letter’s writer.2 In part Does it matter what one believes? Does the problem arises since nothing within it matter what one believes about Jesus, 1 John unambiguously tells the reader specifi cally? Can one know God and it exactly who the author is.3 The standard have no impact on one’s life? John is bold form for a New Testament letter consisted and lucid on these and other matters and of fi ve parts, the fi rst being a salutation in as such, his words are both timely and which both the author and audience are timeless. Indeed, such a message tran- identifi ed. Yet 1 John does not include scends the centuries and comes to us with this opening salutation.4 Given this fact, it abiding relevance. comes as no surprise that there are many The aim of this article is practical: to conjectures concerning authorship.5 provide a framework for further study, preaching, and teaching of the Bible, spe- Authorship cifi cally, 1 John. What follows is a tool that Those who argue against the tradi- will hopefully prove useful to the pastor, tional view of John’s authorship do so Sunday School teacher, youth director, along several lines and make one (or a Bible study leader, and anyone else want- combination) of several arguments. First, ing an overview of John’s fi rst epistle. since the authorship of the Gospel of John The article addresses the following fi ve is disputed, and given the many similari- subjects: authorship and date; the origi- ties between John and 1 John in terms of 4 style, grammar, and theology, questions the son of Zebedee, the “disciple whom concerning the authorship of 1 John are Jesus loved” (John 13:23; 20:2; 21:7, 20) and inevitable for a number of scholars. Sec- author of the Fourth Gospel, wrote 1 John. ond, others have argued that another man This view is upheld by several strands of by the name of John wrote the epistle. This internal and external evidence. man is likely “the elder” noted in 2 and 3 Concerning external evidence, several John. Yet nothing else is known of “John late first century and second century the elder,” and, as such, this view tells church writings strongly echo the Johan- us nothing other than that an unknown nine language found in 1 John.10 Clement fellow may have written the epistles.6 As of Rome described God’s people as those Donald Guthrie notes, this is diffi cult to who are “perfected in love.” The Didache accept given the early church’s preference 10:5-6 (A.D. 90-120) bears a striking for apostolic authorship of those books resemblance to 1 John 2:17. The Epistle they deemed authoritative.7 Third, some to Diognetus contains such phrases as have suggested that the author of 1 John “God sent his only-begotten Son” and was actually a disciple of the apostle John, we “love him who fi rst loved us,” both and thus the apostle “stands behind” of which are quite Johannine. There are the epistle in some fashion similar to the other possible allusions to 1 John in early way that Simon Peter stands behind the church literature,11 yet as Guthrie notes, Gospel of Mark. The difference is that each of these examples can perhaps be Mark is never said to have been written explained as part of the common milieu by Peter. Fourth, still others have sug- of fi rst century Christian thought and, gested that there are enough differences thus, are not unambiguously dependent on between the gospel of John and 1 John to 1 John.12 Nevertheless they are helpful and warrant different authorship of the two. noteworthy in the overall discussion of Yet such distinctions are not persuasive authorship and authenticity of 1 John. enough to support the claim of two dif- The first direct clear reference to a ferent authors. Far more numerous and Johannine letter is that of Papias, bishop noteworthy are the similarities between of Hierapolis (near Laodicea), who is 1 John and the Fourth Gospel.8 Finally, said to have quoted from “John’s former many have suggested that all Johannine epistle.”13 The fi rst direct dependence on writings are actually the product of a 1 John comes from Polycarp, a disciple “Johannine Community” or “Johannine of John himself, who wrote a letter to School,” and thus are not the writing of the church at Philippi (A.D. 110-120) that the apostle John. Such a “community” is likely dependent on 1 John and/or 2 is said to have been taught and led by John.14 Irenaeus (A.D. 180) knows of the the beloved disciple, which eventually fi rst two letters of John and attributes produced the Johannine writings. Thus, them to John the Lord’s disciple who such writings are not the product of the wrote the Fourth Gospel.15 After the time apostle, but products of a group of John’s of Irenaeus, the evidence is plentiful. In disciples written at a later time.9 conclusion, the external evidence for the Yet in spite of the above possibilities, a author being the apostle John is consistent, more compelling argument can be made and the fact remains that in church history in favor of the traditional view that John, 1 John is never attributed to anyone other 5 than the apostle John. John around A.D. 90. Smalley notes that Second is the internal evidence. Since this allows enough time “for a sharpening a writer is nowhere named in 1 John, all of the heterodox opinions on the part of matters of internal evidence hinge on its some members of John’s community.”22 connection to the Fourth Gospel. The For those scholars who maintain Johan- similarities between the two writings are nine authorship, the majority favor a date notable.16 Both have a formal dualism that close to the last decade of the fi rst century. polarizes matters into stark antitheses Given the available evidence for author- such as darkness and light, love and hate, ship and dating, this is an appropriate and truth and lie, belief and unbelief, obedi- acceptable conclusion. ence and disobedience, life and death, children of God and children of the devil. Place of Writing and Audience On such dualisms, D. A. Carson notes that Place of Writing John absolutely forbids the “fuzzy think- There is consistent evidence that the ing and relativism that are characteristic apostle John relocated to Ephesus dur- of our age.”17 These are fundamental ing the Jewish War of A.D. 66-70, that he issues that the writer of both the Fourth planted churches after moving to Ephe- Gospel and 1 John is concerned with, and sus, and that he was one of the foremost such common themes point to a common leaders in Asia Minor.23 Further, histori- authorship.18 Both use the unique terms cal accounts inform us that other church “Paraclete”19 and “one and only Son” (cf. leaders would make the trek to Ephesus “only-begotten Son” or “unique Son”).20 in order to hear John recount stories about Both are marked by the same simple Jesus and to listen to the teaching of the syntax and a lack of conjunctions between apostle. Ancient traditions originating in sentences. In short, there is signifi cant Ephesus also inform us that John’s tomb external and internal evidence that point is in Ephesus. Therefore, it is not reach- to and support the traditional view of ing to assume that the apostle John was apostolic authorship of 1 John. The evi- an evangelist, church planter, and pastor dence therefore points to the author being in the Mediterranean world whose fi rst- John the apostle, son of Zebedee.