Y. Character. — Though ranked among the catholic Epistles, this writing has not the form of an epistle — in this respect it more resembles a free homily ; still, in fact, it undoubtedly was sent as a letter to the persons for whose instruction it was designed. The general strain is admonitory, and the author seems to have writ- ten as he would have spoken had those whom he ad- dresses been present before him. One great thought pervades the book — the reality of Christ's appearance in the flesh, and the all-sufficiency of his doctrine for sal- vation— a salvation whicli manifests itself in holiness and love. But the author does not discuss these topics in any systematic or logical form ; he rather allows his thoughts to flow out in succession as one suggests anoth- er, and clothes them in simple and earnest words as they arise in his mind. Some have imputed a character of senility to the work on this account, but without reason. Under a simple and inartificial exterior there lies deep thought, and the book is pervaded by a suppressed in- tensity of feeling that recalls the youthful Boanerges in the aged apostle. The mighty power that is in it has drawn to it in all ages the reverence and love of the no- blest minds, " especially of those who more particularly take up Christianity as a religion of love — a religion of the heart" (Liicke, Int. p, 65).
VI. Contents. — A strict analysis of this Epistle, there- fore, seems hardlj^ possible, as the writer does not appear to have been systematic in its plan, but rather to have written out of a fuU and loving heart. " He asserts the pre-existent glory and the real humanity of our Lord, in opposition to false teachers, and for the comfort of the Church (i, 1-7), Then follows a statement of the sinfulness of man, and the propitiation of Christ, this propitiation being intended to stir us up to holiness and love (i, 8 ; ii, 17) ; Jesus and the Christ are asserted to be oiie, in opposition to the false teachers (ii, 18-29). The next chapter seems devoted to the singular love of God in adopting us to be his sons, with the happiiness and the duties arising out of it, especially the Aniy of brotherty love (ch. iii). The following chapter is prin- cipally occupied with marks by which to distinguish the teaching of the Spirit of God from that of false teachers and of Antichrist, with repeated exhortations to 'love as brethren" (ch. iv). The apostle then shows the connec- tion between faith, renewal, love to God and to the brethren, obedience, and victory over the world, and concludes with a brief summary of what had been al- ready said (ch. v)" (Fairbairn ). See § 8, below.
VII. Relation to the Fourth Cosptl. — The close affinity between this Epistle and Jolm's Gospel has already been alluded to. In style, in prevailing formute of expres- sion, in spirit, and in thought, the two are identical. "It is evident that the writer of each had a similar class of opponents in his mind — those who, like the Doceta;, de- nied the true humanity of Christ ; those, again, who de- nied that the man Jesus was the Christ and Son of God; and those who, under pretence of being his disci])les, were habitually living in violation of his commands. In both books is the same deeply loving and contemplative nature; in both, a heart completely imbued with the teaching of the Saviour; in both, also, the same tenden- cy to abhorrence of those who opposed his Lord. Ke- markable, too (to use the words of Ebrard), is the simi- larity of the circle of ideas in both ^v^itings. The no- tions, li^ht, life, darkness, truth, lie, meet us in the FZpis- tle with the same broad and deep meaning wliich tliey bear in the Gospel ; so, also, the notions of propitiittion (i\o<r/toc), of doing righteousness, sin, or iniquity {af^iap- Tiav, uvofiiav), and the sharply-presented antitheses of light and darkness, truth and lie, life and death, of lov- ing and hating, the love of the Father and of the world, children of (iod and of the devil, spirit of truth and of error" (Fairbairn). IMacknight, and, still more fuUy, De Wette, have drawn out a copious comparison of expres- sions common to the (Jospel and Epistle.
This similarity has led to the suggestion that both, in a sense, form one whole, the Epistle being, according to
<
JOHN
953
JOHN
some, a prolegomenon to the Gospel ; according to oth- | ers, its practical conclusion ; and according to others, its commendatory accompaniment. The probability is that both were written at the same period of the author's life, and that they both contain in writing what he had been accustomed to testify and teach during his apos- tolic ministry; but whether any closer relation than this exists between them must remain matter entirely of conjecture.
VIII. Design. — That the apostle sought to confirm the believers for whom he wrote in their attachment to Christianity as it had been delivered to them by the ambassadors of Christ is evident on the surface of the Epistle. It is clear, also, that he had in view certain false teachers by whose arts the Christians were in dan- ger of being seduced from the faith of Jesus as the in- carnate Son of God, and from that holy and loving course of conduct to which true faith in Jesus leads ; but who these false teachers were, or to what school they be- longed, is doubtful. It is an old opinion that they were Docetoi (Tertidlian, />(? came Cfuisli, 1,24; Dionys. Al. ap. Eusebius, 77. Ji. vii, 25), and to this many recent in- quirers have given in their adherence. Liicke, who strenuously defends this view, attempts to show that Docetism was in vogue as early as the time of John by an appeal to the case of Cerinthus, and to the references to Docetism in three of the epistles of Ignatius {Ad Smyrii. 2 sq. ; A d Trail, ix ; A d Eph. vii) ; but the doc- trine of Cerinthus respecting the person of Jesus Christ was not Docetic in the proper sense, and the passages cited from Ignatius are all subject to the suspicion of being inteqoolations, as none of them are ibund in the Syriac recension. LUcke lays stress also on the words iv ctapKi iXrjXv^oTa (iv. 2; comp. 2 John vii) as indicat- ing an express antithesis to the doctrine of the Docetics that Christ had come only in appearance. It may be doubted, however, whether this means anything more than that Christ had reallji come, the phrase iv aapKi tXBilv being probably a familiar technicality for this among the Christians. It may be questioned, also, whether the passage should not be translated thus, "Every spirit which confesseth Jesus Christ having [who has] come in the flesh is of God," rather than thus, " Every spirit which confesseth that Jesus Christ is come," etc. (for ufioXoytli' with the accusative, see John ix, 22; Acts xxiii, 8; Rom. x, 9 ; 1 Tim. vi, 12), and in this case even the appearance of allusion to a contrary doctrine vanishes (see Bleek, Einleit. p. 593). It may be added that, had John intended to express a direct antithesis to Docetism, he would hardlj^ have con- tented himself with merely using the words iv aapKt, for there is a sense in which even the Docette would have admitted this. — Kitto.