001.000. Introduction

INTRODUCTION When we completed our 1,500-page exposition of John’s Gospel more than twenty years ago, we were urged to take up the First Epistle of John, but felt quite incompetent to engage in it. The closing books of the New Testament, as their position indicates, require their expositor to possess a fuller knowledge of God’s Word and a more mature spiritual experience than do the earlier ones. The style of John’s Epistle is quite different from that of the other apostles, being more abstract, and for that reason more difficult of apprehension and elucidation. We still feel very unfit for the task upon which we are now entering, but if we wait until we deem ourselves spiritually qualified it will never be essayed. During the past quarter of a century we have given no little prayerful thought to its contents, and have studied carefully all the writings of others on it which the Divine providence has brought our way. The benefits of, and gleanings from this we shall now share with our Christian friends. Not only is John’s Epistle much more difficult than his Gospel (which is manifestly designed for babes in Christ, though even the ‘fathers’ never outgrow it) and the other apostolic writings, but it does not lend itself so readily to expositions of equal length. Some of its contents afford much more scope to a sermonizer than do others; and thus, while a whole article may be profitably devoted to certain single verses, others require to be grouped together, and because of this the reader is likely to be disappointed at the varying lengths of their treatment. It is perhaps for these reasons that comparatively little has been written upon this epistle—scarcely anything during the past fifty years. So far as we know, none of the Puritans attempted a systematic exposition of the same, for N. Hardy’s (1665) scarcely comes under that category.

Yet this portion of God’s Word is equally necessary, important, and valuable for His children as are all the others, though what they are likely to get out of it will largely depend upon their acquaintance with all preceding books and with the constancy and intimacy of their communion with the Triune God. A brief word concerning its writer. So far as we are aware, no evangelical of any weight has ever denied that this epistle was written by the same person of blessed memory as the one to whom the fourth Gospel is unanimously attributed.

There is clear and conclusive evidence, both external and internal, of this. As Barnes stated of the epistle: “It is referred to by Polycarp at the beginning of the second century, it is quoted by Papias and also by Ireneus.” It is found in the old Syriac version, which was probably made very early in the second century. Internally the evidence is strong that the same hand wrote this epistle as penned the fourth Gospel. The resemblances are many and striking, the modes of expression sufficient to identify the one employing them. The similarity of the opening verse of each is too close, yet the variations too marked, to have been made by an imposter. The reference to the “new commandment” (never mentioned by the other apostles) in 1 John 2:8 (and see 1 John 3:11) find its source in John 13:34, of John’s Gospel. The reader may also compare 1 John 3:1 with John 1:12; 1 John 3:2 with John 17:24; 1 John 3:8 with John 8:44; 1 John 3:13 with John 15:20; 1 John 4:9 with John 3:16, etc. To whom it was written. It is correctly designated one of the “General Epistles,” for it is not addressed to any particular individual or local assembly. Obviously it is designed for the whole family of God. Yet, as one reads it through, one gets a clear impression that John was intimately acquainted with those who first read his letter, that the majority of them were the seals of his own ministry, as his repeated “my little children” seems to indicate. As we shall yet have occasion to show it was Jewish Christians who were immediately concerned; 1 John 5:13 makes it evident that John wrote to believers, and by linking that verse with 1 John 2:3-5, we perceive that it was his design to aid them in the important task of selfexamination, that they might be more fully assured of their interest in Christ. From 1 John 2:18-26, we learn that the original recipients of this epistle were being assailed by false teachers, and it was John’s object to counteract (not refute seriatim!) their error, and confirm the same in their most holy faith.

Though there is nothing in the epistle to tell us the date when it was written, yet we may approximate it pretty closely. That it was penned much later than Paul’s epistles appears from the fact that with John “the world” and “the whole world” (1 John 5:19) comprise all that is outside Christianity. Not so with Paul: in his time there were two distinct camps hostile to Christianity—Judaism and heathendom. But the ancient kingdom of God had now passed away. The temple of Jerusalem was destroyed. After A.D. 70 the Jews had no power to persecute Christians. It was manifestly written after his Gospel, for such statements as 1 John 2:17 and 1 John 5:6 are unintelligible unless the reader has a knowledge of his Gospel—not only in general, but in its detailed expressions. The entire absence of such terms as affliction, suffering, tribulation, intimates that this letter was composed when external opposition to Christianity had largely subsided, when outward hostility was giving place to the corruption of the Truth from within. Thus it must have first seen the light very near the close of the first century. In this epistle the enemies of the saints are neither Jews nor Gentiles as such, but “Antichrists,” counterfeit Christians. Just as Satan himself is presented to us in the Scriptures under two outstanding characters—as the lion and as the serpent, as adversary and as seducer—so are his emissaries and his children. There are two distinct classes by which the Truth of God is dishonoured: by those who oppose and corrupt it in doctrine, and by those who misrepresent and malign it in practice—cf. the Sadducees (Acts 23:8) and the Pharisees (Matthew 23:3). Heretics, who pervert the Scriptures or openly contradict the fundamentals of the Faith, are the more easily recognized: against them the apostle warns in 1 John 2:18, 1 John 2:26; 1 John 3:7; 1 John 4:1-3. But numerous formalists and hypocrites shelter behind an empty profession, and are not so readily identified, for they hold the letter of the Truth, acknowledging it with their lips, though they walk not in it nor are their lives transformed by it. Concerning these John has much to say. Right from the beginning he distinguishes sharply between the real Christian and the nominal one (1 John 1:6-7) and continues doing so (1 John 2:3-5, etc.). The several aims of the apostle are easily perceived: in general it was to make a practical application of his Gospel, as appears from a comparison of 1 John 5:13, with John 20:31, and as 1 John 2:7, confirms. John sought that his beloved children should have just views of their Divine Saviour, an intelligent faith in Him, and that they might adorn their profession by a holy and consistent walk—1 John 2:1. It is evident from his “I have not written unto you because you know not the Truth, but because you know it” (1 John 2:21) that he was not addressing himself to those who were uninstructed, but rather to those who were well indoctrinated—compare also 1 John 2:20, 1 John 2:27. Thus his purpose was not so much to inform as to edify, not to tell them something new, but to confirm them in what they had already heard. This was the more necessary because some of their original number had apostatized (1 John 2:19) and false teachers were seeking to corrupt them. Let not their faith be shaken by the former, and let them heed his warnings and then they would not be drawn away by the wiles of the latter. A careful reading of the epistle makes it plain that another important end which the apostle had before him was to confute those who taught that because salvation is by grace God’s people are not “under the Law” or required to keep the Divine commandments. Antinomianism had raised its hideous head even in his day, and it devolved upon John to counteract the same. This it is which explains his frequent reference to “the commandments” (1 John 2:4, etc.) which, in its singular or plural form, occurs no less than thirteen times in this epistle. As students of ecclesiastical history are aware, those known as “The Libertines” had attained unto considerable prominence by the end of the first century. Their very name is sufficient to indicate their character. Peter, in his second epistle, described their forerunners as “false prophets” who, “while they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption” (1 John 2:1, 1 John 2:19), and Jude had spoken of them as “ungodly men turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness,” in this way, “denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 John 2:4). John denounces them as “Antichrists.”

There is little indication that John wrote according to a preconceived and definite plan, yet his thoughts are orderly. While the epistle is far from being a systematic doctrinal treatise, nevertheless, for its understanding, a close acquaintance with the distinctively doctrinal epistles preceding it is requisite. One expositor thereon said, “I am deeply convinced, after years of thought about it, that it can be studied aright exegetically only when it is studied theologically... no one is competent to deal in detail with this wonderful book who is not familiar with the evangelical system as a whole, and able therefore to appreciate the bearing of John’s line of thought in connection with it” (R. Candlish, 1866). That remark is, in our judgment, borne out by the position his epistle occupies in the Sacred Canon. Yet another and higher qualification is needed, namely that spiritual-mindedness which is the fruit of mature Christian experience. But the most difficult part of the expositor’s task here is to trace the connection of the apostle’s successive lines of thought. Our main endeavour will be to bring out the general scope and tenor of his teaching as simply as we can.

“The true knowledge of Christ is the one only key by which all the treasures contained in this epistle can be opened, for it contains a spiritual treatise on communion with Christ, and with the Father in Him, through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in us. We can have no communion with the Three in Jehovah but as we have a distinct Scriptural knowledge of the revelation given concerning Them in the sacred record. No man can call Jesus Lord, but by the Holy Spirit. This epistle ... sets forth the real fellowship which the apostles and saints in that age had with the Holy Trinity, and what all the saints in all succeeding ages are to expect and enjoy, in their measure and degree, until the same is consummated with the Eternal Three in the state of everlasting glory. As this epistle begins with this most sublime subject, so it is pursued throughout the whole of it: in showing the fruits and effects which the true knowledge of and communion with the Lord produce in the minds, lives and conversations of such as know Him, and have free and frequent access to Him” (S. E. Pierce, 1817).

What has just been quoted gives much the best summary and coincides most closely with our own concept of anything we have seen on the subject. It intimates that its grand theme is fellowship with God in and through Christ. Where that is enjoyed by individual saints, it necessarily leads to fellowship one with another. As usual, the key is hung upon the door, for in 1 John 1:3 the apostle states that the design before him is “that you also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.” This fellowship is the quintessence of blessedness, but only the regenerate enter into it. It is “in the light,” with the Holy One, and therefore impossible for those who are dead in trespasses and sins (1 John 1:5, 1 John 1:7). Yet the Christian’s infirmities, be they what they may, are not to be considered as hindrances to his communion with the Lord, since full provision has been made for him in the all-sufficient antidote of Christ’s blood (1 John 1:7) and advocacy (1 John 2:1). Later, John goes on to show that this fellowship is in righteousness and in love; but we will not further anticipate.

Among the many peculiarities of style which mark John in this epistle, we may mention that, negatively, there is almost an entire absence of that logical reasoning that is so prominent in Paul’s epistles—which is just what might be expected from a simple fisherman in contradistinction from a scholar. There is no “according as” or “for this cause.” “Wherefore” occurs but once (1 John 3:12), and there it is a question “why?” “Therefore” is found in 1 John 2:24; 1 John 3:1, and 1 John 4:5; yet in neither instance as a conclusion drawn from a preceding train of thought. Instead of the argumentative method, John is all for direct and positive assertions. Paul lays down a premise as a foundation on which he builds what follows; John simply affirms the Truth in simple form. And so it is in connection with the ministry of the Word. Some of God’s servants deal with their subjects principally in a doctrinal way, others in a solemn method of pointed averment, yet both are used by the Spirit of God, and are best suited to different types of Christians. The Lord is pleased to bestow a variety of gifts on His servants for the good of His people at large.

John indeed has a style all his own, differing noticeably from all other New Testament writers. This epistle contains no salutation, yet it breathes a spirit of warmth unto those addressed. No reference is made to either of the ordinances. No prayer is recorded in it, though definite encouragement and instruction are given to praying souls. There are no predictions in it, no delineation of the future as in the epistles of all his fellow apostles. Instead of describing the conditions which should characterize “the last days,” he declares “it is the last time” (1 John 2:18). Instead of foretelling the appearing of a future Antichrist, John refers to the Antichrists who were then upon the stage (1 John 2:18, and 1 John 4:3).

Turning to the positive side, one who attentively reads through the epistle at a sitting will at once be struck by the fact that it possesses and combines certain definite qualities which at first sight seem quite opposed to each other. Its style of expression is simple and unadorned. It abounds in words of one syllable and contains few that a child would have difficulty in pronouncing. Its sense is clear and patent. Nevertheless, there is no lack of dignity in its language, and its matter is elevated and sublime. Its tone warms our hearts, yet the Truth it expresses causes us to stand in awe. In it profoundest mysteries are touched upon and depths are sounded which no finite mind can fathom; still, its speech is plain, and the terms used are non-technical. “He writes at once with the most commanding authority and most loving tenderness; with the profoundest wisdom and the most touching simplicity; the most searching knowledge of the heart, its difficulties and frailties, and the most elevating and bracing courage and confidence; the gentlest affection, and the most pitiless and sternest condemnation of willful departure from the Truth in practice or opinion” (Ellicott).

Much is said about love, and nowhere is a spirit of charity more admirably and forcibly inculcated. But there are also a bold outspokenness and sternness which make us shrink. The love enjoined is far from being a sickly sentiment or effeminate weakness, being a holy grace, which instead of preventing faithful rebuke and severe denunciation promotes them. In such verses as 1 John 1:5; 1 John 2:22; 1 John 3:8, 1 John 3:10, 1 John 3:15; 1 John 4:20; 1 John 5:10, we hear the voice of “the son of thunder” (Mark 3:17), vehement against every insult to the majesty of the Lord. It is ostensibly written to promote assurance in the saints (1 John 5:13), yet nowhere else in the Word are we so often called upon to close self-examination and unsparing testing of ourselves. This epistle might well be termed a touchstone by which we may discern between the genuine gold and the counterfeit. It frequently utters the language of confidence, yet as often uses that which is discriminating. As Spurgeon well said, “The apostle mingles caution with caress, and qualifies the most soothing consolations with such stern warning that in wellnigh every sentence he constrains us to deep searching of heart.” In our opening paragraph we mentioned the abstract (and absolute) character of many of John’s statements. It is most important that the reader should understand this and bear it in mind. Failure to do so will lead to a serious misapprehension of many verses. In 1 John 1:3, he says “truly our fellowship is with the Father”—not “ought to be”; he speaks characteristically, taking no notice of the things which hinder it. To the “young men” he says, “You have overcome the wicked one” (1 John 2:13), making no mention of their failures. “He that loves his brother abides in the light” (1 John 2:10)—nothing is said about the degree of love, it is simply contrasted with “hatred” (1 John 2:11). “For whosoever is born of God overcomes the world” (1 John 5:4)—no account is there taken of the presence of the flesh with its unbelief and self-will. John abounds in brief factual statements. “We know all things ... you need not that any man teach you” (1 John 2:20, 1 John 2:27) is left unqualified. To John there are only two postures of heart: for or against—the points of transition from the one to the other are ignored. Contrasts are put in their sharpest form: light and darkness—no intermediate twilight; life and death—nothing which answers to mere existence.

Throughout the epistle there rings loudly the note of certainty. The two Greek words used for “know” occur no less than thirty-six times in its five chapters, examples of which are: “We know that we have passed from death unto life ... by this we know that we are of the Truth” (1 John 3:14, 1 John 3:19). “By this we know that we dwell in Him and He in us ... and we have known and believed the love that God has to us” (1 John 4:13, 1 John 4:16). The epistle closes with another threefold “we know” (1 John 5:18-20). Again and again the apostle describes simple but definite marks by which the child of God may be identified, and distinguish himself from self-deceivers and hypocrites. Thus, it was not addressed to those who resided in “Doubting Castle,” and any who dwell in its dismal dungeons should find here that which, by the Divine blessing, will deliver him from there. Nor was it only a small and particularly favoured class which shared the apostle’s own assurance, or only mature Christians, as his “I write unto little children, because you have known the Father” (1 John 2:13) shows. That his epistle is an intensely practical one is evinced in many ways. For example, not once is the word “knowledge” found in the form of a noun, but always as a verb. The same is true of “faith”; he almost invariably uses the verbal form. With John doctrine is not mere dogma, but faith in action. Truth is not merely a theory, but an energy, which lives and moves in the new life. There is scarcely any strictly “doctrinal” teaching, and very few direct exhortations. It is mainly the vital and experimental side of things, and thus it is that the line of demarcation and separation is so sharply and often drawn between genuine and graceless professors—not to discourage believers, but to inform and safeguard them against being deceived and imposed upon. John did far more than deal with forms of error which were local and ephemeral, refuting those of his day in a manner by which he enunciated principles of universal importance and of almost illimitable application—equally suited to the exposure of error in every age.

It is remarkable how many different topics are introduced into this brief letter, so that we are almost justified in saying with J. Morgan, “The whole realm of evangelical truth is traversed by the apostle.” Blessed it is to see how the balance of Truth is preserved there. No one would regard it as a theological treatise, yet most of the fundamentals of our faith are briefly set forth in it. The Divine incarnation (1 John 1:1-3), the nature of God (1 John 1:5; 1 John 4:8), the atonement and advocacy of Christ (1 John 2:1-2), the person and work of the Holy Spirit (1 John 3:24), regeneration (1 John 2:29), the Trinity (1 John 5:7), etc. The epistle is far from being an appeal to emotionalism, yet it bids believers, “Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed upon them” (1 John 3:1), and while affording no encouragement to rest upon feelings (as its repeated dogmatic “we know” shows), yet it is written that “our joy may be full.” While it is not a discourse on humanitarianism, it stresses practical altruism (1 John 3:17-18). Though not a discussion of eschatology, yet the return of Christ (1 John 2:28) and, “the day of judgment” (1 John 4:17) are mentioned. Thus this epistle supplies an admirable corrective to one-sided views of the Christian life.