THE FAITHFUL WITNESS: WHO WROTE THE EPISTLES OF JOHN?
By R. Herbert
The question posed in the subtitle above sounds like the famous query, “Who is buried in General Grant’s tomb?” But it is a serious question. The three epistles we call “First, Second, and Third John” are, along with the Book of Hebrews, the only New Testament letters that do not mention their authors. While we are used to seeing the letters of “John” in our Bibles, they were not called that originally – the names were given to them by the early Church.
So who did write the letters we call the epistles of John? It is sometimes claimed that the terminology used in them shows that the letters may have been written by different individuals. This idea is based on the fact that 1 John, at least, has certain small grammatical traits which are not found in the Gospel of John. That is true, but against these small stylistic details, we have some very good reasons to believe that the epistles of John were written by the writer of the fourth Gospel.
First, the small details of grammatical style found only in 1 John are not necessarily a convincing argument of different authorship. There are small differences between the style of the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts, yet there are few who deny they were both written by Luke. More important than the small stylistic differences is the fact that there are major stylistic similarities between the Gospel of John and the three epistles ascribed to him. The vocabulary and use of terminology found in the Gospel of John are often very close to what we find in the epistles of John.
Second, the early Church was virtually unanimous in asserting that the three epistles were written by John. Irenaeus (who died around AD 200, and who was a student of Polycarp who was himself a student of John) tells us the three letters were written by John; Clement of Alexandria (who died around AD 215) and Tertullian (who died around AD 220) also confirm the Johannine authorship of the three letters.
Third, and perhaps most telling of all, the writer of the epistles of John, although he does not name himself as “John,” does identify himself as an eyewitness of Jesus’ ministry and earthly life: “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands …” (1 John 1:1). This is in fact, the same kind of indirect way the apostle John refers to himself in stressing the truth of the witness of his Gospel. There, John wrote of himself: “This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true” (John 21:24). The matter of witness is also of great importance in other areas of the fourth Gospel. While all the Gospels tell of the work of John the Baptist, for example, it is John who stresses the fact that the Baptist “… came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light” (John 1:7-8).
For John this matter of being a faithful witness seems to have been of the greatest importance. As the last surviving apostle, he saw a great amount of apostasy and error enter the Church and he seems to have been particularly conscious of the need for accurate witness to the truth. It is perhaps unsurprising then, that both the Gospel of John (the last of the four Gospels to be written) and the three epistles of John (evidently also written late in the New Testament era) all stress the truth of their witness. In a similar manner, John’s Book of Revelation stresses the faithful witness aspect of Christ and his followers (Revelation 1:5, 2:13, 3:14).
The writer of the three epistles puts this principle into everyday practice, frequently speaking of the importance of not accepting error into the truth (1 John 2:7, 24-27; 3:7; 4:1; 2 John 1:5, 9-11; etc.), and we can see these epistles as a clear logical progression of the theme begun in the fourth Gospel. It is precisely because John so frequently uses the term “faithful witness” and tells us he was such a witness of the events of Jesus’ life of which he wrote in his Gospel, and of the doctrines of Jesus of which he speaks in the three letters, that we see just how important the faithfulness of that witness was.
There is a lesson in this, of course. How faithful is our own witness? Do we diligently search to see what the Bible actually says in its teachings, or do we just accept what we have always presumed, or what people tell us the Bible says? As history unfolds and errors continue to enter the edges of the Christian faith, we are wise to be reminded that the faithful witness to the truth once delivered (Jude 1:3) – which was equally important to the writer of the fourth Gospel and the writer of the three epistles of John – should be equally important to us.
By R. Herbert
The question posed in the subtitle above sounds like the famous query, “Who is buried in General Grant’s tomb?” But it is a serious question. The three epistles we call “First, Second, and Third John” are, along with the Book of Hebrews, the only New Testament letters that do not mention their authors. While we are used to seeing the letters of “John” in our Bibles, they were not called that originally – the names were given to them by the early Church.
So who did write the letters we call the epistles of John? It is sometimes claimed that the terminology used in them shows that the letters may have been written by different individuals. This idea is based on the fact that 1 John, at least, has certain small grammatical traits which are not found in the Gospel of John. That is true, but against these small stylistic details, we have some very good reasons to believe that the epistles of John were written by the writer of the fourth Gospel.
First, the small details of grammatical style found only in 1 John are not necessarily a convincing argument of different authorship. There are small differences between the style of the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts, yet there are few who deny they were both written by Luke. More important than the small stylistic differences is the fact that there are major stylistic similarities between the Gospel of John and the three epistles ascribed to him. The vocabulary and use of terminology found in the Gospel of John are often very close to what we find in the epistles of John.
Second, the early Church was virtually unanimous in asserting that the three epistles were written by John. Irenaeus (who died around AD 200, and who was a student of Polycarp who was himself a student of John) tells us the three letters were written by John; Clement of Alexandria (who died around AD 215) and Tertullian (who died around AD 220) also confirm the Johannine authorship of the three letters.
Third, and perhaps most telling of all, the writer of the epistles of John, although he does not name himself as “John,” does identify himself as an eyewitness of Jesus’ ministry and earthly life: “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands …” (1 John 1:1). This is in fact, the same kind of indirect way the apostle John refers to himself in stressing the truth of the witness of his Gospel. There, John wrote of himself: “This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true” (John 21:24). The matter of witness is also of great importance in other areas of the fourth Gospel. While all the Gospels tell of the work of John the Baptist, for example, it is John who stresses the fact that the Baptist “… came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light” (John 1:7-8).
For John this matter of being a faithful witness seems to have been of the greatest importance. As the last surviving apostle, he saw a great amount of apostasy and error enter the Church and he seems to have been particularly conscious of the need for accurate witness to the truth. It is perhaps unsurprising then, that both the Gospel of John (the last of the four Gospels to be written) and the three epistles of John (evidently also written late in the New Testament era) all stress the truth of their witness. In a similar manner, John’s Book of Revelation stresses the faithful witness aspect of Christ and his followers (Revelation 1:5, 2:13, 3:14).
The writer of the three epistles puts this principle into everyday practice, frequently speaking of the importance of not accepting error into the truth (1 John 2:7, 24-27; 3:7; 4:1; 2 John 1:5, 9-11; etc.), and we can see these epistles as a clear logical progression of the theme begun in the fourth Gospel. It is precisely because John so frequently uses the term “faithful witness” and tells us he was such a witness of the events of Jesus’ life of which he wrote in his Gospel, and of the doctrines of Jesus of which he speaks in the three letters, that we see just how important the faithfulness of that witness was.
There is a lesson in this, of course. How faithful is our own witness? Do we diligently search to see what the Bible actually says in its teachings, or do we just accept what we have always presumed, or what people tell us the Bible says? As history unfolds and errors continue to enter the edges of the Christian faith, we are wise to be reminded that the faithful witness to the truth once delivered (Jude 1:3) – which was equally important to the writer of the fourth Gospel and the writer of the three epistles of John – should be equally important to us.