01 A Brief Intro to the Epistles of John and A Survey of I John

November 10, 2019

Christopher C. Freeman

Title: A Brief Intro to the Epistles of John and A Survey of I John Text: I-III John FCF: We often struggle to understand both the necessity of and means of defending our faith. Prop: Because Christ will continue to build His church, we must believe, obey, and love one another. Scripture Intro: [Slide 1] Turn in your bible to Luke chapter 9. Today we officially begin a new book study. It has been since January of 2017 that we have studied a book besides Matthew. That’s a long time. Today we begin three book studies at once. Somewhat of a crazy endeavor I know. But since two of those books are less than 30 verses combined, we might be able to get through it all in a reasonable amount of time. Today we officially begin our study of the Epistles of John. Since first, second, and third John occur in roughly the same time period with roughly the same background, this morning we will first cover the background information for all three books. Just as we did with Matthew and Galatians before it. After we do that this morning, we will survey the book of I John, whetting our appetite for the things that are to come over the next several months. I anticipate our study in the Epistles of John to carry us on for anywhere from 6-9 months, if the Lord permits. But before we dive in, let me say this first. As I read John, I am struck by the meekness of this apostle. In his old age, he wrote with strength and certainty but counter-balanced that force with genuine love and care. He is bold and determined, yet not oppressive or totalitarian. John is the pastor that I hope to be some day. One that God is training me to be. To strike that perfect balance between spiritual steadfastness and tenacity but wrapping all of it in loving and compassionate care. With that – let’s pray. Transition: So to begin our study, let’s look into the background of the Epistles of John. I.) A Brief Introduction to the Epistles of John a. Let me start by saying that the background of the epistles of John is a complicated one. b. Every piece of background information is shrouded in difficulty of some kind or another. c. So determining who wrote the books, when, to whom, and for what reason or reasons – are all somewhat perplexing questions. d. Let’s start by asking the question – who wrote these epistles? e. [Slide 2] How would we answer this question? i. Typically, we would look to the first few verses to see who identifies themselves as the sender of the letter. However, in all three of these epistles, the author does not identify himself. ii. So what we need to do next is look for any internal clues as to the identity of the people being written to or anything at all that might give us an idea of who is writing. When we do that, here is what we find. 1. I and II John do not include any specific details of the audience of the letter. 2. III John does, but it is a person that from the rest of scripture, we are unfamiliar with. 3. But, helpfully, we find incredibly strong similarities between I John and the Gospel of John. The same pithy phrases, the same perspective on Theology, Christology, Pneumatology, Hamartiology etc. In fact, on particular topics shared between the Gospel of and the First Epistle of John – the wording to address these topics is almost identical. Indeed it is so close, that the real challenge would be to prove that the writer of the Gospel of John and the writer of the first epistle of John were NOT the same person. 4. Then when you compare I John to II and III John – you have harmony between them as well. What becomes the most reasonable explanation is that the same author wrote the gospel of John and all three epistles of John. iii. So that means we need to identify the writer of the Gospel of John. Which is actually quite an easy task. We identified Matthew as the author of Matthew because there was virtually no believer in the 2nd century who attributed his gospel to anyone but Matthew. iv. And likewise, John is virtually undisputed as the author of the gospel of John. Especially since in the gospel of John, John the disciple is never actually mentioned. In fact, John in the gospel of John, ALWAYS refers to John the Baptist. A designation that was necessary in every other gospel to differentiate between which John was meant. It only follows that the writer of John’s Gospel was John the Apostle. And therefore, since he wrote the gospel, he also wrote the three epistles. v. John’s authorship of I John is almost universally accepted by the very early church. II and II John have some dissenters as to its authorship, but for the most part, by the 250s A.D – John the apostle is said to be the author of all three. f. [Slide 3] So now that we have an idea of who wrote these letters – we have to ask the question – who is John the Apostle? i. Look with me at Luke 9:51-56. ii. James and John were brothers. James probably older, John younger. John, no doubt, was the youngest of the disciples. iii. Although it is difficult to be sure, Salome is probably their mother and Zebedee their father. We find James and John as inheritors of a rather large fishing business. In the scripture their father had hired men helping him on the fishing boat. After they left, Zebedee seems to have died and Salome becomes a disciple of Christ, liquidating her considerable wealth to support Jesus and His disciples. iv. Since Salome was Mary’s sister, that would make James and John Jesus’ first cousins on his mother’s side. v. James and John constituted 2/3 of the inner circle along with Peter. These three disciples attended more activity with Christ than the others. vi. Yet as honorable as all this was, James and John still had some problems. They were nicknamed the “Sons of Thunder” by Jesus Himself. No doubt indicating their fiery tendencies which we saw on display in this Samaritan village where they wanted to call down fire to consume less than hospitable Samaritans. In another instance we saw in Matthew Salome and James and John being just brash enough to ask for seats at the right and left hand of Christ when He is in His Kingdom. Of course, they had no idea what they were asking. vii. After the resurrection, we see a different James and John. John, arguably the first to have been regenerated of the disciples, becomes a prominent leader in the early church in Jerusalem. Being one of the disciples Paul pursues for authentication as an apostle. James, of course, becomes the first disciple to be martyred in Acts 12 at the hands of King Herod. viii. [Slide 4] Although there is some conjecture, primarily around the 9th century, most early church fathers agree that John fled Jerusalem along with Philip and his daughters to Ephesus between 66-67 AD, Right before the Jewish war and the fall of Jerusalem at the hands of Titus. ix. For the first son of Zebedee to be the first martyr of the disciples, John becomes the last of the disciples to die. Living to a rather old age and being sent to the penal island of Patmos to finish his days. It was there that he wrote the Apocalypse of John or as we call it, Revelation. During the time between his fleeing to Ephesus and imprisonment, John spent his time primarily ministering to the churches in Ephesus and to the church at large. g. [Slide 5] So now that we know who wrote the books, we need to ask when John wrote these books in his lifetime. i. Although it is difficult to assign a date to these books simply because there is very little of specific details in them – we can assume that he wrote these books after 70 A.D. simply because the church does seem to be developed and dispersed. Even assigning himself the title of elder in II and III John, seems to indicate a more developed sense of church government. ii. But where do these 3 epistles fall in reference to the gospel of John and the Apocalypse of John? iii. Most scholars place the writing of John’s Gospel in the 80s A.D, after John and Phillip fled from Judea to Ephesus. iv. Most scholars place the writing of the Apocalypse of John (Revelation) in the late 90s A.D. from the isle of Patmos. v. Probably I-III John were not written after Revelation. In both II and III John he hopes to visit the churches. Indicating that he is not on a penal island. vi. Although it is possible that John wrote the letters prior to writing the gospel, it seems that much of what he is addressing in the letters are a reaction to things being twisted from his previous Gospel. vii. Also, as we get to the purpose of the writing this becomes clearer, but the things that John is addressing in all three letters, seem to be focused on developing movements of heresies that would indicate a later date than pre-temple destruction and even pre-gospel writing. viii. So probably, if we were to take a stab at a date it would be between the late 80s and early 90s AD. h. [Slide 6] So we know who wrote these epistles and when, but who is John writing to? i. This is the first real question we have to tackle individually for each of the epistles. ii. I John is known as a general or a catholic epistle. Catholic in this sense does not mean Roman Catholic, but rather that it was a letter intended for a group of churches rather than a particular church or person. iii. II John is somewhere between general and particular because it could be to a particular person or figurative language for the entire universal church. iv. III John is a particular epistle, in that it is addressed to one man. Gaius. v. It has been suggested, and I tend to agree, that II and III John may have been cover letters sent with I John. So along with the general teaching passed to several churches, there was also more specific teaching being offered as well. i. [Slide 7] But even though the recipients of the letters are different, they are united in purpose. i. II and III John are short, and relatively forthcoming with their purpose. II John is a letter written to a house church, warning them of being naïvely accepting of traveling preachers, because many are false teachers. ii. III John is a letter written to encourage a man to accept traveling preachers that John was sending them, and to be careful of a person who is challenging John’s authority. iii. I John includes no introduction, and no specific reference to a person, a church, or group of people. However, after reading through the book a few times, it became apparent to me what most commentators have concluded. 1. John is writing I John, primarily as a polemic. What does that word mean? Polemic? 2. Polemic is a strongly worded attack or defense against something that is potentially dangerous. John is addressing some major doctrinal shifts that are taking place, and addressing those with the readers of his letter. iv. And so, since it is a polemic against false teaching, we see parity between I-III John, in that John is defending his little children (which he calls them in every letter) from apostates and false teachers. Transition: [Slide 8] And so, this ends our background introduction to the Epistles of John. When we finish with I John we will return to remind ourselves of these points before we begin II and III John – but for now, we will turn our attention to I John. II.) [Slide 9] A Survey of I John a. What does it mean to survey? Survey means to get a quick, high level, fly over, bird’s eye view of what you are talking about. b. In many ways, it is the opposite of what we will be doing with the book of I John for the next several months. c. In our survey of I John today, I want to answer a few questions before we even get started with the book. I want to ask and answer – how is I John a Polemic, and against what? What are the key themes of I John? What is a good outline of the book of I John? Finally, What are some other Key concepts we need to observe in I John? d. [Slide 10] Let me start by asking how I John is a polemic and against who or what? i. It is clear that John desires to combat the error of false teachers. He calls them anti-Christs and that their message is from the spirit of the anti-Christ. ii. His endeavor is that his little children would not be deceived but continue to know the truth. iii. Now many commentators attempt to dig historically to find the specific heresy or schism that caused John so much trouble here. However, it may be a mistake to think that it was one particular movement. iv. Still it is not a fruitless endeavor for us to understand some of the heretical positions that arose out of the early church, that we can clearly see presenting themselves in seed form in I John. v. Gnosticism – Or rather, proto Gnosticism. True Gnosticism did not actually come together until the 2nd or 3rd century. But what we see in I John has hints of what Gnostics would later believe. 1. Gnostics generally understood that all things of matter were evil and all things of spirit were good. 2. All life came from a Spirit-Father who created a variety of Spirit-beings. Of those Spirit beings came Wisdom, which was united to Thought. Wisdom attempted to act independently of thought and inadvertently produced a misshapen spirit being. This spirit being stole enough of Wisdom’s power to create his own host of spirit beings which he used to create a world and put those spirit beings in charge of it. He created the physical realm. In case you haven’t figured it out yet, Yahweh, in Gnosticism, is the misshapen spirit being. In the garden, then, the serpent was not tempting Adam and Eve to sin, but rather, to gain knowledge to free themselves of Yahweh’s shackles and become spirit beings themselves. 3. Adam’s Son Seth, inherits some pure spirit and thus sets up a dichotomy. The elect of the father are not his chosen, but rather, those who have a spirit being heritage and are able to understand the deep knowledge that they are spirit beings and their bodies are a prison. 4. In Gnosticism, Jesus would be fully a Spirit being only disguised as a man. Not actually a man. He did not come in flesh but rather was a Spirit, sent by the real Spirit Father not Yahweh. 5. Salvation has nothing to do with repentance or sin, but everything to do with inheriting a spirit ancestry and coming to the understanding or knowledge of that ancestry and therefore being reborn to a new existence in that spiritual light. 6. You can see the hints of truth layered through this. Making it just plausible enough to confuse a new convert. 7. Also in Gnostic teaching, anything that Yahweh said would be disregarded because he was a deceiver, and anything done in the flesh would be merely symptoms of the disease of matter being evil. This translates to a rather flippant understanding of sin and holiness and a disregard for living purely in this life. They may have even said, that being spirit beings and awoken to this, they no longer had any sin. Sin was a concept that was completely foreign to their person. 8. Although what we just talked about is the highly developed form of Gnosticism, when we get into the meat of I John, I’m sure you’ll see much of what John is saying is opposite to what Gnostics would later believe. Perhaps John saw the beginnings of Gnostic faith, even if it would not fully come together until later. vi. Docetism- Doe-SEA-tism – A branch of Gnosticism that said that Christ could have never truly become flesh. He could have assumed flesh or wrapped himself in flesh, but He could never have become flesh. vii. Cerinthianism- sair-IN-thian-ism – Jesus was only a man. The Spirit of God descended upon him at his baptism and He became the Christ – the Spirit left him prior to suffering on the cross. viii. The fact that these teachings gained steam and plagued the early church, and some would say, still plague the church today – proves that John was right to attack such teaching. e. [Slide 11] Seeing this epistle as a polemic then, what are some key themes that run through it? i. John, as an old man, in the most pastoral way possible, attacks false teaching and defends his flock. The false teachers have called into question the entire nature of their faith, to the extent that they are starting to wonder if they were missing crucial knowledge. Who has eternal life and who doesn’t? Who is God’s child and who isn’t? ii. Overall, the scope and message of I John is profoundly encouraging to those who are in Christ, and absolutely terrifying to those who are only pretending. iii. John says that those who are believing and are continuing to hold fast to the message of old that Jesus came in flesh and is the Messiah, the Son of God, are holding to the true faith. And since they are holding to the true faith, that faith will work itself out in practicing righteousness and loving one another. iv. John emphasizes the relational loyalty of God to His people that transcends the problems we have in life. God’s eternal life that He has given to us through Christ starts today and we go on living in this dying world, in this dying body, with the hope that one day we will truly be alive surrounded by life. Christ truly is, the Word of Life. There is no reason for His children to live as though they are dead. They have been given life. v. Unless, they are not alive. That is the only reason to live in darkness, in death… because you are dead and of the dark. f. [Slide 12] How could we outline the book of I John. i. Let me tell you something… that is a very difficult and perplexing question. It is one that far wiser men than I have struggled with for centuries. ii. There are several approaches. Some attempt to see the pattern of the Gospel of John repeated in I John. Others try to assign an intro, body, and conclusion. Still others make sense of his thought flow as best they can or the opposite of that, conclude that John sorta stream of consciousness wrote it down. iii. However, I think the best explanation is one that John MacArthur observed. Before I even read MacArthur’s idea for structuring the book, I too noticed a distinct spiral, cycle, or wave pattern to John’s epistle. John essentially covers the same 3 topics over and over again in 4 different ways. It is a wonderful way to teach for understanding. iv. I have handed out our general outline for I John to you today. We won’t take the time to go over every detail together, but generally speaking you can see that John is providing to his little children a test of true fellowship with God. That test repeats itself in various ways but ends with the same basic thought, belief in the right doctrine produces a predictable and practical outcome of living. If your doctrine and practice are right, you have confidence of your fellowship with the Father. g. [Slide 13] The last question I’d like to ask in our survey of I John is what are some key concepts or highlights of the book we should be looking for? i. Keep your eyes peeled for purpose statements from John. 1. 7 times in his letter John tells his readers that he is writing for a specific purpose. Each of these purposes are related, but distinct from each other. And they are worthy of highlighting when we see them. 2. Most of them are within the first two chapters of the book – with the final one as a reminder before he concludes. 3. They vary from the prevention of sin all the way to assurance of eternal life and many shades of those truths in-between. ii. Keep your eyes peeled for the proofs of knowing God and the proofs of not knowing God 1. There are almost 30 of each throughout the book of I John – several are repeats 2. This is obviously central to the purpose of John’s letter. 3. He desperately wants his little children to be confident that they are children of God. Therefore it is a wonderfully encouraging book for those who are real and genuine followers of Christ. However, for those who are only converted in name only, with a faith that is not alive, it will be quite a challenging book. 4. Only correct doctrine that produces correct practice is a faith that gives us assurance of our fellowship with God. Transition: [Slide 14 (end)] So as we wrap up our introductory comments to this shiny new book study, we might be wondering what we can take away from today’s message besides raw knowledge. Conclusion: The real gem from today… and the thing that we will continue to see over and over again in the book of I John, is what we just said. Only correct doctrine that produces correct practice is a faith that gives us assurance of our fellowship with God. If we have correct doctrine but our lives do not demonstrate the power of Christ, victory over sin, genuine self-sacrificing love of other believers… if our lives do not bear the scars of the Grace of God burning within us to melt what we were and transform us into the image of His Son… then we cannot claim with any certainty that we have fellowship with God. In fact, John goes so far as to say that such a person has NO fellowship with God. But simultaneously, if we do not have a sound theology and deny that Christ was human, and God, two natures coexisting in one person of the Godhead, then even if we have a seemingly changed life and love for others – we cannot rely on such a faith to give us assurance of our fellowship with God. Correct doctrine produces correct practice. There is a movement in our nation to deemphasize stuffy doctrine because all it does it produce a people who are less compassionate and more arrogant. They cite Paul’s verse in I Corinthians that says that Knowledge puffs up. The conclusion is that it doesn’t matter as much about what you believe if you don’t live it, therefore, don’t be too concerned about sound theology. Live like Christ. At the core of this teaching is one fatal flaw. It is not doctrine that produces pride and selfishness – it is the sinful nature of man. Doctrine itself is not the problem. In fact – Doctrine is the solution. Having a correct understanding of who Christ is and who you are, ALWAYS and I say ALWAYS with the authority of scripture behind me, ALWAYS produces a humble, law abiding, other believer loving person. The answer then, what do you do with someone who is a theologian but has no genuine repentance for sin and does not love others? The answer is quite simple… they know nothing of Christ and Him crucified. They may know facts – but true doctrine has eluded them. And the answer is not to discard doctrine at that point and get them out of the classroom and onto the streets to do some good. No! Because that will produce at BEST a legalist and at worst an apostate. The answer is to teach them again the elementary principles of Christ. They have neglected their great salvation. They need to be reminded of the grace of God. If they are truly His child – they will repent and produce the fruit of repentance and grace. According to John – Doctrine is not a dirty word, nor is it the enemy. True doctrine – not just the knowledge of it – but intimate heart knowledge of a person that has truly been brought to life – true doctrine is the catalyst in a man’s soul to change Him to be conformed to the image of Christ. Doctrine, given by God, relied on in faith, also given by God, transmits grace, given from God, to transform us into the image of His Son. It is God’s work and God will see it done. Are you here today and already you know that you may know the right things about Christ, but the things of Christ have never changed you? Do you desperately seek to be changed? Cry out to God for mercy and grace. He offers it freely to those whom He enables to believe.