Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
perseusomega9
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by perseusomega9 »

John2 wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:56 pm
2 John 1:12:
I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete.


It's nothing more than a literary ploy, verisimilitude to get the church to accept the letter as coming from John.
The metric to judge if one is a good exegete: the way he/she deals with Barabbas.

Who disagrees with me on this precise point is by definition an idiot.
-Giuseppe
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by John2 »

And not to derail the thread, but I've been getting more interested in 1, 2 and 3 John lately (especially how they -or at least 1 John- intersect with Papias), and whoever may have authored them, they all seem Jewish Christian to me, so I put them in the same camp with James, 1 Peter, Revelation, Mark, and Matthew (which also strike me as being Jewish Christian). Take 1 John 3:4, for example.
Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness.
And then it goes on to say in 3:7-10:
Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. The one who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work. No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister.
What could be more Jewish Christian than to say "sin is lawlessness"? That and the following reference to the devil reminds me of what James says in 3:13-16 after castigating the "foolish man" who preached "faith without works" in chapter 2 (who I take to be Paul, cf. Gal. 2 re: faith without works and 2 Cor. 11 re: "foolishness" and boasting that he is better than Jewish Christians):
Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. Such “wisdom” does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.
And the language of 1 John above seems similar to what Paul says in Gal. 2:15-21 ("sin is lawlessness"; "the one who does what is sinful is of the devil"; "the Son of God appeared ... to destroy the devil's work"):
We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn’t that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker.

For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!


It just seems curious that they both talk about being led astray (1 John 3:7, Gal.1:6-9 and 2:11-13), destruction (1 John 3:8, Gal. 2:18), Torah observance (1 John 3:4, Gal. 2:16), the devil (1 John 3:8, 2 Cor. 11:14), and "the Son of God" (1 John 3:8, Gal. 2:20), with James echoing the theme of being led astray and the devil (2:14 and 3:15).They all seem to be using the same kind of language, but 1 John seems to be in line with James (and thus with Jewish Christianity) while Paul doesn't.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by Ben C. Smith »

John2 wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 4:35 pmIt just seems curious that they both talk about being led astray (1 John 3:7, Gal.1:6-9 and 2:11-13), destruction (1 John 3:8, Gal. 2:18), Torah observance (1 John 3:4, Gal. 2:16), the devil (1 John 3:8, 2 Cor. 11:14), and "the Son of God" (1 John 3:8, Gal. 2:20), with James echoing the theme of being led astray and the devil (2:14 and 3:15).They all seem to be using the same kind of language, but 1 John seems to be in line with James (and thus with Jewish Christianity) while Paul doesn't.
I am reminded of Nienhuis' table comparing James and Paul: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3877.

With respect to 1, 2, & 3 John themselves:
  1. There is no significant doctrinal content in 2 John which does not connect in some way to 1 John: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3194.
  2. It seems possible that 2 John once served as a cover letter or such for 1 John: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1847.
  3. The epistles of John completely lack any talk of lordship: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3580. What does that mean?
  4. 1 John takes on (at least two) different authorial perspectives: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3224.
  5. The gospel of John seems to have known and used at least 1 & 2 John: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4092.
  6. Acts seems to have known and used at least 1 & 2 John: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2037.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by John2 »

perseusomega9 wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 3:44 pm
John2 wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:56 pm
2 John 1:12:
I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete.


It's nothing more than a literary ploy, verisimilitude to get the church to accept the letter as coming from John.
The idea at least pre-dates Papias, since he is said to have known 1 John, and I see Papias as being relatively early (c. 100 CE), so if 1 John is earlier than that then I don't see why it couldn't be genuine.

And here's what I'm thinking. if 1 John is earlier than c. 100 CE and is Jewish Christian (as it appears to be to me), and if the other two pillars that Paul mentions in Gal. 2:9 have letters in the NT (James and 1 Peter, which I think are genuine), then why couldn't 1 (and 2 and 3) John be by the other pillar John?

The last time I checked (but I need to refresh my memory), it seemed like the pillar John could be the same John who is said to have worn a sacerdotal plate (which I take as being a reference to his uncut Nazirite hair) and lived in Asia, where Papias was from.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
Stuart
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:24 am
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by Stuart »

perseusomega9 wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 3:44 pm
John2 wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:56 pm
2 John 1:12:
I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete.


It's nothing more than a literary ploy, verisimilitude to get the church to accept the letter as coming from John.
Agree 100%. Of course that verse could have been added by the church to explain why an important letter from John would be unknown. The same language is used in the rebuttal letter 3 John 13.

The Sitz im Leben is clearly 3rd century, where the controversy involves an issue within the orthodoxy, despite the effort of 2 John to paint the opponents as Gnostic. It has in it elements of dispute of which Bishop has authority of which and whether itinerant preachers shoudl be allowed or not. This is not 2nd century fresh territory evangelism anymore.
“’That was excellently observed’, say I, when I read a passage in an author, where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, there I pronounce him to be mistaken.” - Jonathan Swift
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by John2 »

Stuart wrote:
The Sitz im Leben is clearly 3rd century, where the controversy involves an issue within the orthodoxy, despite the effort of 2 John to paint the opponents as Gnostic.
Then why are there so many similarities between 1 John and the letters of Paul and James, as I noted above? I think it's just a matter of being open to the idea that being "led astray" by demonic false teachers could be directed at Paul (like in Paul's view the demonic false teachers were conversely Jewish Christians in 2 Cor. 11:13-15).
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by John2 »

I was starting to wonder if John the elder could be both the pillar John mentioned in Gal. 2:9 and John the son of Zebedee, and I see that Culpepper argues for this in John, the Son of Zebedee: The Life of a Legend, summarizing on page 51:
In sum, the synoptic tradition portrays John as one of the leaders of the disciples called by Jesus ... one chosen to be among the disciples closest to Jesus during his ministry and to be a "pillar of the church" in the years that followed.

https://books.google.com/books?id=-6O2U ... ar&f=false
This seems like the least complicated "John" idea that I'm aware of. I've never given much thought about John the son of Zebedee before, yet somehow I assumed he was fictional. But now that I'm coming around to the idea that the disciple Philip could be real (considering that Papias is said to have known his daughters, for example), maybe John the son of Zebedee was real too, and then he became the pillar John who is mentioned by Paul, and then he later lived in Asia (like Philip and his daughters are said to have done).

And I would reckon, given the similarities between the letters of James and Paul and 1 (and 2 and 3) John, that this could be the John who wrote the latter (which is why Papias, who lived in Asia, was aware of them -or at least 1 John).

I would venture to guess that this is not the John who wrote Revelation or the John who wrote the gospel of John. So in this scenario, there would be three Christian Johns: John the son of Zebedee who became the pillar John and then moved to Asia and wrote 1 (and 2 and 3) John; the John who wrote Revelation; and the John who wrote the gospel of John. And I wonder if the latter is pretending to be John the son of Zebedee.

I'm curious to see how this scenario lines up with Papias and Polycrates.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by John2 »

I see that Eusebius, for one, thinks that the John who wrote Revelation is the apostle John (the son of Zebedee?) and the John that Polycrates says lived in Asia. He writes in EH 3.20.11:
11. It was at this time that the apostle John returned from his banishment in the island and took up his abode at Ephesus, according to an ancient Christian tradition.


Hm.

Ah, here we go. Eusebius goes on to say in EH 3.23.1-2:
1. At that time the apostle and evangelist John, the one whom Jesus loved, was still living in Asia, and governing the churches of that region, having returned after the death of Domitian from his exile on the island.

2. And that he was still alive at that time may be established by the testimony of two witnesses. They should be trustworthy who have maintained the orthodoxy of the Church; and such indeed were Irenæus and Clement of Alexandria.
Hm again.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by John2 »

This is just a note for me to peruse.

EH 3.23.3-19:
3. The former in the second book of his work Against Heresies, writes as follows: “And all the elders that associated with John the disciple of the Lord in Asia bear witness that John delivered it to them. For he remained among them until the time of Trajan.”

4. And in the third book of the same work he attests the same thing in the following words: “But the church in Ephesus also, which was founded by Paul, and where John remained until the time of Trajan, is a faithful witness of the apostolic tradition.”

5. Clement likewise in his book entitled What Rich Man can be saved? indicates the time, and subjoins a narrative which is most attractive to those that enjoy hearing what is beautiful and profitable. Take and read the account which runs as follows:

6. Listen to a tale, which is not a mere tale, but a narrative concerning John the apostle, which has been handed down and treasured up in memory. For when, after the tyrant's death, he returned from the isle of Patmos to Ephesus, he went away upon their invitation to the neighboring territories of the Gentiles, to appoint bishops in some places, in other places to set in order whole churches, elsewhere to choose to the ministry some one of those that were pointed out by the Spirit.

7. When he had come to one of the cities not far away (the name of which is given by some ), and had consoled the brethren in other matters, he finally turned to the bishop that had been appointed, and seeing a youth of powerful physique, of pleasing appearance, and of ardent temperament, he said, 'This one I commit to you in all earnestness in the presence of the Church and with Christ as witness.' And when the bishop had accepted the charge and had promised all, he repeated the same injunction with an appeal to the same witnesses, and then departed for Ephesus.

8. But the presbyter taking home the youth committed to him, reared, kept, cherished, and finally baptized him. After this he relaxed his stricter care and watchfulness, with the idea that in putting upon him the seal of the Lord he had given him a perfect protection.

9. But some youths of his own age, idle and dissolute, and accustomed to evil practices, corrupted him when he was thus prematurely freed from restraint. At first they enticed him by costly entertainments; then, when they went forth at night for robbery, they took him with them, and finally they demanded that he should unite with them in some greater crime.

10. He gradually became accustomed to such practices, and on account of the positiveness of his character, leaving the right path, and taking the bit in his teeth like a hard-mouthed and powerful horse, he rushed the more violently down into the depths.

11. And finally despairing of salvation in God, he no longer meditated what was insignificant, but having committed some great crime, since he was now lost once for all, he expected to suffer a like fate with the rest. Taking them, therefore, and forming a band of robbers, he became a bold bandit-chief, the most violent, most bloody, most cruel of them all.

12. Time passed, and some necessity having arisen, they sent for John. But he, when he had set in order the other matters on account of which he had come, said, 'Come, O bishop, restore us the deposit which both I and Christ committed to you, the church, over which you preside, being witness.'

13. But the bishop was at first confounded, thinking that he was falsely charged in regard to money which he had not received, and he could neither believe the accusation respecting what he had not, nor could he disbelieve John. But when he said, 'I demand the young man and the soul of the brother,' the old man, groaning deeply and at the same time bursting into tears, said, 'He is dead.' 'How and what kind of death?' 'He is dead to God,' he said; 'for he turned wicked and abandoned, and at last a robber. And now, instead of the church, he haunts the mountain with a band like himself.'

14. But the Apostle rent his clothes, and beating his head with great lamentation, he said, 'A fine guard I left for a brother's soul! But let a horse be brought me, and let some one show me the way.' He rode away from the church just as he was, and coming to the place, he was taken prisoner by the robbers' outpost.

15. He, however, neither fled nor made entreaty, but cried out, 'For this did I come; lead me to your captain.'

16. The latter, meanwhile, was waiting, armed as he was. But when he recognized John approaching, he turned in shame to flee.

17. But John, forgetting his age, pursued him with all his might, crying out, 'Why, my son, do you flee from me, your own father, unarmed, aged? Pity me, my son; fear not; you have still hope of life. I will give account to Christ for you. If need be, I will willingly endure your death as the Lord suffered death for us. For you will I give up my life. Stand, believe; Christ has sent me.'

18. And he, when he heard, first stopped and looked down; then he threw away his arms, and then trembled and wept bitterly. And when the old man approached, he embraced him, making confession with lamentations as he was able, baptizing himself a second time with tears, and concealing only his right hand.

19. But John, pledging himself, and assuring him on oath that he would find forgiveness with the Saviour, besought him, fell upon his knees, kissed his right hand itself as if now purified by repentance, and led him back to the church. And making intercession for him with copious prayers, and struggling together with him in continual fastings, and subduing his mind by various utterances, he did not depart, as they say, until he had restored him to the church, furnishing a great example of true repentance and a great proof of regeneration, a trophy of a visible resurrection.
The last section reminds me of what Hegesippus says about James in EH 2.23.6:
And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel, in consequence of his constantly bending them in his worship of God, and asking forgiveness for the people.
Last edited by John2 on Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Who was John the Elder? The same author of the Epistles of 1 & 2 John

Post by John2 »

Ditto for EH 3.24.1-2, 5 and 17:
1. This extract from Clement I have inserted here for the sake of the history and for the benefit of my readers. Let us now point out the undisputed writings of this apostle.

2. And in the first place his Gospel, which is known to all the churches under heaven, must be acknowledged as genuine.
5. ... Nevertheless, of all the disciples of the Lord, only Matthew and John have left us written memorials, and they, tradition says, were led to write only under the pressure of necessity.
17. But of the writings of John, not only his Gospel, but also the former of his epistles, has been accepted without dispute both now and in ancient times. But the other two are disputed.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
Post Reply