Peter J. Leithart

In the London Telegraph, Christopher Hitchens sums up the life of Benazir Bhutto, calling attention to her impressive courage. But Hitchens also notes that the courage had a touch of fanaticism that leaves a dangerous legacy. He recalls that during her terms as Prime Minister she pursued a . . . . Continue Reading »

In the words of the CBQ reviewer of his book, Terry Griffith “opts for a minority position, though he does so with a growing number of authors (see now a work not yet known to G., Hansjorg Schmid, Gegner im 1. Johannesbrief: Zu Konstruktion und Selbstreferenz im johanneischen Sinnsystem . . . . Continue Reading »

Griffith suggests that John writes a pastoral rather than a polemical letter, one designed to shore up the identity of his church and prevent further apostasy. John achieves this by insisting on faithfulness in the confession of Jesus as Messiah, by an exhortation to communal love, and by a warning . . . . Continue Reading »

Terry Griffith argues in his Keep Yourselves from Idols that the odd closing exhortation of 1 John (“little children, guard yourselves from idols”) holds the key to the book as a whole. He also argues that the “Jewish matrix of Johannine tradition has been significantly . . . . Continue Reading »

Malcolm Coombes (http://www.bct.edu.au/Arche/Coombes.pdf) notes that John clusters words together, often in threes, throughout his first epistle. “Teach,” for instance, occurs only three times in the letter, all in 1 John 2:26-27. John uses “devil” “only four times: . . . . Continue Reading »

In a 1956 JBL article on John’s gospel, one Pierson Parker makes the intriguing statement that 1 John makes almost as much sense read backward as it does read forward. This is evidence that the letter’s contents are “disconnected” and that the letter reads like “an old . . . . Continue Reading »

Another argument against Wurm’s thesis is that from John’s testimony, John’s opponents claim to be a superior enlightened class that has a higher knowledge of God than ordinary Christians can attain. But how is this an argument against Wurm’s idea that the opponents are . . . . Continue Reading »

The 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica mentions Wurm’s thesis that John’s opponents were Jewish Christians, but concludes that “the antithesis of John and Cerinthus, unlike that of Paul and Cerinthus (Epiph. Haer. xxviii.), is too well based in the tradition of the early Church to be . . . . Continue Reading »

In his commentary on the Johannine epistles, I. Howard Marshall notes A. Wurm’s thesis that John’s opponents were Jews. John’s opponents claim to know the Father, but deny Jesus is the Christ, a position that is certainly compatible with Judaism. Marshall dismisses Wurm’s . . . . Continue Reading »

Brown suggests that the structure of John’s gospel sets the pattern for the first epistle. His outline of the gospel is: A. Prologue, 1:1-18. B. Book of Signs, 1:19-12:50. C. Book of Glory, 13:1-20:29. D. Epilogue, ch. 21. And the first epistle: A. Prologue, 1:1-4. B. Part 1, 1:5-3:10 (God is . . . . Continue Reading »