The First Epistle of John is a profound and powerful unfolding of the life of a Christian individual and of the Church as a whole. It is, at once, poetic and unequivocal. At first reading, the epistle may appear to be all sweetness and light, because it talks extensively about light and life and loving one another. But John always contrasts this bright side with very sharp warnings and judgment. A person who disobeys God is of the evil one. A person who fails to love his brethren is a liar and an antichrist.

 Clearly, the epistle is intended to bring its readers to Christian maturity—in terms of individual sanctification, perfecting of the Church in love, and becoming a witness that can overcome the world.

 Each commentary I have read on 1 John understands the epistle quite differently. It almost seems that we each read into it much of our own preconceptions. If we want to continue in sin, we have to find a way around such statements as : “He who is born of God does not sin,” and “when we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sin, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” If we do not like to think about evil spirits, we have to find a way of disposing of 1 John 4:1-6. If we think that love just means “accepting people as they are,” we will have a different interpretation of the love passages from those who believe Christian love aims to produce radical transformation.

 Several factors make a definitive interpretation of 1 John difficult. Part of this difficulty is that certain themes (e.g. light, love, submission, and obedience) recur several times almost in the same words. John does not necessarily make it clear how the new context affects the meaning. Closer examination of the context, however, reveals that, when they recur, these passages refer to a different level of Christian growth and experience. Love, for example, is presented in Chapter 3 as a fulfillment of God’s law and in the context of Christian community. In chapter 4, it appears as part of the discussion of Christian witness and overcoming the world.

 Another difficulty is that John does not clearly define the terms he uses most prominently—love, law, commandments, righteousness, light, darkness, eternal life. The meanings have to be inferred from their use in this epistle, in the Gospel of John, or from our knowledge of the use of these words in other scriptures and in the context of First Century thought.

 One help in understanding the structure of the epistle is the transitional verses that are placed between sections. For example, 2:3-6 serve to move us beyond the initial victory over sins and to bring us into the realm of abiding in God, obeying His law, avoiding pitfalls, and growing to maturity. The last two verses of chapter 2 make a transition from the concepts of obedience and abiding to the deeper meaning of being born of God and being His children, which forms the subject matter of chapter 3. The reference to the Holy Spirit’s assurance in 3:24 leads into the discerning of spirits in 4:1-6 and the further teaching on overcoming the world in 4:7-5:15.

 I believe that the structure that I have chosen to interpret the epistle takes account of the development of the argument and the beautiful and forceful way in which this is developed.

 Some commentators think that the purpose of the epistle was merely to refute heresies prevalent  at the end of the first century. I rather think that John wanted to leave his flock with a clear and comprehensive statement of the orthodox faith and life to keep them firm in their faith and living. In so doing, he also clearly defines many pitfalls or deviations that need to be avoided. Of course, a clear presentation of the orthodox faith is really the best way to protect people from pitfalls and heresy.

 I am aware that much modern scholarship questions the authorship of the epistle, and also whether the Gospel of John and this epistle are by the same author. The more I study and meditate on the two documents, however, the harder I find it to accept these theories. The epistle has the kind of similarities with the Gospel of John that indicate the same authorship. The epistle brings together many of the concepts contained in the narrative of the Gospel, often using the same terminology, and brings these into a cohesive whole. I am convinced that John wrote this epistle towards the end of his life after a lifetime of reflection on things he had seen and heard. The epistle reflects the life of a man who knew Jesus intimately and is now passing on the fruit of a lifetime of meditation and living out of the totality of the Christ experience. The cry of his pastoral heart is expressed very beautifully in the introduction to the epistle:

  That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life—2the life was made manifest, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was made manifest to us—3that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you may have fellowship with us; and our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. 4And we are writing this that our joy may be complete.