a long time, even by the shortest route that could be taken. And Peter must have passed through Pontus, &c. in his way to Rome, and, therefore, it would have been unnecessary for him to write. Writing from Rome, indeed, the case was different, as he never expected to see them more.

We are warranted, therefore, to date these Epistles about the beginning of A.D. 65; soon after the second Epistle to Timothy. Whether Paul and Peter suffered at the same time, or separately, is not known; probably the latter: for Jerom relates, that Peter was crucified by Nero for opposing the sorceries of Simon Magus, who had bewitched the Romans, as formerly the Samaritans, Act. viii. 9, 10, Lardner VI. p. 544, Petav. II. p. 379.

THE EPISTLES OF JOHN.

I. The authenticity of these three Epistles, especially of the first, and principal, is unquestionable. It was received as the Apostle's composition every where almost in the eastern and western Churches, and is cited by the early Fathers, Polycarp, Papias, the martyrs of Lyons, Irenæus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Cyprian, Eusebius, Cyril, Epiphanius, Augustine, Chrysostom, venerable Bede, &c. &c. See Lardner, VI. p. 584. And, indeed, the internal evidence in its favour is striking and satisfactory, in the remarkable analogy of sentiment and expression to his Gospel throughout; especially to the beginning and the end of the Gospel in the animated exordium of the Epistle.

"What occurred from the beginning [of the GOSPEL] concerning THE ORACLE OF LIFE; what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld, and our hands have handled-declare we unto you, that ye may participate with us;-and these, write we unto you, that your joy may be completed," i. 1—4. (See note, p. 256 of this Volume.)

Whether this Epistle was written, 1. before or after his Gospel; and 2. before or after the destruction of Jerusalem, has been much disputed by commentators and critics. The generality agree, however, that it was written before his Gospel, and are followed herein by Lardner and Michaelis, concurring in this point, indeed; but differing with many commentators on each side, as to the other; Michaelis contending that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem; Lardner, after.

It was probably written before the destruction of Jerusalem, for the following reasons, not noticed by either.

1. As the other Apostles, James, Jude, Paul, and Peter, had written Catholic Epistles to the Hebrew Christians especially; it is likely that one of the principal "pillars of the Church," the greatest surely of the Mother Church, the most highly gifted and illuminated of all the Apostles of the circumcision, and the beloved disciple, would not be deficient likewise in this labour of love.

2. Nothing could tend so strongly to establish the faith of the early Jewish converts as the remarkable circumstances of OUR LORD's crucifixion, exhibiting the accomplishment of the ancient types and prophecies of the Old Testament respecting CHRIST'S passion, or sufferings in the flesh. These, John alone could record, as he was the only eye witness of that last solemn scene among the Apostles. To these, therefore, he alludes in the exordium, as well as to the circumstances of our Lord's appearances after the Resurrection; and to these he again recals their attention in that remarkable reference to "the water" at his baptism; to" the water and blood" at his passion, and to the dismissal of "his spirit," when he commended it to HIS FATHER, and expired, v. 5-9. See the foregoing explanation of this most important and most disputed passage, p. 236, 237 of this Volume.

8. The parallel testimony in the Gospel, John xix. 35-37, p. 236, bears witness also to the priority of the Epistle, in the expression, "He that saw, hath testified," (uɛpapтvoŋkɛ,) intimating that he had delivered this testimony to the world already; for if now, for the first time, it should rather be expressed by the present tense, paprνpa, "testifieth." And this is strongly confirmed by the Apostle's same expression, after giving his evidence in the Epistle, "This is the testimony of GOD, which HE hath testified (μɛμaprvoŋkɛ,) concerning HIS SON," ver. 9, referring to the past transaction, as fulfilling prophecy.

This argument seems decisive for the priority of the Epistle to the Gospel.

Its priority also to the destruction of Jerusalem, may be inferred by analogy, from the dates of the other Catholic Epistles, which were all written not long before the destruction of Jerusalem, when it was most necessary to prepare the minds of the faithful for that catastrophe, and to comfort them under it, with the prospect of future "joy," or happiness, in reward of their patience," and resignation to the will of God.

It was, therefore, probably written the last of the Catholic Epistles, and soon after the publication of the three first Gospels, whose omission of that most material testimony, it was absolutely necessary to supply without delay. And the allusions of this Epistle to the Gospel prognostics of the destruction of Jerusalem, are pointed and express.

The springing up of false Christs and false teachers, and false prophets in the Church, were among the first and last signs of the destruction of Jerusalem, foretold by OUR LORD, Matt. xxiv. 5-25. To these the Epistle evidently alludes:

"Dear Children, this is the last hour, and as ye have heard, that the Antichrist is coming; even so now there have been (yeyovaoi) many Antichrists: whence we know that it is the last hour," ii. 18.

This word, avriXITоç, is peculiar to John; it signifies in strictness, a "deputy-Christ," or one who assumed his authority, see Vol. II. p. 505, corresponding to our Lord's expression, a false Christ, or impostor; and avrixpiσTo in the plural, false Apostles, or false teachers, who sowed heresies, or erroneous doctrines in the Church. The earliest of these on record were the Judaizing teachers from the Church of Jerusalem, of the Sect of the Pharisees, who attempted to impose circumcision and the observance of the law of Moses on the Gentile Church of Antioch, Acts xv. 1-5; and who were censured by the first Apostolic council at Jerusalem, in A.D. 49; for “disturbing the peace of the Gentile Church without commission from the Apostles," Acts xv. 23-29. And to these, in the first instance, the Epistle alludes pointedly :

They went out from us, (the Apostles) but they were not of us for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us, [or kept our doctrine] but [they did not] that they might be manifested, that all are not of us," ii. 19.

"The last hour," so emphatically repeated, seems to refer to the approach of the catastrophe, as intimated by Our Lord, "When ye see all these [signs] know ye that it is near at the doors. Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass away till all these [woes] shall happen," Matt. xxiv. 33, 34.

And that this generation was now "passing away," the Apostle also emphatically repeats:

"I write, (ypapw) to you fathers, because ye have known HIM that is from the beginning————

"I wrote (εypala) to you fathers, because ye have known HIM that is from the beginning," -ii. 13, 14.

Here the Fathers, or Elders, are distinguished twice from "the young men, and the children," by this circumstance of having known CHRIST, or seen him either during his ministry, or after his resurrection. They were, therefore, passing off the stage of this world, above an entire generation from our Lord's resurrection, A.D. 31, supposing that this Epistle was written the year after the publication of the three Gospels, about A.D. 68, or two years before the destruction of Jerusalem, as the most seasonable time.

The leading doctrine of this sublime Epistle, is our Lord's New Commandment of Christian love, or charity. This, it repeatedly inculcates and admirably enforces, ii. 7-11, iii. 1618, iv. 7-12. And it warns the faithful, especially, against false prophets, worldly-mindedness, and idolatry, iv. 1, ii. 15, 16, v. 4, v. 21.

II. The second Epistle is an epitome of the first, touching, in few words, on the same points. It is addressed "to the elect Lady and her Children," ver. 1. The word kupia is ambiguous, it may literally denote a woman, or figuratively, a Church. And the latter seems preferable; for the Church of CHRIST was styled, "the Queen," (n ẞaoidiooa, Sept.) Ps. xlv. 10, which is a synonymous term. And this imagery is frequent in the New Testament, Matt. xxv. 10; Gal. iv. 25, 26; Eph. v. 25; Rev. xix. 7, xxi. 2.

CHRIST also is styled in prophecy," the Father of the future Age," Isaiah ix. 6; whose "children should be made princes in all lands," Ps. xlv. 16; and he styled himself, "the bridegroom," Matt. ix. 15, and John Baptist, "the friend of the bridegroom," or bride man, John iii. 29.

And in support of the allegorical interpretation, we may observe, that though Tɛкva, “children," may include daughters, those of the elect lady are plainly sons, (ovc) "whom I love," ver. 1, (περITαTоvvTaç) "walking in truth," ver. 4, whom he (περιπατούντας) warns to look to themselves,” (¿avrovç,) ver. 8, &c. the masculine relatives and participle restricting the sense to sons alone.

Now, in a numerous family, it is very seldom that we find all sons, and no daughters: but when we speak of a Church, the word 'sons' includes persons of both sexes," according to the acute remark of Michaelis, IV. p. 450.

Hence, we may presume, that this was a later brief epistle, referring to the first: "I wrote to you, Fathers," &c. ii. 14.

That some particular Church, indeed, is here meant, may also be collected from the concluding salutation of, "The children of thy elect sister," from which the Apostle wrote. But we know from Ecclesiastical History, that the Church of Ephesus was under his peculiar jurisdiction; therefore, it is highly probable that he wrote to the Mother Church at Jerusalem; according to Whitby, Barrington, and Gilpin.

III. The third Epistle is addressed to an individual, a respectable member of some Church; which, from the Greek names, Gaius, or Caius, Diotrephes, and Demetrius, seems to be Gentile, as intimated, ver. 7. And that this Church was Corinth, may be presumed, from the person addressed, Caius, and on the score of his hospitality; for which he was honourably distinguished by Paul, as "his host, and the host of the whole Church," Rom. xvi. 23; who resided at Corinth, and had been one of his first converts, 1 Cor. i. 14. And this testimony, and the disinterestedness of Paul himself, who took nothing from the Church of Corinth, as he repeatedly told them, 2 Cor. iv. 5, xi. 7—11, xii. 13; working there at his trade as a tent-maker, for his support, Acts xviii. 3, seems to be here elegantly and forcibly alluded to, as a motive to Caius and the Corinthians for hospitality towards strangers of the eastern Churches, on their travels, ver, 6-8.

Nor is it any objection to this, that the Apostle styles Caius, and the Church, "his children," whose "walking in truth, gave him the highest joy," ver. 4; for, after the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, "the care of all the Churches" that they had "planted," necessarily devolved on him, the survivor, the last, and the greatest of the Apostles, "to water." Though not his own converts, therefore, he might reasonably account the Corinthians," his children," or flock, as being comprized within his jurisdiction of the western Churches.

And the immediate occasion of this Epistle, seems to have been some inattention shewn to a former, which "he wrote to the Church," recommending some of the Asiatic brethren to

* Lardner renders, εуpaya тy εкkλŋoig, ver. 9, “I would have written to the Church," (with the Vulgate, Le Clerc, and Grotius,) were it not for the opposition of Diotrephes : wherefore, the Apostle preferred writing to Caius, Lardner VI. p. 601. But the com