A commentary on the Epistles of St. John - The Preterist Archive

IXTRODÜCTIOX. 23
recoi'ds and definite indications of the gospel itself,
impossible.^ ^
But let us suppose that the time when the gospel
was written could be precisely determined ; still
how are VvC to know for certain, and from what shall
we infer, how soon, or how late after the gospel, the
epistle was written ? On this point, the opinions are
very much divided.
Modern authors, who consider it as a dedication
or an accompanying epistle to the gospel, say that it
is of the same date as the gospel.^ ^ Others conclude
from its style, as betraying old age, that St. John
wrote it when highly advanced in years, and conse-
quently long after the gospel, which thej"^ suppose
was written when the author still was in the vigour
of manhood.^ ^ Others again, from ii. 18, fix upon the
destmction of Jerusalem, as the point with which
they connect their inferences ;
but while the greatest
number of these suppose tliat the epistle is written
before that event,^'* there still are others, who, found-
ing their conjecture on the same passage, maintain
the very reverse.^-^
^^ See the Author's Commentary on the Gospel, ^''ol. i.
p. 130.
^^ Thus Hug, Storr and Berger.
^^ Ambrosius says, Psalm 3ö, " Johannem jam senem
scribere ccepisse Evangelium et Epistolas." But modern
authors, such as Lange, Bertholdt and others, assume that
the epistle only is written in old age, but the gospel in the age
of manhood.
•''* Thus Hammond, Grotius, Calovius, Lange, Michaelis,
Hänleiu and otliers.
•'^ Thus Baronius, Basnage, Mill, Le Clerc and others.