The Epistles of John

Written by David Rensberger Reviewed By Pieter J. Lalleman

The rapidly growing series of ‘Bible Companions’ from Westminster Press in fact consists of commentaries for ‘the laity’ (vii). As far as I can see the contributing authors are all working in America and none of them are explicitly evangelical. The volume under review here is one of the slimmest so far because it only deals with the seven brief chapters of the three epistles attributed to John. Rensberger also published a commentary on these same Epistles in the Abingdon NT Commentaries series in 1997.

As always in the Bible Companions the text of the NRSV is printed and then explained passage by passage rather than verse by verse; yet Rensberger regularly offers an alternative translation in his comments. In accordance with the non-technical nature of the series there is only a brief bibliography (which does include books by Evangelicals). Basic things such as the fact that the NT was written in Greek are explained rather than assumed (87).

The brief introductions (first to the three epistles together and then to each one individually) show that Rensberger thinks an elder from the Johannine community wrote the three little documents shortly after the year 100 against a background of docetism. Here as in the commentary proper structural as well as theological questions are discussed. Other regular features in the commentary are emphasis on the lack of clarity in many of the author’s sentences and brief glimpses into the texts’ reception history.

There is one major problem with this book. Although his tone is respectful and empathic throughout, Rensberger does not endorse the opinions expressed in the letters as a matter of principle. For example, in the comments on 1 John 2 we read: ‘By identifying “the antichrist” with his opponents, the author set a fateful course for the Christian treatment of theological disputes’ (37). In the third epistle this approach has the awkward consequence of leaving it open whether the author or his adversary Diotrephes is in the right. Because of this attitude to scriptural authority the book cannot be recommended without qualifications. It needs to be read with a discernment that ‘the laity’ might not have.


Pieter J. Lalleman

Spurgeon’s College, London