We know...

One commentary I read remarked on the frequent use of the phrase "we know" in 1 John. It suggested that John uses it to counter the (proto-)Gnostic claim to a superior insight, only available to the initiated and not to all believers.

I just did an analysis of how many times this phrase appears in the New Testament, in the two Bibles I can search easily. Results like so (all unmentioned books do not include the phrase):

Book	KJV	ESV
Matthew	1	1
Mark	1	1
Luke	1	1
John	10	15
Acts	1	2
Romans	5	7
1 Cor.	3	3
2 Cor.	1	3
Galatians	0	1
1 Thess.	0	1
1 Timothy	1	1
Hebrews	1	1
1 John	10	13

Interesting that John and 1 John are the two stand-out books.

When I went through the results of the search in John's gospel, the results were even more interesting - only twice (or only once KJV) are the words actually used to confess orthodox faith:

"Now we know that you know all things and do not need anyone to question you; this is why we believe that you came from God." - John 16:30. "This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true." - John 21:24.

If instead we search for "you know", then John and 1 John again stand out, but Matthew, Mark (less so) and 1 Thessalonians also join them. This means that if you add the two together, John and 1 John both come out far ahead of the rest of the New Testament. This time, on a quick glance, we see the phrase being used much more in a meaningful sense in John's gospel, on Jesus' lips, e.g. "And you know the way I am going", John 14:4.

But does this indicate/flow from what the commentary says it does? How would we know? (Boom, boom). And at what point do such observations become an evidence (of whatever weight) for the common authorship of John and 1 John? (I suppose on the latter question, a statistical test could be devised to test the hypothesis against its alternative. I recently read of such a test being done to prove to the highest confidence levels that Genesis chapters 1-3 are of the genre of historical narrative in the same way that other uncontroversial passages of the Pentateuch and Old Testament are accepted to be historical narratives. You can find this in ed. Terry Mortensen, Biblical authority and the age of the earth).

If you hoped that this post was going to climax in some new and profound insight and conclusion, then it's time to be disappointed. It's food for thought, but I'm still chewing! Have you got any ideas?