2nd John: Its World, Its Message
Commentary on Lesson 12, for Sabbath September 19th, 2009
Steve Thompson is Senior Lecturer in New Testament in the Faculty of Theology at Avondale College, Australia. His publications include The Apocalypse and Semitic Syntax (Cambridge University Press, 1985, repr. 2005) and "Was Ancient Rome a Dead Wives Society? What Did the Roman Paterfamilias Get Away With?", Journal of Family History 31/1 (2006), pp. 3-27.
.jpg)
Part of the Tabula Peutingeriana, an ancient map of the Roman Empire showing Roman Roads (Wikipedia Commons)
2 John is the New Testament's shortest letter. In less than 225 Greek words it reveals how a church leader—absent due to travel—nurtured and protected a Christian congregation by employing and adapting the deep-rooted social conventions of family and hospitality to express the core of Christian identity, and to highlight some of its boundaries.
2 John opens with an intimate greeting, typical of a husband addressing his wife and children, and the language of family is sustained through most of the letter. Families across the multi-cultural Roman empire during the New Testament era achieved their core mission of providing multi-generational nurture and grounding under the dominant paradigm of the Roman family, which traditionally granted the paterfamilias, the male head of household extensive and life-long authority over spouse and children. Paul deliberately extended this convention to the Christian “family” when he described the runaway slave Onesimus as his “child” and appealed to Philemon on his behalf (Philemon 8-10). The author of 2 John, like Paul, drew on the paradigm of the authoritative Roman paterfamilias when directing his "wife" to refuse admission of some persons to their "home" (2 John 10).
Every part of the New Testament alludes to travel by Christian leaders. The rapid spread of Christianity through the Roman Empire was aided by extensive road networks, while the ubiquitous Roman military presence reduced travelers' risk at the hands of bandits and pirates. The apostles and their assistants crisscrossed the empire establishing congregations and nurturing them with follow-up visits, and with letters. Letter writing flourished once the improved travel increased the likelihood that most would reach their destinations. Hundreds of surviving Roman-era letters reveal that they helped people to keep in touch, to inform, and to make requests. 2 John contains each of these elements.
Travel called for hospitality, and while there was a rudimentary hospitality industry, Roman-era travelers preferred the more secure and predictable hospitality of private homes. Strict codes of conduct governed home-based hospitality, imposing privileges as well as obligations on host and guest. To ignore or violate these was a heinous crime in the ancient Near East, which on occasion brought serious retribution—up to and including pay-back destruction of entire cities. Sodom’s destruction was triggered in part by an attempted violation of the sanctity of hospitality (Genesis 19), while the Trojan War, leading to the destruction of Troy, was sparked by un-guest-like behavior of Paris in the home of his host (Homer, The Iliad, book 3). Jesus placed hospitality in the center of Christian life. Hospitality became a metaphor for core relational values in parables (Matthew 22:3-11; 25: 1-10). He prepared his disciples for their first mission journey with precise instruction regarding hospitality (Matthew 10:9-14), and He employed the offering or refusing of hospitality as a criterion in the last judgment (Matthew 25:35, 42-43). Elsewhere in the New Testament hospitality is commanded for family, friend and stranger alike (Rom 12:13; 1 Tim 3:2; Tit 1:8; Heb 13:1-2; 1Pet 4:9). Hospitality's boundaries come into focus in several New Testament passages, including 2 John, where readers were admonished not to extend hospitality to would-be teachers not conforming to apostolic teaching. This counsel apparently led to a retributive response according to 3 John—not what the author expected or wished.
2 John has the hallmarks of a personal letter, including formal language, standard greeting, and typical conclusion, features shared with one other New Testament letter, Philemon. All other New Testament letters are considerably lengthier, and address groups. 2 John, in spite of its personal form and intensely private tone, is actually written to a group.
Historical setting
2 John lacks any reference to a dateable event, making precise dating impossible. There is no hint of the location in the letter. The early Church Father Irenaeus (Against Heresies, book 3 chapter 3, paragraph 4) reported that the disciple John lived “until the times” of emperor Trajan (ruled 98 to117 C.E.) and that he ministered in Ephesus, capital of the Roman province of Asia.
Message
“Truth” is the golden theological cord, which runs through John’s Gospel and three letters. The word occurs twenty-five times in the Gospel, nine times in 1 John, five times in 2 John, and six times in 3 John. The “truth” intended by the author focuses on the person and nature of Jesus, and especially his relation to God and the world. At heart, “truth” is the good news that God has now shown his saving love for the world in a unique way through his son Jesus. Truth thus touches all aspects of a believer’s life, providing hope in the face of suffering and death, guidance in the issues of personal life, and a new basis for relating to others in the believing community. The author commends readers for "walking" in the truth; that is, living a life committed to the teaching of, and about, Jesus.
“Love” is another characteristic Johannine term, employed in 2 John verses 3 and 6 to explain that truth impacts life in the community—in John's words, believers "walk" according to the love command issued by Jesus.
2 John contains six major spiritual observations about spiritual reality:
1. Changed lives are the source of genuine exuberance (verse 4a)
2. Some "children" were still walking the true walk (verse 4b)
3. Deceivers are out there! (verse 7a)
4. They are Antichrist unmasked (verse 7b)
5. Remain within Christ's teaching to "possess" God (verse 9)
6. Even to so much as greet deceivers is to collaborate with them (verse 11).
The letter includes three major appeals to the first readers:
1. Let us love one another! (verse 5)
2. Watch yourselves! (verse 8)
3. Do not let unknown, untested visitors teach the congregation! (verse 10).
Deceivers exploited congregational hospitality to spread untruths about Jesus, denying that He came in the flesh. The Elder revealed deep concern about the damage caused by these people and their ideas. He called them “antichrist” in verse 7, then ordered a risky strategy—refusing them hospitality—in an all-out effort to protect the congregation from error and exploitation. The consequence of this risky strategy is disclosed in 3 John.
The epistle 2 John thus provides insights into how one early Christian leader nourished a congregation from a distance, how he defined boundaries of orthodoxy and orthopraxy, and how he responded to a serious doctrinal and leadership challenge.
Search
- Real Cartoonists on Fascinating Adventist Mathematics
- Donna Haerich on Mt. Ellis on the Brink of Winning Big
- Elaine Nelson on Fascinating Adventist Mathematics
- Steve Moran on Mt. Ellis on the Brink of Winning Big
- Bonnie Dwyer on Mt. Ellis on the Brink of Winning Big
- Donna Haerich on Fascinating Adventist Mathematics
- victor on Fascinating Adventist Mathematics
- Andre Reis on Hate Speech?
- Your Friend on Fascinating Adventist Mathematics
- Your Friend on Hate Speech?
Comments
Steve has given us a masterful overview of John's second letter. His own research into family life in the Roman Empire enriched our understanding of not only John's messages but also those of Paul. Steve makes it clear that "truth" for John is not a weasel word so prevalent today. For John, truth is not the sum of any group's opinion, more than a majority vote. Truth is given to us in the person and message of Jesus Christ. Getting that right is everyman's jpyful responsibility; in other words, it is something given to us, not something that each generation watches as it evolves in conversation. And Steve's emphasis that truth is something to be jealously guarded has never been more relevant. Cheers, Steve.
Early in the Church it was the Judaizers that plagued the Church and Paul's letter railed aginst this backward movement.
Now late in the first century, John is concerned about the Gnostics polluting the Gospel. John always dewelt on two issues: Gnostic heresy and the fruits of the Spirit-Love.
His theme is "Let's not get carried away!" he uses "truth" to emphasize reality of the Christ Event. Tom
Great summary, Steve. Allow me a few supporting observations...
By identifying God as a being of both truth and love, John captures the essence of the way God operates and the response God wishes from each of us. In substance the principles of God and His government rest on these two great pillars, rightly understood. This harmony of truth and love is truly divine and has definite results in the Christian’s life.
John talks about a new command. But is it? Jesus himself also identified a new command (John 13:34). But though it may have seemed new to his hearers at the time, as John came to understand, this is not a new command, since it reflects the character of God since the very beginning. As he wrote in the previous letter, “This command I am writing you is not new; it is the old command, the one you have had from the beginning. The old command is the message you have already heard. However, the command I now write you is new, because its truth is seen in Christ and also in you.” (1 John 2:7, 8 TEV). God’s command becomes new in the person of Jesus Christ—in him it is most clearly revealed. And remember that this command was at the heart of Jesus’ message too.
Since Jesus stresses the “love command,” it’s clear that God never compels or pressurizes any of His children to obey Him. Indeed, to operate from such principles of force and compulsion would be to negate the whole Great Controversy and its evidence, accumulated at such tremendous cost. For if God can achieve His intentions by force, why does He not do so? Why did He not do so in the very beginning?
“Anyone who does not stay with the teaching of Christ, but goes beyond it, does not have God” (2 John 9 TEV). Christ is not contradictory—so anything someone might have to say must be tested by what has already been revealed. While it may seem impressive—a popular TV evangelist may say that he is communicating “God’s word” directly and “on-air”—but this can be no substitute for the study of the Bible.
“I have a lot that I could write to you, but somehow I find it hard to put down on paper. I hope to come and see you personally, and we will have a heart-to-heart talk together—and how we shall enjoy that!” (2 John 12 Phillips). Here we can see John’s great love that comes straight from the heart. Separated by distance his heart goes out to his brothers and sisters in the truth whom he genuinely loves and cares for.
What a tremendous example to us, for whatever the theological ideals, Christianity is shown for what it is as it’s played out in the lives of individual believers.
John in his Epistle says that his greatest happiness is to be with his extended Christian family. He writes from genuine “parental” concern for those he loves in the truth, and he wishes more than anything else to be with them.
Best,
Jonathan
Thank you Steve - and Jonathan for your good insights and thoughts on this weeks lesson. I would like to add my observations as well.
Paul wrote to the church in Rome, “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church at Chenchreae… help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a benefactor of many and of myself as well.” Then again Paul wrote to the Phlippians, “I ask you, my loyal companion, help these women (Euodia and Syntyche) for they have struggled beside me in the work of the gospel”
Once the Christians were no longer welcome in the Jewish synagogues, congregations meet in private homes. Home churches were the norm for the early days of the church. That women opened their homes for meeting places is recorded in several places in the book of Acts. “After leaving prison they went to Lydia’s home, and when they had seen and encouraged the brothers and sisters there, they departed.”
“We went into the house of Philip the evangelist… He had four unmarried daughters who had the gift of prophecy.” (They exercised their gift in silence no doubt)
Most commentaries acknowledge that “the elect lady” in 2 John could have been an individual, but most choose to interpret the lady as merely a symbol for the church. Even those who process to take the Bible “literally” choose not to see this as referring to a female person.
The passage in 2 John 8 can be read, “Be on your guard, so that you do not lose what (you) have worked for but may receive a full reward.” But since men must be given credit it is usually rendered as “do not lose what (we) have worked for”
That a women might have been a pastor in charge of a flock – that there may have been other women, sisters, who also oversaw congregations in their church homes – that a pastoral letter may have been sent to her - that this passage could be used in a Sabbath School class to support our female pastors - this is just not the way things are done – even in the 21st century. Evidently.
It has been conveniently overlooked, and relegated to the trash heap of history that women were the first evangelists--proclaiming the risen Savior!
How often has anyone heard that mentioned in or out of the pulpit?
Shouldn't we recognize that women were the instruments to first preach the Gospel? And it was the men who were the doubters?
Thanks, Donna, for reminding us again what has been forgotten for centuries.
Thank you, Elaine, for your response - however I don't think the contribution of women has been "forgotten for centuries" merely marginalized.
The main reason 'the elder' writes to the 'elect lady' is to warn her about letting certain individuals (deceivers) have access to her 'house'(ie church).
Written in the 90's when persecution was beginning to be felt - it would have been prudent not to call her by name or to identify the 'house' where she held her meetings.
Yes, the children were her flock as were the children mentioned in 1 John his flock. And yes, the letter was to be circulated to other congregations, including those led by other women.
Ignoring the gender of the person to whom the letter of 2 John may have been written is one of the many ways - even in the 21st century - that allows a patriarchal church system to continue
Dear Lord,
Please don't allow people who lack identity in you to pervert your most precious message given through the one you loved.
Amen
Post new comment