Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadInternational Critical Commentary NT - 2 John 1:1 - 1:99
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
NOTES ON 2 JOHN
————
1-3. Introduction and salutation.
1. ὁπεβτρς The use of πεβτρςas a more or less official title in Asia Minor, the Islands, and Egypt has been discussed by Deissmann, Bibel Studien, 153 ff., NBS 60 ff. Cf. also H. Hauschildt, in Preuschen’s ZNTW, 1903, p. 235 ff., and Deissmann, Licht vom Osten, p. 25. Its use in Egypt as a title, and in connection with the Temples, as well as in other connections, is well established at an early date. The evidence of Papias and Irenaeus points to a prevalent Christian usage of the word, especially in Asia, to denote those who had companied with Apostles, and had perhaps been placed in office by them; who could, at any rate, bear trustworthy witness as to what Apostles taught. It is natural to suppose that throughout the fragment of his Introduction, which Eusebius quotes, Papias uses the expression πεβτρςin the same sense. The elders are the men from whom he has himself well learnt and well remembered the illustrative matter for which he finds a place in his book beside his interpretations of the Lord’s words, or whose statements as to what the Apostles said he had learnt by inquiry whenever he met those who had companied with them. This interpretation is supported by the comments of Eusebius on the passage (H. E. 3:39. 7), τὺ τνἀοτλνλγυ πρ τνατῖ πρκλυηόω ὁοοε πριηέα, i.e. he learnt from elders who had companied with Apostles the words of the Apostles, obtaining his information either directly from the elders themselves, or indirectly from those who had companied with the elders. Irenaeus uses similar language, adv. Haer. 5:33. 3, “Quemadmodum presbyteri meminerunt qui Iohannem discipulum Domini uiderunt audisse se ab eo quemadmodum de temporibus illis docebat Dominus et dicebat”: 111. xxxvi. I, ὡ ο πεβτριλγυι Ττ κὶο μνκτξωέτςτςἐ ορν δαρβςἐεσ χρσυι. Any individual member of such a class might naturally be styled ὁπεβτρς as Papias speaks of ὁπεβτρςἸ ίνς or ὁπεβτρς and Eusebius (H. E. 3:39. 14) of τῦπεβτρυἸάνυπρδσι. The absolute use of the phrase in Papias (κὶτῦʼὁπεβτρςἕεε and in 2 and 3 John makes it the distinctive title of some member of the circle to whom the words are addressed, or at least of one who is well known to them. The circle is in all three cases Asiatic. It is natural to suppose that Papias is referring to the John whom he elsewhere describes as John the Elder. And it is equally natural to see in the author of these two Epistles, who so describes himself, the Elder John whom Papias so carefully distinguishes from the Apostle. The usage of the word is most naturally explained if he is the last survivor of the group, though the possibility of other solutions is by no means excluded.ἐλκῇκρᾳ The interpretation of these words has been discussed generally in the Introduction. Those who have seen in this designation the name of an individual have explained it differently according as the first, or the second, or both words are regarded as proper names, or both are treated as descriptive adjectives, the actual name not being given. (i.) The view that Electa is a proper name is first found in Clement of Alexandria, “Scripta est ad Babyloniam quandam Electam nomine.” It is uncertain whether “Babyloniam” is due to some confusion with the First Epistle of S. Peter on the part of either Clement or his excerptor and translator, or whether it is a conclusion drawn from the title Πὸ Προςby which the First Epistle was known (cf. the title of Augustine’s Tractates). This view has been supported in recent years by Dr. J. Rendel Harris, who in an article in the Expositor (1901) to which reference has been made in the Introduction, collected several instances of the use of κρο and κραby near relatives in letters contained in the Oxyrhynchus, and Fayum Papyri. Cf. Oxyrh. Pap. ii. 300 (p. 301), Ἰδκ Θεσῦιτ κρᾳχίεν He might have noticed a similar use of δσον in one of the letters which he quotes (ἀπζμιτνγυυάη μυθγτρ Μκαίνκὶτνδσοννμυμτρνὑῶ κὶὅοςτὺ ἡῶ κτ ὄοα cf. in the same letter, written by a father to his son, κνὥ, δσοάμι ἀτγαο μιἐ τχι His view that κρο, κραare thus proved to have been used as titles of affection, has been justly criticized by Professor Ramsay in a subsequent article in the same periodical, who sees in it more naturally a title of courtesy. Perhaps it would be better to regard its use as rather playful, or not to be taken too seriously. But the evidence adduced in any case does not go far towards proving that 2 John is addressed to an individual. The usage of individual address would necessarily be followed by a writer who wishes to personify a community to whom he writes. And the language of ver. 15 (τςἀεφςσυτςἐλκῆ) is almost fatal to the supposition that Electa is here used as a proper name.
(ii.) If the name is given at all it must be found in Kyria and not in Electa. Kyria as a proper name is found occasionally, and even in Asia Minor. Lü quotes (p. 444) Corp. Inscr. Gruter. p. 1127, n. xi. Φνπο κὶἡγν ατῦΚρα and other instances. According to Holtzmann it is a common name for women, but he does not cite instances. Cf. Zahn, Introd. vol. 3., Eng. tr p. 383, who refers to Sterrett, The Wolfe Expedition, pp. 138, 389. But on grammatical grounds this explanation is improbable. We should certainly expect the article with ἐλκῇ Cf. 3Jn_1:1, Γί τ ἀαηῷ Rom_16:13, Ῥῦο τνἐλκὸ ἐ κρῳ Philem. Φλμν τ ἀαηῷ Oxyrh. Pap. 117, ΧιέςΔουί τ κρῳἀεφ: 119, Θω Θωιτ πτὶχίεν These passages illustrate the grammatical difficulty of assuming that Κραis a proper name. The anarthrous ἐλκῇmakes it very improbable.
(iii.) The language of ver. 13, ἀπζτίσ τ τκατςἀεφςσυτςἐλκῆ, makes it very unlikely that both words are to be regarded as proper names.
(iv.) The view, however, that an individual is addressed, has often been held by those who think that her name has not been recorded. As stated in the Introduction, the name of Mary the Mother of the Lord, and of Martha, have been suggested. The former suggestion was natural, if not inevitable, at an earlier date, in view of Joh_19:27 and the supposed residence of the Blessed Virgin in Asia, when the general historical setting of the Epistle was less carefully considered or understood than in recent times. A supposed play on the meaning of Martha was equally attractive to an earlier generation. No serious arguments can be brought forward in favour of either conjecture. If the theory of individual address is maintained, it is certainly better to assume that the name is not given. The combination of terms is a natural expression of Christian courtesy.But the general character of the Epistle is almost decisive against the view that it is addressed to an individual. The subjects with which it deals are such as affect a community rather than an individual or a family, though much of its contents might be regarded as advice needed by the leading member of a Church on whom the duty mainly fell of entertaining the strangers who visited it. We must also notice (1) that the language of vv. 1-3, “Whom I and all who know the truth love because of the truth that abideth in us,” suits a community far better than an individual. This is also true of the language of the salutation in ver. 13 which has been already quoted. (2) The interchange of singular and plural points to the same conclusion, ερκ ἐ τντκω συ(ver. 4), ἐωῶσ (ver. 5), βέεεἑυος(ver. 8), ε τςἔχτιπὸ ὑᾶ (ver. 10), ὑῖ (ver. 12), ἀπζτίσ (ver. 13). Mr. Gibbins in an interesting paper in the Expositor (series 6, 1902, p. 232) has drawn attention to the similar changes between singular and plural which are found in Is. liv., lv. and Bar. iv., v., where the City and her inhabitants are addressed under the image of a woman and her children. These parallels show clearly how natural was the transference of the prophetic language with regard to Jerusalem and its inhabitants to a Christian Church and its members. (3) The language of ver. 5, ἐωῷσ, κρα οχὡ ἐτλνγάω σικιή, ἀλ ἣ εχμνἀʼἀχς ἵαἀαῶε ἀλλυ, with its clear reference to the Lord’s “new commandment” given to His disciples, suggests a Church and not an individual. (4) The substance of what is said in vv. 6, 8, 10, 12 is clearly not addressed to children. The “children” of the “Elect Lady” must certainly have reached the age of manhood. (5) The nearest parallel in the N.T. is to be found in 1 P. 5:13, ἡἐ Ββλν σνκετ, though we may hesitate to assume with Dom Chapman (JTS, 1904, pp. 357 ff., 517 ff.) that the reference in both cases is the same, the Church of Rome being addressed. We may perhaps also compare the language in which the Seer addresses the same Churches in the Apocalypse (i.-iii.).
The reference to the whole Church is already suggested by Clement, “signif cat autem electionem ecclesiae sanctae.” Cf. also Jerome, Ep. 123. 12, Ad Ageruchiam, “Una ecclesia parens omnium Christianorum …praue haeretici in plures ecclesias lacerant …Una est columba mea, perfecta mea, una est matris suae, electa genetrici suae (Son_6:8). Ad quam scribit idem Iohannes epistolam, Senior Electae dominae et filiis eius, ” where the reference to the Church is clear, though he apparently regards Electa as a proper name.
The reference to a local Church is found in the Scholiast, ἐλκὴ κρα λγιτνἐ τν τπ ἐκηίν This explanation has been adopted by most modern commentators.κὶτῖ τκοςατς Cf. Bar. 4:30-32, θρε, Ἱρυαή,πρκλσισ ὁὀοάα σ. δίαο ο σ κκσνε κὶἐιαέτςτ σ πώε·δίαα α πλι αςἐολυα τ τκασυ διααἡδξμν τὺ υοςσυ v.5, ἴεσυσνγέατ τκαἀὸἡίυδσῶ…χίοτςτ τῦθο μεᾳ Gal_4:25, δυεε μτ τντκω ατς The use of τκα which emphasizes the idea of community of nature of those who have experienced the new spiritual birth, as contrasted with the Pauline υό, which often lays stress on the dignity of heirship, is characteristic of the author. But it is not always safe to press the distinction. The more general term, which includes the whole family, would in many cases naturally be preferred to υό, which, strictly speaking, applies only to sons.
οςἐὼἀαῶ Cf. Gal_4:19, τκα(v.l. τκί) μυ οςπλνὠίω Arguments, in favour of the view that a Church is addressed, which are based on the use of the masculine relative are very precarious. In any case it would be the natural construction κτ σνσν For the use of ἐώ cf. 3Jn_1:1. It may be characteristic of the writer’s style. But the emphatic language of the rest of the verse suggests that the author is thinking of those who do not love, and love “in truth.”
ἐ ἀηεᾳ Cf. 3Jn_1:1, where the word is again anarthrous. The phrase is not “merely adverbial,” a periphrasis for “truly.” It suggests a love which is exercised in the highest sphere, which corresponds to the truest conception of love. Cf. πρπτῖ ἐ ἀηεᾳ conduct in which everything is regulated by “truth.”
κὶοκἐὼκτλ The unsuitability of this language, if addressed to the members of a single family, has already been pointed out. As addressed to members of a Church in which the Elder can confidently reckon on faithful support, while he is fully conscious of the existence of divisions and of strenuous opposition to himself and his teaching, they offer no difficulty and have their special significance.
τνἀήεα] Cf. 1Jn_1:6 (note). The truth, as revealed by the Christ, and gradually unfolded by the Spirit, who is “Truth.” It covers all spheres of life, and is not confined to the sphere of the intellect alone.
οπεβτρς ησμρσυεο 93: Iohannes senior tol. Cassiod. | ελκη pr. τ 73 | Κρα pr. τ 31 | ατς ατι Isa_65 (317) | ος ος 62. 161 (498) | ε αηεαααω 158 (395) | κιοκεωאB K P al.pler. vg. sah. cop. syrp arm. aeth.] οκεωδ A 73 syrbodl Thphyl.: + δ L | kai 3:0] om. Ia 170 (303) | ενκτς ααωτςIa δ
2. δὰτνἀήεα] The possession of the “truth” as an abiding force which dominates the whole life calls out the love of all who share the possession.
ἐ ἡῖ]The author includes the Church to whom he is writing, or at least its faithful members, in the numbers of those who “know the truth.”
κὶμθ ἡῶ ἔτι An expression of sure confidence rather than of a wish. The truth must always “abide” in the Society, though individual members may fall away. For the parenthetical construction, cf. 1Jn_3:1, ἵατκαθο κηῶε, κὶἐμν
δατναηεα] om. 27. 29. 66**. 106* fu. syrp txt | μνυα B K L P etc.] εοκυα A : 13. 65 dscr: om. 66** | ηι] υι 22. 68. 100. 104 cscr jscr | κι…αωα quia et uobiscum erit et nos in aeternum uobiscum eritis arm. | ηω] υω 22. 68. 100. 104 ascr cscr jscr al. | ετιετν31 syrbodi et p: ετIa 200f (83).
3. ἔτιμθ ἡῶ]The taking up of the language of the preceding verse is thoroughly in accord with the writer’s habit. Compare the repetition of ἀήεαin the preceding verse. The wish expressed in ordinary salutations here “passes into assurance.” Perhaps in view of their circumstances the need of assurance was specially felt by writer and recipients as well.
χρς ἔες ερν] This exact form of salutation is found elsewhere in the Epistles to Timothy. It is a natural expansion of the commoner χρςκὶερν which in some sense combines the Greek and Hebrew forms of salutation; and it fits in well with the general tone of later Epistles. Neither ἔεςnor the cognate verb occurs elsewhere in the Johannine writings. Cf. Jud_1:2, ἔεςὑῖ κὶερν κὶἀάηπηυθί: Polycarp, ad Phil. ἔεςὑῖ κὶερν, and the Letter of the Smyrnaeans, ἔεςκὶερν κὶἀάη πηυθί.
πρ Ἰσῦκτλ The whole phrase brings into prominence the views on which the author throughout lays most stress—the Fatherhood of God, as revealed by one who being His Son can reveal the Father, and who as man (Ἰσῦ can make Him known to men. Cf. Joh_20:31, ἵαπσεηεὅιἸσῦ ἐτνὁΧιτςὁυὸ τῦθο. The words used contain implicitly the author’s creed.
ἐ ἀηεᾳκὶἀάῃ The two vital elements of the Christian Faith, the possession of the highest knowledge and its expression in action. They are the keynotes of the Epistle.
ετιμθηω] om. A | ετι + δ15. 36 | ηω אB L P al. sat. mu. cat. am. sah. boh-ed. syrbodl aeth. Thphylcom Oeccom] υω K al. plu. vg. (et. fu. demid. harl. tol.) arm. boh-codd. (ετ μθυ. post ααηarm. boh.) syrp. An obvious correction to the more usual 2nd pers. of salutations | χρς χρ Ib 260 (440): + υω κιIc 116, 486, 356 (-) | ερν] pr. κιIa 200f (83) | πρ א A B L P al. pler.] αοא 11. 18. 19. 32. 40. 57. 68. 98. 105. 126 cscr. A natural correction to the more common usage of salutations; cf. Ro., 1, 2 Co. Gal. Eph. Ph. Col., 2 Th., 1, 2, Ti. Philem. Apoc. Clement. Polycarp has πρ | (θο…κι1:0) om. sah. | θο (? ver. 3)] om. Ia δ (?) Ic 486 (-) | πτο (? 1:0)] pr. κιIa 256 (24) | πρ 2:0] om. א 99 fscr am. | ισυχιτυ pr. κ אK L P al. pler. cat. tol. cop. syr. arm. Thphyl. Oec.: χ ι H257 (33) Ia δ 192 (808) | τυ1:0] om. H δ (Ψ Ic 114 (335) | τυ2:0] pr. ατυא | ααηκιαηεαIa 506 (60) | κιααη ααηηH δ (Ψ | ααη pr. ε Ia δ (808): εαηIb 365 (214).
4-11. “Counsel and warning”
4. ἐάη λα] Cf. 3Jn_1:3; Luk_23:8. We may compare also St. Paul’s use of εχρσενin the opening verses of eight of his Epistles. It is part of the usual order of epistolary composition to strike first the note of praise or thankfulness. The aorist is probably not epistolary, the contrast of ννin ver. 5 makes it almost certain that it refers to past time.ερκ] The connection of this word with ἐάη shows that we have here one of the instances, of which there are several in the N. T., which prove that in certain words the perfect is in this period beginning to lose its special force, though the process has not yet gone so far as is often maintained. Cf. Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 44, who regards the usage as confined in the N.T. to a few forms, ἔχκ, ελφ, ἑρκ, ερκ,γγν. To distinguish in this verse between the initial moment (ἐάη) and the ground of it which still continues is precarious.
A comparison of 3Jn_1:3 suggests that the information which caused his joy came to the Elder through travelling brethren who, perhaps from time to time (cf. πρπτῦτς brought him news of the sister Church. There is no suggestion of an earlier visit of his own to the Church to which he is now writing. In that case he would probably have used the aorist.
ἐ τντκω συ He cannot praise the whole Church without distinction. All the members of the community had not remained faithful to the “truth.” If “many” had not themselves gone out into the world as deceivers (ver. 7), many had listened to the seductive teaching of such deceivers. It seems probable that even the majority had been led astray.
πρπτῦτςἐ ἀηεᾳ Cf. ver. 1, and 3Jn_1:4. The “truth” corresponds to perfection in every sphere of being.
κθςἐτλνἐάοε πρ τῦπτό] Cf. Joh_10:17 f. δὰτῦόμ ὁπτρἀαᾷὅιἐὼτθμ τνψχνμυ ἵαπλνλβ ατν οδὶ ἦε ατνἀʼἐο, ἀλ ἐὼἐὼτθμ ατνἀʼἐατῦ ἐοσα ἔωθῖα ατν κὶἐοσα ἔωπλνλβῖατν τύη τνἐτλνἔαο πρ τῦπτό μυ Cf. Joh_12:49; 1Jn_3:23. The phrase ἐτλνλβῖ is used elsewhere in the N. T.; cf. Act_17:15; Col_4:10. Dom Chapman’s ingenious suggestion, that the meaning of this verse should be determined by the passage quoted from Jn. 10., breaks down, as Prof. Bartlet has shown, on a point of grammar. The present participle (πρπτῦτς could not be used in such a sense. Men could hardly be said to continue in the exercise of the “remarkable virtue” of martyrdom. The command referred to here must be either the “new commandment” to love as Christ loved (cf. 1Jn_4:21), which perhaps suits ver. 5 best, or the commandment to faith and love; cf. 1Jn_3:23, κὶατ ἐτνἡἐτλ ατῦ ἵαπσεσμντ ὀόαιτῦυο ατῦἸσῦΧιτῦκὶἀαῶε ἀλλυ, κθςἔωε ἐτλνἡῖ. On the whole the latter suits the whole context better.
λα] om. Ib δ (440): + μγλςIsa_65 (317) | ερκ] ερνIa δ (?) K306 (119) | συ μυIa 70 (505) | πρπτυτς post. αηεαO 46 (154): πρπτυτ 40. 67. 69. 101. 180 Iscr | κθςετλν secundum mandatum quod arm. | κθς + κιIa 70 (505) | εαοε] εαο א13. 28. An accidental error (? from Joh_10:18) | πρ] αοA 73 | τυ om. B.
5. νν The adverb is temporal. Cf. ver. 4, ἐάη.
ἐωῶσ Κρα If ἐωᾶ has the special force of suggesting some sort of equality of position between the two parties concerned (“in the exercise of the full privilege of Christian fellowship,” Wsct.), the emphasis is laid on the words οχὡ ἐτλν The Elder who has the right to command merely grounds a personal request, as between equals, on the old command laid on both alike by the Master. If, however, the special meaning of ἐωᾶ is to be found in the emphasis which it lays on the person addressed, as opposed to the thing asked (ατῖ), then Κραis the emphatic word. He can ask in full confidence of the “Elect Lady” that which is no new command, pleading for the fulfilment of the old commandment laid on her and on all by the Lord. But ἐωᾶ was the natural word to use. Cf. Oxyrh. Pap. 2:292, ἠώηαδ κὶἙμα τνἀεφνδὰγατῦἀηεσα σιπρ τύο.
εχμν The writer includes himself and all Christians among the recipients of the command. There is no need to limit his application of the first person plural to those who originally heard the command given.
ἵαἀαῶε ἀλλύ] These words should probably be taken, not as dependent on ἐωῶ but as defining the ἐτλ. The instances of the purely definitive ἵαhave been collected before.
εωω εωωεIa 101. 7f, 65 (40) boh-cod. | γαω σικιη B K L P al. pler. cat. sah. Thphyl. Oec.] κιη γαω σιאA 5. 13. 31. 68 dscr vg. cop. Lcif. | γαω] γαω64. 65. 66. 106 dscr * al. uix. mu. arm. aeth. | κιη] inc. sahb | αλ] + ετλνא: + ετλνπλινsyrp | εχμνאA] εχμνB K L P al. pler.: εοε 31. 38. 68 ascr al. fere. 20 | ια pr. αλ δ (?).
6. ατ ἐτν…ἵα Cf. 1Jn_5:3, 1Jn_3:23. In the first Epistle the love which is said to consist in the “keeping” of His commandments is more clearly defined as the love of God. Here it is left undefined. The immediate context (ἵαἀαῶε ἀλλυ) suggests that the writer is thinking especially of Christian brotherly love. The highest expression of this love is found in obedience to all the commands (however variously expressed) which God has enjoined in regulation of the relations between brethren. The clearest expression of love is obedience to the will of God, so far as He has revealed His will in definite precepts. It is quite in the writer’s style to make the more absolute statement, even if he is thinking particularly of a special application.
ατ ἣἐτλ ἐτν The order of the words, if this is the true text, lays stress on ἡἐτλ. This is the one command in which all precepts are summed up.κθςἠοστ] If the reading ἵακθςis correct, the ἵαwhich precedes ἐ ατ must be resumptive. Cf. 1Jn_3:20, according to a possible interpretation of that verse. The omission of ἵαcertainly appears to be an attempt at simplification. In either case the clause must be taken with what follows, and regarded as thrown forward for the sake of emphasis.
ἵα…πρπττ] In order to avoid the appearance of tautology most commentators interpret ἐ ατ as referring to ἀάη the main subject of the verse. It would be tempting to refer it to the subject of the sentence ἀηεα(ver. 4). The one command is that we should walk in truth as we have heard it from the beginning. This would suit the following verse. But the more natural reference is to the command. Cf. the Vulgate rendering in eo (sc. mandato). If this is possible, the emphasis must be on πρπτῖ and κθςἠοστ. The command which sums up all the precepts, which men show their love in obeying, is the command to active obedience to God’s will as it has been revealed from the beginning of the Christian life, to “abide” in what they have always known, and to let it regulate their whole conduct and life.
κι…ααη om. aeth. | ατυ τυθ Ia 70 (505) | ατ 20] pr. et arm. boh-ed. | ηετλ] post ετνא(+ατυ L P al. pler. ugcle et. demid. harl. tol. sah. cop. arm. Lcif. Thphyl. Oec. | κθς πρπττ] ut incedamus in hoc quod audiuistis antiquitus aeth. | κθςB ñP al. pler. syrbodl et p Lcif. Thphyl. Oec] pr. ιαאA K 13. 31. 73. al. mu. cat. vg. sah. cop. arm. | ια20] om. K 13 al. mu. cat. vg. sah. boh. (uid.) arm. | ε ατ] om. Ia 175 (319) | πρπττ] πρπτιεL 13 al. aliq. Thphyl.: πρπτστ א incedamus arm-codd. boh-ed.
7. ὅι gives the reason for the preceding ἵαἐ ατ πρπττ. If this refers to love, the reason given must be either (1) that the presence of such false teachers as are here described is likely to prove destructive to the exercise of mutual love among Christians, or (2) that their teaching, in denying the reality of the Incarnation, cuts away the whole foundation of Christian love as called out by the great act of love in which God expressed His love for the world. But both these interpretations are forced, and the contents of this verse point to a different interpretation of ver. 6, that, namely, which throws the emphasis on the word πρπτμν command to mutual love grounded on true faith must be obeyed so as to find expression in action and conduct (πρπτῖ).Otherwise the forces which make against obedience will be too strong. Many have joined the world, and their power to lead astray is great.πάο] Cf. 1Jn_2:26, τνπαώτνὑᾶ, and the accusation brought against the Lord by some of the crowd in Joh_7:12, παᾷὸ ὄλν cf. also Justin Martyr’s λολνν substantive does not occur in the Johannine writings except in this verse. The verb is fairly common in the Apocalypse.
ἐῆθν Cf. 1Jn_4:1, πλο ψυορφτιἐεηύαι εςτνκσο. The verb probably does not refer to the excommunication or withdrawal of the false teachers (contrast 1Jn_2:19, ἐ ἡῶ ἐῆθν It suggests the idea that these deceivers have received their mission from the Evil One, in whose power “the whole world lieth.”
ο μ ὁοοονε] The subjective negative is naturally used when a class is described and characterized. They are distinguished by their refusal to confess the truth of the Incarnation.
Ἰσῦ Χιτνἐχμννἐ σρί Cf. 1Jn_4:2 ff., esp ὃὁοοε Ἰσῦ Χιτνἐ σρὶἐηυόα of which the present passage is almost certainly a reminiscence; cf. the notes on the earlier passage. The chief difference is in the tense of the participle. By the use of ἐχμννinstead of ἐηυόαthe confession is taken out of all connection with time and made timeless. In the First Epistle stress was laid on the historical fact and its permanent consequences. Here the writer regards it as a continuous fact. The Incarnation is not only an event in history. It is an abiding truth. It is the writer’s view that humanity has been taken up into the Deity. The union is permanent and abiding. His view as to the exact difference in the relation of the Logos to the world and to mankind, which was brought about by the Incarnation, is not so clear. All creation was “life in Him.” Before the Incarnation “He came to His own.” But it is clear that he regarded it as a completely new revelation of what human nature was capable of becoming, and as establishing the possibility for all future time of a more real union between God and man. The Incarnation was more than a mere incident, and more than a temporary and partial connection between the Logos and human nature. It was the permanent guarantee of the possibility of fellowship, and the chief means by which it is brought about.1
οτςκτλ Cf. 1Jn_2:22 and 18. The coming of Antichrist is fulfilled in the sum-total of all the evil tendencies in the work and influence of those who refuse to confess “Jesus Christ come in flesh.”ὁπάο] The deceiver, par excellence, known as Antichrist in popular expectation. As in the First Epistle, the writer uses the term as the convenient expression of the evil tendencies of his time. He thus spiritualizes the popular idea, but he nowhere throws any light on the general character or the details of the popular legend. The use of the plural in some Latin and Syriac authorities, supported by one or two cursives, bears witness to the difficulties felt by those who did not easily understand the drift of his language.
εηθν(-θνΑ אA B al. plus15 cat. vg. (et. am. fu. demid. harl. Bed. m8 tol. prodierunt, Lcif. progressi sunt) sah. syrbodlet p arm. Ir. Ps. Chr.] εσλο K L P al. pler. Thphyl. Oec. Clearly a correction caused by the εςwhich follows. The form found in A is probably original | ο μ οοοονε] ομ οοοω Ia 200f (83) | εχμνν om. Isa_55* (236) Ib 209f (386) | σρι + ε τςοκοοοε ῙΧ̄εχμνννσριIb396-398 (-) K51δ (17) | οτς…ατχιτς hii fallaces et antechristi sunt m 8: isti sunt fallaces et antichristi Lcif.: hi sunt seductores et antichristi syrp mg: οτιεσνο παο κιο ατχιτι 70, 7 (505) Ic 258 (56).
8. βέεεἑυος Cf. Mar_13:9, βέεεὑεςἑυος 1Co_16:10, βέεεἵαἀόω γντιπὸ ὑᾶ: and for the form of expression, 1Jn_5:21, φλξτ ἑυά “The use of the active with the reflexive pronoun …emphasizes the duty of personal effort.”
ἵαμ ἀοέηεκτλ The reading of B, etc., ἀοέηεἠγσμθ—ἀοάηε is almost certainly the true text. The other variants are easily explained as attempts to reduce this reading to uniformity, by using either the first or the second person throughout.
ἠγσμθ] Cf. Joh_6:27, Joh_6:28, ἐγζσε…τνβῶι τνμνυα: and for the thought of the reward, Joh_4:36, ἤηὁθρζνμσὸ λμάε κὶσνγικρὸ εςζὴ αώιν ἵαὁσερνὁο χίῃκὶὁθρζν Perhaps these passages offer a more probable source for the ideas of this verse than the quotation from Rth_2:12, ἀοία Κρο τνἐγσα συ γνιοὁμσό συπήη πρ Κρο θο Ἰρή, πὸ ὅ ἦθςππιέα ὑὸτςπέυα ατῦ out of which Dr. Rendel Harris has elaborated his ingenious suggestion that the Lady to whom the Epistle is addressed was “a proselyte, a Gentile Christian, and a widow.” Holtzmann`s criticism of this suggestion as “allzu scharfsinnig” is not unmerited. It may be of interest to notice that the reference to Rth_2:12 is to be found in Wettstein, who has provided or anticipated far more of the best illustrative parallels than the acknowledgments of his work in later Commentaries would lead us to suppose. Wettstein also quotes the Targum, “retribuat tibi Deus retributionem bonam operum tuorum in hoc seculo et erit merces tua perfecta in seculo futuro a Deo Israelis,” and also Xen. Cyr. Exp. vii. ἧε ἄ πήηφρντνμσό.
For ἀοαβνι, cf. Rom_1:27, ἀτμσίνἥ ἔε …ἀοαβννε: Oxyrh. Pap. ii. 298 (p. 299), ἐνδ τ ἄλ ποοελτι…εθω ἀοήψ.
ευοςאA B P Dam. etc.] ατυ ΚΛDam. Ir. Lcif. | αοεηε αοαηεא(αοηθ א A B 5. 13 40, 66**. 68. 73. 137 dscr fscr jscr al. fere. 15 cat. vg. sah. cop. syrutr arm. aeth. Ir. Lcif. Ps. Chr. Isid. Dam. Thphyl com Oeccom] αοεωε, αοαωε K L P 31 al. plu. Thphyl txt Oectxt | εραμθ B (ηγ K L P 31 al. plu. sah. syrp mg Thphyltxt Oectxt] ερααθ אA 5. 13. 40. 66**. 68. 73. 137 d f jscr cat. vg. cop. syrbodl et p txt arm. aeth. Ir. Lcif. Ps.-Chr. Isid. Dam. Thphylcom Oeccom: ερααεακλ K 186 δ (223) | πηη πηη L Dam. (? cf. Joh_1:14). According to Tischendorf’s note it would seem that what is probably the true text is supported by B sah. syrp mg only. See note above.
9. ὁπογνκὶμ μννἐ τ δδχ] The phrase should be taken as a whole. The sarcastic reference of πογνto the claims of false teachers to the possession of a higher knowledge and more progressive intelligence was naturally misunderstood. The πρβίω of the Receptus was the inevitable result. What was not understood had to be corrected into an intelligible commonplace. If this were the true text, we should have to supply as object τνδδχνfrom the following ἐ τ δδχ. But the originality of πογνis obvious. For the use of πογι, Windisch quotes Sir. 20:27, ὁσφςἐ λγι ποξιἑυό.
The non-repetition of the article before μ μννis significant. All “progress” is not condemned, but only such progress as does not fulfil the added condition of “abiding in the teaching.”
ἐ τ δδχ τῦΧιτῦ There is nothing in the context or the usage of the N.T. to suggest that τῦΧιτῦshould be regarded as an objective genitive, the writer meaning by the phrase “the apostolical teaching about Christ.” Such an interpretation would seem to be the outcome of preconceived notions of what the author ought to have meant rather than of what his words indicate. Cf. Joh_18:19, ἠώηα ατν…πρ τςδδχςατῦ Joh_7:16, ἡἐὴδδχ οκἔτνἐὴἀλ τῦπματςμ …γώεα πρ τςδδχς where there is the same transition to the absolute use of the word which is found in this verse. Cf. also Mat_7:28; Mar_4:2; Luk_4:32; Act_2:42; Rev_2:14 (τνδδχνΒλά), 2:15 (τνΝκλιῶ). The “teaching” no doubt includes the continuation of Christ’s work by His Apostles, but it begins in the work of Christ Himself. In the view of the writer all true teaching is but the application of “ὁλγςὁἐό” He did not regard Paul or any other Apostle as the inventor of most of what was characteristic of the Christian Faith as he knew it.
θὸ οκἔε] Cf. 1Jn_2:22f., a passage of which this verse is probably a summary. It is hardly intelligible except in the light of that passage, or of teaching similar to that which it contains. The true revelation of God was given in Jesus Christ. He who rejects the truth about Christ cannot enjoy the fellowship with God which Christ has made possible for men.οτςκὶκτλ Cf. 1Jn_2:23 ff. and notes. As was pointed out in the Introduction and also in the notes on that passage, the words can refer equally well to Gnostic claims to a superior knowledge of the Father, and to Jewish opponents who shared with their Christian antagonists the belief in the God of Israel.
τς(? πς om. Ia 1100 (310) | οπογνאA B 98mg am. fu. harl. sah. boh. aeth.] οπρβιω K L P al. pler. cat. syrbodl et p (qui transgreditur) arm. Eph. Thphyl. Oec.: qui recedit vgcle demid. tol. Lcif. Didlat | μννε τ 10] εμνντ 31 | δδχ 10] ααη13 | τυδδχ 20] om. Ib 365*. 356*. δ260f (214) Ic 353, 174, 506 (58) | τυχιτῡτυθ Isa_55 (236) Ib δ (1149): om. Ib 157 (29) | εε] nouit arm. | μννε τ 20] εμνντ100 | μνν(? 20)] πρμνν δ (440) | ε 20] om. H δ (Ψ δδχ 20 אA B 13. 27, 29, 66**. 68 vg. sah. syrp txt arm. Didlat Fulg.] + eius syrbodl et p Lcif.: + τυχιτυK L P al. pler. cat. boh-ed. aeth. Thphyl. Oec.: (?)+ τυθ Ia δ459 (125) | κιτνπτρ κιτνυο] אB K L P al. pler. cat. vgcle sah. cop. syrbodl et p aeth. Lcif. Did.] κιτνκιῦ τυπ͂ A 13, 31 (om. τν20). 68 am. fu. demid. harl. tol. arm. Fulg. | κιτνυο] post εε Isa_7 (?) Ic 208-116 (307) | εε 20] pr. οκIb δ (440).
10. ε τςἔχτικτλ Cf. Didache xi. I, 2, ὃ ἂ ονἐθνδδξ ὑᾶ τῦαπνατ ποιηέαδξσεατν ἐνδ ατςὁδδσω σρφὶ δδσῃἄλνδδχνεςτ κτλσι μ ατῦἀοστ. There is nothing in the Epistle itself to indicate that this verse “at last discloses the special purpose of the whole Epistle.” Its purpose is clearly to encourage those to whom it is addressed to continue in the active exercise of the faith and love which they had learned from Christ and His Apostles, even to the point of refusing hospitality to those who claimed to come in Christ’s name, but who, in the writer’s opinion, were destroying the work of Christ by their teaching.
The form of the conditional sentence used presents the case as more than a mere possibility, rather as something not unlikely to happen.
ἔχτιπὸ ὑᾶ] The usage of ἔχσα in the Johannine Epistles is confined to the “coming” of Christ, or Antichrist, or of the brethren visiting another Church (3Jn_1:3), or of the Elder paying a formal visit (3Jn_1:10, ἐνἔθ). It is dangerous to read a special sense into common words. But clearly the accompanying condition, κὶτύη τνδδχνο φρι limits the reference to those who claim to come as Christians, and to have a “teaching” to communicate to the members of the Church. The context excludes the idea that the writer is thinking of “casual visits of strangers.” Those to whom he would refuse recognition claim to be received as brethren by fellow-Christians. In his view their conduct has made that impossible.
μ λμάεεεςοκα] For the use of the verb, cf. Joh_1:12, ὅο δ ἔαο ατν 6:21, λβῖ ατνεςτ ποο: 13:20, ὁλμάω ἄ τν πμωἐὲλμάε.χίεν…μ λγτ] Elsewhere in the N.T. χίενis only used in the greeting at the beginning of Epistles (Act_15:23, Act_15:23:26; Jam_1:1). These passages throw no light on the question whether the welcome at meeting or the farewell greeting is meant. There is really nothing in the usage of the word or in the context to decide the question. We may perhaps compare Luk_10:5, εςἣ δ ἂ εσληεοκα πῶο λγτ·Ερν τ οκ τύῳ In the LXX the use of χίενin this sense is confined to the letters contained in the Books of the Maccabees.
ε τςεχτι οιεσρεα Ic 506 (60) | τυη] post δδχν31 | ατ] pr. εIc 114 (335).
11. This verse gives the grounds on which the injunctions of the preceding verse are based. The welcome and greeting contemplated are clearly such as express approval of the character and work of those who claim such reception.
κιωε] always expresses a participation realized in active intercourse. It never denotes a mere passing sharing. Cf. 1Ti_5:22; 1Ti_1 P. 4:13.
τῖ πνρῖ] The form of expression is chosen which lays greatest stress on the adjective. Cf. 1Jn_2:7, 1Jn_2:8, 1Jn_2:1:2, 1Jn_2:3; Joh_10:11.
ο(?)] om. Ia 1402 (219) K2 (S) | λγν post γρK L P al. pler. cat. Ir. Thphyl. Oec. | ατ] om K al. 25 Oec. | πνρι] + ecce praedixi nobis ne in diem Domini condemnemini m63 : + ecce praedixi nobis ut in diem Domini nostri Jesu Christi non confundamini vgsix Such additions are not uncommon in the text of the Speculum.
12, 13. Conclusion
12. ὑῖ] The position of the pronoun is perhaps emphatic. The writer of these Epistles is clearly well acquainted with the circumstances of those whom he addresses.
οκἐολθν One of the more certain instances in the N.T. of the epistolary aorist.
χρο κὶμλνς Cf. the similar phrase in 3Jn_1:13, μλνςκὶκλμυ and 2Co_3:3, ο μλν ἀλ πεμτ. The material denoted is, of course, papyrus, the usual material for correspondence and for the cheaper kinds of books. Contrast 2Ti_4:13, μλσατςμμρνς Jer_43. (36.) 23, ἐέιε πςὁχρη εςτ πργνσα] If there is any difference of meaning between this word and the more usual ἐθῖ into which it has been altered in the Textus Receptus, γνσα seems rather to mean to “pay a visit” (cf. 1Co_2:3, 1Co_16:10, ἵαἀόω γντιπὸ ὑᾶ). The intercourse which the coming makes possible is emphasized rather than the actual fact of coming. But cf. Tebtunis Pap. ii. 298 (p. 421), ἅατ λβῖ σ τῦάμυτ γάμτ γνῖπὸ μ, and also Joh_6:21 (ἐέεοἐὶτςγς 25. πτ ὧεγγνς
σόαπὸ σόα Cf. 3Jn_1:14, and 1Co_13:12, πόωο πὸ πόωο: Num_12:8, σόακτ σόα(פ א פ).
ἵαἡχρ κτλ Cf. 1Jn_1:4; 3Jn_1:4. The object of the proposed visit is the same as that which the writer had in view in writing the First Epistle. It is generally to be noticed that the closest parallels in the Johannine writings are given some slightly different turn in different circumstances, which suggests that in both cases the writer is using his own favourite expressions rather than copying those of another.
εω א A2 B K L P al. pler. cat. vg. etc.] εωא 27. 29. 61. 64. 180 oscr: εχνK51 (17) arm. | υι] post γαεν Rev_3 scr | γαεν γαα Α17. 73 gscr | οκ pr. sed arm. | μλνςκιχρο sah. | αλ επζ אB K L P al. longe. plur. sah. syrbodl et p Thphyl. Oec.] επζ γρA 5. 13 27. 29. 66**. 73 dscr