Month: Aug 2024

Posted in Exposition

THOUGHTS ON 2 JOHN

Posted on by writtenexposition

INTRODUCTION

The Second Epistle of John, the second shortest book in the New Testament with only 245 Greek words, is a brief letter written in the Greek style that was common in the first century CE and is the only New Testament epistle addressed to a woman. At first sight, 2 John appears to be a personal letter, possibly sent to an individual Christian woman. However, the content of the letter is general enough to suggest a broader audience. Many scholars believe that ‘elect lady’ is a cryptic reference to a Christian church or community, rather than an actual person.

Traditionally, the letter is attributed to the Apostle John, who is thought to have written it from Ephesus, possibly to a Christian community in Asia Minor c. 80-95 CE. The letter mentions the Father and Jesus Christ but does not refer directly to the Holy Spirit. Like 1 John, its major themes are ‘love’ and ‘truth.’

The epistle divides as follows:

1-3 Address and salutation

4-6 Spiritual life: following God’s commands.

7-11 Spiritual dangers: repudiating deceivers.

12-13 Closing greeting.

ADDRESS AND SALUTATION (1-3)

(1) The author of the letter does not provide his name but instead identifies himself as ‘the presbyter’ or ‘elder,’ The definite article (‘the’) would suggest that he was a well-known figure among his recipients. The word ‘elder’ means an older man but in the early church it also carried the idea of maturity, dignity and authority. It signified a church leader/overseer.

For further reading see my earlier posts on presbuteros in the Pastoral Epistles:

(1) THE PRESBYTER-BISHOP IN THE PASTORAL EPISTLES – INTRODUCTION

(2) THE PRESBYTER-BISHOP IN THE PASTORAL EPISTLES – QUALIFICATIONS

(3) THE PRESBYTER-BISHOP IN THE PASTORAL EPISTLES – CONCLUSION AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

The letter opens with a greeting from ‘the elder’ to ‘the elect lady and her children.’ In vv. 1 and 5 ‘lady’ (kuria) is the feminine form of ‘lord’ (kurios). She is described as ‘elect’ (eklektḗ). Possibly the writer is using this designation to respectfully address a woman of distinction (something like ‘dear lady’). If so, she is a Christian woman who has children (v.4) and her own house (v.10).

Note, however, that both words may be proper names. Electa meaning ‘chosen, selected or excellent’ and Kyria meaning ‘strong, valued, essential, noble.’ The letter may therefore be written to a woman called Electa Kyria. Notice that Rom 16:13 has a similar masculine example that includes ‘elect.’

Various interpretations of ‘elect lady’ have been suggested, such as:

  • the lady Electa (it is, however, unlikely that one particular woman would be known and loved by all Christians or that two sisters in the same family would be named Electa, see v.13).
  • the noble Kyria
  • Dear lady – a courteous greeting.
  • Elect lady – the Christian church at large.
  • Elect lady (and your children) – a local church or Christian community (and its members).

Given the context of Roman hostility towards Christianity at the time, the latter interpretation seems likely. By using symbolic language, the author may have been attempting to protect the identities of both himself and his audience.

If the ‘elect lady’ is indeed figuratively a church then her children (téknois) are her spiritual offspring or members. Church members are referred to as ‘children’ several times in 1 John (1 Jn 3:1, 2, 10; 5:2). John says that he loves them (‘whom’ is plural) ‘in truth.’ This means that he’ ‘really’ or ‘truly’ loves them.

Not only is it a church that John loves but it is also well-known – because it is loved by all who know the truth. John here associates himself with all who ‘have known’ the truth. The perfect tense conveys two ideas: an action that has taken place in the past and its results that continue in the present. In John’s thinking he and all who know the truth are orthodox in their beliefs unlike the deceivers in vv.7-11. ‘Truth’ is mentioned five times in 2 John, all occurrences are in the first four verses.

(2) John expands upon v.1 and says that he loves the lady and her children ‘on account of the truth.’ He does not only love her because she is well-respected but also because they share the truth. This truth dwells (abides, remains) in us and will be with us forever. The emphasis is on the words ‘with us.’ This may be an indirect reference to the Holy Spirit (Jn 14:17; 15:26; 1 Jn 3:24; 5:7). The indwelling power makes us capable of Christian love.

(3) The salutation concludes with a blessing, expressing confidence that the recipients will receive grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. God will support them (grace) and have compassion and pity on them (mercy) should they have to endure undeserved affliction. Grace and mercy will produce well-being (peace). These three things are associated with truth and love.

The formula ‘grace, mercy and peace’ occurs in other New Testament letters (1 Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2; Tit 1:4). John says that grace, mercy and peace come from God the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father. The expression ‘Son of the Father’ is unique to 2 John.

See: THE IDENTITY OF JESUS AS ‘SON OF’

The repetition of truth and love from v.1 marks the end of the opening salutation.

SPIRITUAL LIFE: FOLLOWING GOD’S COMMANDS (4-6)

(4) The next section shifts to a discussion about the spiritual life of the recipients. Having referred to truth and love at the end of v.3 the author takes these up as themes in vv.4-6. John expresses joy upon hearing that some members of the community are ‘walking in truth,’ living in accordance with God’s commands (1 Kgs 2:4; 2 Kgs 20:3; Psa 86:11; Isa 38:3; 3 Jn 3, 4). However, his use of ‘some’ suggests that not all are steadfast in their faith, indicating possible divisions or disagreements among the believers. Verse 4 attributes the command to live in the truth to the Father, not to the Lord Jesus Christ.

(5-6) Verses 5-6 make it clear that the command to live in the truth includes the obligation to love others. John emphasises the importance of love to resolve issues, reminding them that they are to love one another, a command which has been central since the beginning of Christianity. It is the new command which in the Fourth Gospel was issued by Jesus (Jn13:34; 15:12-17) but would have come from God (Jn 7:16-17). It is also attributed to God in 1 Jn 3:23. Love, John argues, is the foundation of all God’s commands.

‘Command’ appears four times in vv. 4-6. It appears three times in the singular; in v.4 (‘a command’), in v.5 (‘a new command’) and in v.6 (‘the command’). In v.6 it is in the plural (‘his commands’). The singular may perhaps refer to the specific command to love but the plural to all God’s commands.

Again emphasizing that the command is from the beginning, John in v.6 underlines the fact that they should love one another. He does this by reversing the order of the ideas of command and love; in v.5 command is followed by love, in v.6 love is followed by command. In v.6 he also uses ‘this’ and ‘that’ to provide emphasis: ‘this is love…that we should walk after his commandments.’ Obedience to the command to love is obligatory.

SPIRITUAL DANGERS: REPUDIATING DECEIVERS (7-11)

(7) John then moves on to warn against spiritual dangers, specifically false teachers who may lead believers astray. These ‘deceivers,’ as he calls them, have abandoned true doctrine and are opposing Christ, making them ‘antichrists.’ John cautions his readers to be vigilant so that they do not lose what they have worked for, but instead receive their full reward.

John links vv.7-11 with the preceding section vv.4-6 by the word hóti meaning ‘for’ or ‘because.’ He moves from rejoicing that his readers walk in truth to warning them against the malign influence of people who might mislead them into holding false beliefs. He claims that many deceivers have abandoned true doctrine and  ‘defected’ into the world (1 Jn 2:18-19). Switching from plural (‘many deceivers’) to singular (‘a deceiver’) John brands such a person as the deceiver and the antichrist. A deceiver is someone who figuratively wanders from the truth and leads others astray. An antichrist is someone who is actively opposed to Christ.

John says of the deceivers that ‘they confess not,’ – it is worth observing that often what people do not say can be more deceptive than what they actually do express.

Deceivers do not acknowledge ‘Jesus Christ coming in the flesh.’ ‘Coming’ (erchomenon) is a present active participle. What does John mean by this brief description of their heresy? Is he referring to Christ’s first or second coming, i.e. to his incarnation or to his parousia?

The usual interpretation takes this present active participle as meaning that the historical Jesus Christ came in the flesh and continues to remain in the flesh, i.e. he never stopped being human (see Patterson & Kelley, Women’s Evangelical Commentary NT, p. 879). It is thus a similar thought to 1 John 4:2 which is more precise as it has a perfect participle (elḗlythota):  ‘Jesus Christ having come in the flesh.’

Or, does the present participle have a future meaning? If it does then the deceivers either deny Christ’s future parousia or that it will be ‘in the flesh.’

(8) Since many deceivers are out and about John issues a strong warning to his readers. He instructs them using the imperative: ‘watch yourselves’ (‘be vigilant’ or ‘protect yourselves’). Self-effort is necessary, the believers must always be on the alert. This is because doctrinal error can result in loss. John presents this possibility negatively and then positively:

Do not lose what we have worked for. This refers to the missionary work and evangelistic effort that John and others have undertaken. It would be sad to lose what has been accomplished (cp. Gal 4:11; Phil 2:16).

That you may receive a full reward. This refers to the reward for service that believers will receive (Mt 5:12; Mk 9:41; Jn 4:35-36; 1 Cor 3:8; Rev 11:18; 22:12). Acceptance of false teaching will diminish that reward. John therefore warns them against complacency as he wants them to receive their reward ‘in full’ i.e. without anything lacking.

(9) Should someone, however, ‘transgress’ (run ahead, go beyond, make progress) and not remain in the doctrine of Christ then that person has never been saved. He may think that he is progressive but he does not have (possess) God. John draws a contrast between ‘whoever abideth not in the doctrine of Christ’ and ‘he that abideth in the doctrine of Christ.’ Someone with a wrong view of Christ has neither Christ nor the Father whereas someone who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both.

Whether the genitive (‘of’) is subjective (teaching from Christ) or objective (teaching about Christ) is matter of great debate. Either view makes sense but in view of the emphasis in 1 and 2 John on what is ‘from the beginning’ (1 Jn 1:1; 2:7, 13, 14, 24; 3:8, 11; 2 Jn 5, 6) it seems more likely that Christ’s own teaching is foremost in John’s mind, i.e. the genitive is subjective.

(10-11) CONTAMINATION BY ASSOCIATION

‘If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine…’ The two verbs ‘come’ and ‘bring’ together suggest the possibility that people are travelling about with the deliberate intention of promoting their false teaching. John may be aware of some who have already set out to visit the ‘elect lady’ for that purpose. He uses further imperatives: ‘do not receive’ and ‘do not greet’ to issue a clear instruction to reject false teachers and avoid any association with them. This is practical advice. Using the repeated negative ‘do not’ for emphasis, he warns the believers against what D. Moody Smith (1 2 & 3 John : Interpretation Commentary, p.145) aptly terms ‘contamination by association.’

Although hospitality was strongly encouraged in the early church (Acts 16:15; Rom 12:13; 1 Tim 3:2; 5:9-10; Tit 1:8; Heb 13:2; 1 Pet 4:9) the presence of false teachers in believers’ houses would make it easier for false teaching to be spread, especially since church services were usually held in homes.

Vv.10-11 make it clear that an individual Christian or a church has a responsibility to combat the spread of error by refusing to welcome false teachers into ‘the house’ or even to greet them cordially. The reason John gives for this is that anyone who welcomes and supports false teachers becomes complicit in their wrongdoing. Such a person ‘fellowships’ or ‘partners’ with the false teachers in their evil deeds. A similar thought is expressed by Paul in 1 Tim 5:22 where the same verb (koinōnéṓ̄) is used: ‘neither be partaker of other men’s sins.’ This apparent intolerance advocated by John demonstrates the seriousness with which the apostles regarded false teaching about the person of Christ. Such doctrine would undermine the true Christian faith so they were not prepared to permit or overlook it.

CLOSING GREETING (12-13)

John closes his letter by expressing his wish to visit in person. He has so much to write to them that he ‘did not wish’ to set out his thoughts on paper (lit. papyrus) and ink (lit. what is black). He looks forward to face-to-face (lit. mouth to mouth) communication that will bring ‘completed joy’ (see 1 Jn 1:4). He also sends greetings from the ‘offspring of your elect sister,’ which, if ‘elect lady’ in v.1 is indeed a metaphor for a church, suggests another Christian community sending regards.

SUMMATION

Though brief, 2 John is rich with meaning and insight into the early Christian church. It emphasises the importance of love and truth, warns against false teaching and teachers, and underscores the need for vigilance. Written in a time of persecution and uncertainty, this letter serves as both encouragement and a guide to maintaining the integrity of the Christian community.

Posted in Exposition

EZEKIEL 11 – THE GLORY DEPARTS

Posted on by writtenexposition

INTRODUCTION

Ezekiel 11 is the last of four chapters (8-11) that describe Ezekiel’s second vision. The main topic of that vision is the gradual departure of YHWH’s kabod (Glory) from Solomon’s temple and the city, leaving Jerusalem without divine protection. It begins with a change of location for Ezekiel when in vision he is transported to the east gate of the temple where he observes a meeting of ‘the princes of the people.’

The bulk of the chapter consists of two disputation speeches. Put simply, a disputation speech presents one particular viewpoint and contradicts or refutes it by presenting the other side of the argument. There are ten such speeches in the book of Ezekiel (11:1-12; 11:14-21; 12:21-25; 12:26-28; 18:1-32; 20:32-34; 33:10-11; 33:17-20; 33:23-29; 37:11-14).

Chapter 11 closes with the departure of the kabod, Ezekiel’s return to Chaldea in vision and confirmation that he communicated details of the vision to his fellow-exiles.

There are two main divisions:

1-13 CONDEMNATION

14-25 RESTORATION

Each of these sections contains a disputation oracle.

CONDEMNATION (1-13)

(1) Ezekiel is transported to the eastern gate of the temple where he observes a meeting of twenty-five members of the Jerusalem elite. This is the same number of individuals as in 8:16 but cannot be the same men. The sun-worshippers in the inner court of the temple in chapter 8 would have been priests whereas those meeting at the east gate are called the ‘princes of the people.’ They are not priests, they are politicians. Two of the most notable are mentioned by name: Jaazaniah the son of Azur and Pelatiah the son of Benaiah.

(2-3) The Spirit informs Ezekiel that this group of influential men meets to plot evil and is responsible for giving harmful counsel to the Jerusalemites. Verse 3 gives an example of this counsel: ‘it is not near; let us build houses, this city is the caldron, and we are the meat.’ The Preacher’s Commentary says that: ‘the Hebrew wording of their boast is difficult to understand. It says literally, “Not build houses near? It is the pot, we are the meat!”

The exact meaning escapes us but obviously it is an arrogant assertion of confidence that goes against what YHWH was revealing through Jeremiah at the time. The elders are insisting that all is well while Jeremiah prophesies imminent destruction at the hands of the Chaldeans (Jer 37:14 – 38:4).

The following ideas might be conveyed in the proverb:

  • ‘All is well. Now is the time for us to build houses and restore the material damage done by Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians when Jerusalem under King Jehoiachin was besieged a few years ago (597 BCE).’
  • ‘We who live in Jerusalem are like meat in a cooking pot. We are the best bits. The exiles in Babylon are the offal, they have been thrown away. We are in a city that is under YHWH’s protection, the exiles in Babylon are obviously under his judgement.’
  • ‘Even if the Babylonians do attack it is much safer for us to be in the pot (within Jerusalem’s city walls) than outside it.’

In the verses that follow (especially vv. 7-12) their opinions are shown to be false.  Note that in Ezekiel caldron (siyr) occurs only in chapter 11 and in chapter 24. The latter contains the parable (or allegory) of the cooking pot.

(4-6) In the vision Ezekiel is commanded to prophesy and is empowered by the Spirit to speak YHWH’s words. They reveal that the leaders’ thoughts, intentions, motives and hypocrisy are known to the Lord. They, the leaders of the people, have been responsible for widespread violence and death in the city. This may refer to the slaughter carried out by the six executioners earlier in the vision (9:5-7).

(7-12) In this disputation speech by the Lord God (Adonai YHWH) the analogy of the caldron (cooking pot) as used by the leaders of Jerusalem is refuted. The city of Jerusalem is the cooking pot but YHWH asserts that dead bodies, not living people, is the meat. The leaders may think that the pot guarantees safety but they will be driven out of it to face what they fear most: a violent death by the sword. YHWH will remove them from Jerusalem and hand them over to foreign enemies who will slay them at Israel’s border. Notice the double occurrence of ‘I will bring you out’ (7, 9). This is language reminiscent of the Exodus. The imminent ‘bringing out,’ however, will not be to salvation but death. Notice also the double mention of ‘border’ (10,11).

YHWH reiterates (vv.11) that the city will not provide safety (‘be a pot for you’) and emphasizes that the leaders will be judged. The judgement will reveal YHWH’s sovereignty and lordship (‘ye shall know that I am the Lord’ vv.10,12). The Jerusalemites (represented by their leaders) will face consequences because: a) they have not followed the Lord’s decrees b) they have not kept his law, but c) they have adopted pagan practices. We learn from 2 Kgs 25:4-7 and Jeremiah 52:7-10 that what Ezekiel prophesied concerning the leaders of Judah literally came to pass.

(13) In Ezekiel’s vision the threat of impending judgement is emphasized by immediate judgement upon Pelatiah who drops dead while Ezekiel is prophesying. We do not know if Pelatiah really dies in Jerusalem at that time or if his death is just enacted in Ezekiel’s vision. Ezekiel’s reaction to this episode in the vision is one of concern that a remnant in Israel should survive. This is similar to a previous reaction by him in chapter 9: And it came to pass, while they were slaying them, and I was left, that I fell upon my face, and cried, and said, Ah Lord GOD! wilt thou destroy all the residue of Israel in thy pouring out of thy fury upon Jerusalem? Ezekiel 9:8. De Vries (The Kābôd of Yhwh in the Old Testament, p.281) observes that: ‘Whereas in 9:8b he had called this out as a question, in 11:13b it is actually a statement: the interrogative particle is lacking this time.’

LOUD VOICE

In the second vision the Jerusalemites cry with a ‘loud voice’ (8:8), YHWH cries with a ‘loud voice’ (9:1) and Ezekiel cries with a ‘loud voice’ (11:13).

RESTORATION 14-25

The hope that a remnant will survive is addressed in the following section of the chapter. The prevailing view is turned on its head. There will indeed be a remnant but it will not arise from Jerusalem, it will come from the Jehoiachin exiles who are already in Babylon. In this section we have the first of three prophecies of restoration delivered by Ezekiel before the fall of Jerusalem (11:16-21; 16:60-63; 20:33-44). After he hears about the fall of Jerusalem (33:21) Ezekiel utters further prophecies of restoration in chapters 34, 36, 37 and 39.

(14-16) Still in vision the word of YHWH came to Ezekiel and quotes what the inhabitants of Jerusalem say about the exiles: ‘Get you far from the LORD: unto us is this land given in possession.’ The Jerusalemites have the notion that it is the exiles who are far from the Lord and that the ancestral land they have left behind now belongs to those remaining in the city. The exiles referred to are the royals and professional people (including Ezekiel) who were deported to Babylonia a few years earlier by Nebuchadnezzar in the Jechoiachin Exile of 597 BCE (2 Kgs 24:8-17). As a result of that deportation the people of Judah became divided into two groups; those in exile with Jehoiachin in Babylon and ‘the people that were left in the land’ (Jer 40:6) of Judah under Zedekiah. It was very much a ‘them and us’ situation although ongoing contact between the two groups (e.g. Jeremiah’s letter to the exiles – Jer 29) did occur.

Throughout Israel’s history the concepts of deity, kingship, people and land have been closely linked. In spite of the fact that they are idolaters it suits the Jerusalemites financially to claim allegiance to YHWH and promote the view that the exiles had been deported far away because he was angry with them. They said that YHWH had expelled them because of their wickedness and that therefore their ancestral land was forfeit. The Jerusalemites claimed that YHWH favoured them rather than the exiles because they still had the land, a functioning royal court, and (YHWH’s presence in) the temple. They must therefore be the remnant.

The exiles are described as Ezekiel’s ‘brethren’ and ‘kindred.’ As prophet to the exiles (3:11) Ezekiel very much identified with them and viewed them as family. In 33:21 and 40:1 he refers to the exile as ‘our captivity.’

Ezekiel’s prophetic answer to the Jerusalemites arrogation of land to themselves is that, contrary to expectations. YHWH has deliberately sent the exiles to Babylon because he controls history; the Babylonians carry out his will. The temple might be in Jerusalem (soon to be destroyed), but the exiles would have access to YHWH because he would be a ‘little sanctuary’ (or some suggest: ‘sanctuary for a little while’) for the exiles, in Babylon or wherever else they dwelt.

This is highly significant as it means all the benefits of YHWH’s presence, protection and favour transfer from those still dwelling in the land to the exiles.

(17-20) In this disputation oracle (vv.14-21) YHWH reveals that the exile will be temporary. A remnant will indeed return to the land of Israel but it will be from the Babylonian exiles, NOT from the dwellers in Jerusalem. Those who come back will clear the land of all the idols and images (7:20; 8:3) that defile it. That they should do so will be evidence of a change of heart. This change will be brought about by YHWH himself. He promises to replace their heart of stone with a heart of flesh so that they will be receptive to what YHWH wants. He will ‘take away their stony, stubborn heart and give them a tender, responsive heart’ (11:19 NLT). The covenant between YHWH and his people will effectively be re-established – ‘they shall be my people, and I will be their God’ – as a result of them keeping the Lord’s regulations and following his commands.

(21) It is not clear who v.21 refers to. Is this a prophecy that some of those who return from the exile will return to or persist in idolatry and therefore receive the consequences of their behaviour? Or is this a warning to the leaders and residents of Jerusalem who are mentioned earlier in the chapter (vv.2-6,15)?

(22-23) The final stage of the vision takes place. The cherubim and wheels take off from the eastern gate of the temple and carry YHWH’s enthroned kabod to the hill to the east of the city (Mount of Olives, Zech 14:4). The judgement can begin, Jerusalem is no longer under YHWH’s protection.

(24-25) The chapter ends with comments by Ezekiel explaining that once the vision ended he was returned to Chaldea by the Spirit of God. He the shared with the exiles what YHWH had shown him. It was a solemn message about the current state of Jerusalem and its impending destruction but one which contained hope of a remnant and a return from captivity. That must have been a great encouragement to his fellow-exiles.