What Kind of Book? Letter
The letter focuses on truth, which we have from God, and ought to hold to. This truth includes in its compass adherence to the commands of the God who is truth, the chief of which is to love.
| Who wrote it? | Somebody only identified as 'the elder'. The use of the term 'antichrist' might cause one to consider this as being John. |
| Who was it written to or for? | Somebody only identified as 'the chosen lady'. There is room to debate whether this was a reference to an actual person, or to a church. |
| Why was it written? | To admonish continued obedience to the Lord. |
| When was it written? | Cannot be determined, but clearly in a time when heresy was rife. |
| What was happening in the world at that time? | Apparently many cults were springing up. |
| What was happening to God's people at that time? | It is equally clear from the text that the church itself was being troubled greatly by false teachers trying to lead believers off after new teachings. |
| What was happening to the author at that time? | Unclear. |
Read some Background - 3rd Pass (Add some authors)
Harper's:
Generally accepted as having been written by the same author as 1John and 3John, it may have been written by John the apostle, or some other. The time of its writing would be about 90AD, from Ephesus. It seems relatively clear that the 'chosen lady' is indeed a church, as is the 'chosen sister' of the conclusion. As a leader of the early church, the author moves to counter the effects of heresy on his charges.
Read some Background - 3rd Pass (Add some authors)
Hebrew-Greek Key:
The particular heresies being dealt with were those of Gnosticism, which wanted to deny Christ's humanity. If we take the 'chosen lady' to indicate a church, then the indirection would tend to indicate that this was also written during a time of potential persecution.
Read some Background - 3rd Pass (Add some authors)
Matthew Henry:
It should come as no surprise to find a woman addressed by this letter, as women had a prominent place in Christ's ministry both while He was here, and when He had left.Read some Background - 3rd Pass (Add some authors)
Adam Clarke:
It seems pretty clear that all three letters come of a common author, although the status of 2Jn and 3Jn were in debate as late as the 4th century, as possibly not written by John. Quite possibly, the letters had been kept by their recipients' families, and didn't become known until later, when no witness remained to their authenticity. That the church needed to guard itself from false writings shows in the 75 plus gospels, acts, and other books and letters offered to and rejected by the church. 3Jn and 2Peter were so suspect that some forms of the Bible still omit them. [I wonder if this is why Calvin has no comments on them?] However, the letters have - upon examination - been determined to be legitimate. It ought to be noted that all three letters have been quoted by close contemporaries of John. The majority opinion places the author at Ephesus, and the time of writing between 80 and 90 AD, although there is no real internal proof for this.
Read some Background - 3rd Pass (Add some authors)
Barnes' Notes:
Points that confirm the letter(s) to us are both external and internal. Externally, there is the fact that they were known amongst the Alexandrian school; Irenaeus, who was raised under Polycarp, who knew John, attested to these letters as being of John the disciple; the African church of the 3rd century considered it legitimate; even the Syrian church seems to have accepted them after earlier rejection; many councils of the church accepted them; for a time, all doubts of authenticity were removed, to be rekindled in the reformation but since, put aside once more. Such concern over the letter speaks well of the church's efforts to protect it's genuineness. Internally, the style and manner of the letters are consistent with John's writing, although such things could be forged with relative ease by one familiar with his writings. However, there is nothing in the content that would not fit with John's style and message, or would suggest that such was being mimicked to forward another's view; that no appeal is made to his name suggests that it was legitimately him, as he never did so, and that it is not somebody else using his name; the severity of the letters in regard to heretics suggests John's authorship in spite of objections that they don't fit his mild manner. They are actually well matched to the 'son of thunder', who wanted to destroy the unreceptive Samaritan, and forbid the non-disciple who cast out demons; that this seems so out of character to the John we've come to know should argue against its falsity, for one trying to pass himself off as John would not use such an uncharacteristic way of presenting himself. The term 'the elder', itself would seem to apply most distinctly to John - as the aged member of the Asian church moreso than as a reference to any office.
Opinions regarding the 'elect lady' include: that she was a lady named either eclecte or kyria; that it refers to a church; that it refers to a lady who remains nameless; that it refers to Mary, the mother of Jesus. What seems probable given the limited evidence, is that it was indeed addressed to an individual, for the Scripture abounds in naming of specific churches, and a general address to the church at large would not be so mystically wrapped. It seems quite probable that the lady addressed was indeed 'kyria', as all other personal epistles named their recipient, and 'kyria' is not an uncommon name amongst early Christians. All that we know of this person is that she was known to John, had children, and tended to be hospitable to religious teachers.
Canonical authority is based on the evidence that they are indeed John's writings; the precedence of other personal letters being admitted; and their accord with the body of New Testament teaching. Nothing certain can be ascertained regarding the time and place of the letter's writing.
Read some Background - 3rd Pass (Add some authors)
Wycliffe:
The letter appears to have been written to a lady near Ephesus who was well known to her community. A sister of hers having been connected with John's congregation had sons who visited their cousins, making John acquainted with them. Of this he writes
J,F & B:
Early fathers recognized the letters as being John's. Irenaeus quotes 2 John. Clement of Alexandria identifies the 2nd letter as 'written to a certain Babylonian, named the Elect lady.' Various other testimony exists of such like. There are about equal probabilities that the letter is written to the church in Parthian (Babylon) from the church in Asia (as Peter's from Parthian to Asia), or that it was to a lady with a Christian sister. Eusebius tells us that John returned from his exile on Patmos, and became a missionary in Asia Minor. This would date these letters as post-Apocalypse, and place him somewhere in the area of Ephesus.
