Historical Background

Second and Third John are the shortest “books” in the New Testament, even shorter than Philemon and Jude. Second John is less than three hundred words in Greek, and Third John is less than two hundred. Likely recorded on a single sheet of papyrus, they truly deserve to be called “letters” rather than “treatises,” “essays,” or even “epistles” with that term’s connotations of lengthiness and wide audience.

Second John applies the principles of First John—the tests of true faith—to a specific situation with a specific congregation. That situation involved traveling teachers who did not confess orthodox theology about Jesus. The congregation was not to extend hospitality to them. They should not be invited into “the house” (v. 10), probably meaning the house-church.

Hospitality was crucial in the ancient world and in the early church. Christianity was exploding in the Roman Empire and churches were forming everywhere. Many teacher-missionaries were on the road, but there were no Motel 6s, and inns were often thinly veiled houses of ill-repute, “notoriously dirty and flea-infested and innkeepers were notoriously rapacious” (Barclay, quoted in Stott, The Letters of John, p. 201). Christian hospitality can be seen in the Book of Acts, as Paul stayed in the homes of Lydia in Philippi and Jason in Thessalonica (16:15, 17:7). Travel in the Roman Empire had reached a degree of safety and convenience unknown in the ancient world, and this aided missionaries. This is not to say that transportation possessed anything like modern safety and convenience, but excellent roads kept up by the Roman legions, a common language (Koine Greek), and the pax Romana did enable folks to journey.

So, prophets, evangelists, and teachers were abroad. Some of them followed the teaching of the Apostles but some did not. How were small congregations to know if such-and-such a teacher taught the authoritative Word of God? After all, “many deceivers have gone out into the world” (v. 7) as Jesus had warned (Mark 13:22-23). Congregations were to sift these teachers by their message, the focus of 2 John, and their manner, the focus of 3 John. Similar instruction can be seen in the Didache (“Teaching”), a manual of church life thought to have been written at the end of the first-century. The message of the false teachers concerned the person and work of Jesus. They said that “the Christ” was not “Jesus.” That is, divinity (Christ) could not simultaneously take human nature (Jesus).

The author is “the elder,” probably the Apostle John. His use of this title implies that he was well known to the recipients and that he had fatherly spiritual authority over them. The recipient is “the elect [chosen] Lady.” This could have been an individual, perhaps the patroness or even overseer of a house church, or more likely an entire house church. Personifying cities and countries was common in the ancient world just as today we refer to Mother Russia and Britannia, and personifying the church in female terms was also common (see Eph. 5:22-33; Rev. 21:9; 1 Pet. 5:13; cf. Israel referred to this way—Isa. 52:2).

Sermon Series

Here are two options for designing a series from 2 John. The first is an outline for preaching the whole book in a single sermon, and the second expands each point of the outline for a four-week series.

Option One (whole book)

Sermon Title: No Name, No Gain

Note: The term “name” is shorthand for “Jesus Christ come in the flesh,” and even that phrase is shorthand for the whole gospel story—the identity, incarnation, and sacrifice of Christ for the sins of humanity. Likewise, the term “no gain,” is shorthand to say that anyone who departs from the gospel will not receive a full reward (v. 8). That person does not have God (v. 9), and whoever supports the false teachers takes part in their wickedness (v. 11).

Big Idea: Watch out for false teachers.

Sermon Outline:

True believers walk in love. (4-5)

True believers walk in obedience. (6)

False teachers deny Christ. (7, 9)

So, watch out for false teachers.

Don’t aid them. (10)

Don’t participate in their works. (11)

So you won’t lose what you have. (8)

And you will gain a full reward. (8)

Conclusion: When we walk in the love of Jesus, obedience to Jesus, and the truth about Jesus, our joy is complete. (12)

Option Two (four-week series)

Series Title: Walking in Truth, Running from Error

Text: 2 John 1-3, 6

• Exegetical Idea: The “elder” who loved the “chosen lady” in truth, greets and blessed her.
• Big Idea: Walk in truth.

Text: 2 John 4-6

• Exegetical Idea: The elder rejoiced greatly to find that some of the “children” were walking in love just as they had been commanded from the beginning.
• Big Idea: Walk in love.

Text: 2 John 7, 9

• Exegetical Idea: Deceivers/antichrists are abroad who do abide in the teaching of Christ and do not confess that he has come in the flesh.
• Big Idea: False teachers deny Christ.

Text: 2 John 8, 10

• Exegetical Idea: Therefore, watch yourselves by not believing or aiding the deceivers so that you will not lose your reward or participate in their wicked works.
• Big Idea: Watch out!

Application

The primary application when preaching 2 John grows out of the primary theological theme—hold on to the truth about Christ! “Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God” (v. 9). The elder may have been quoting a catch phrase from the Gnostics who claimed to have “gone ahead” into deep mysteries (gnosis means “knowledge”). But when it comes to Christology we should be conservative not progressive. We do not add to or subtract from Jesus’ message as given to the Apostles. Jude says that we must “contend for the faith that was delivered once for all” (v. 3).

Joseph Smith (Mormonism), Charles Russell (Jehovah’s Witnesses), and Mary Baker Eddy (Christian Science) have “gone ahead” of the Apostles’ teaching. Yet, in a day of pluralism, pragmatism, ecumenism, and tolerance, most people feel that any religion that helps people should be embraced. If a religion helps alleviate suffering we should not focus on the thing that divides us—Jesus! Similarly, some people teach that the great monotheistic religions (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism) all worship the same God; but this teaching sidelines Jesus. The differences between those religions on the second person of the Trinity are vast. A Christ-less Christianity is . . . what?

The issue of Christology is not academic, theoretical, heady, or dusty. It is the heart of the faith and souls hang in the balance. That is why the elder (and we) must be uncompromising in treating the cancer of false teaching. We must reject doctrines of Christ that make him merely a good man or merely a god. We must refuse to support teachers who muddle orthodox Christology.

But “rejecting” and “refusing” feel intolerant and pigheaded to modern people in North America. The following exchange from the Phil Donahue Show (2002)[1] illustrates this. Donahue’s guests were Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, author of Judaism For Everyone, Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and Dr. Michael Brown, president of Israel, the Church, and the Nations Ministries:

Donahue: [to Mohler] Do you believe Jews can go to heaven?

Mohler: Southern Baptists, with other Christians, believe that all persons can go to heaven who come to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. And there is no discrimination on the basis of ethnic or racial or national issues. . . .

Donahue: You cannot possibly look a person in the eye and say, if you don’t come to Jesus, if you don’t change your faith, you’re not going to heaven. Reeks of prejudice, and also stirs the soul to evil behavior, in my opinion. . . .

Boteach: Reverend Mohler, however intelligent of a scholar he may be, is a spiritual Neanderthal with repulsive, revolting views. . . .

Mohler: Well, all I know is that the only way to heaven is through Jesus Christ, and that all who are there come by his grace and mercy alone. There is nothing in us to merit salvation. And so humility has to be the Christian posture.

Donahue: There is nothing humble about telling me I’m [not] going to heaven if I don’t believe in Jesus. That’s not humility. That’s arrogance.

Mohler: It would be if this were our message. But if that is what the Son of God said himself, if that is the truth, then it would be hateful and it would be intolerant not to tell you what we believe to be the truth. I can’t compel anyone to believe in Christ, but I do have the responsibility, with gladness and joy, to share the good news of the gospel.

Brown: Listen, very simply, you want to respect my faith? The core of my belief is that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, and we have to go tell everybody. . . .

Donahue: You can tell me about it. But you can’t stand there righteously and tell me you know what’s good for me. And you sure as hell can’t tell me that there’s only one way for me to get to heaven. Nobody is that smart, nobody. . . .

Boteach: You should be ashamed of yourself and it’s time that you finally change.

The gospel of Christ does not permit us to change. We must contend earnestly for the faith.

But this does not mean that we should be pigheaded. When we drive a theological stake into the ground, we should learn from 2 John. First, notice who is in view. The elder’s “intolerance” is toward teachers, not laypersons. The phrases, “if anyone comes to you” and “bring this teaching” (v. 10) imply that the missionary comes in an official manner. John is talking about authoritative teachers who have “gone ahead” of the Apostles’ message. He is not making a general rule for how we should treat visitors who are not Christians.

Second, notice the action 2 John forbids: extending hospitality to the false teachers. This probably means an official welcome, not simply giving a cup of tea to a door-to-door witness. We should not invite a false teacher into the pulpit or give the “right hand of fellowship.”

Third, notice the issue: heresies related to Christology. The instructions in 2 John should not be applied to any belief we happen to disagree with.

But even if these three considerations soften the harsh command to refuse and reject false teachers, we must remember that the command stands. The glory of the Son and the salvation of your people are at stake, so take your stance as a soul-watcher (Heb. 13:17).

Theological Themes

The “tests” of true faith expounded in 1 John infuse the shorter letters also. Those tests are love, obedience, and orthodox confession about Jesus. True teachers/believers love God and his people, and they obey God’s holy Word. If the traveling teachers despise other believers, or live licentious and selfish lifestyles, reject them!

Of special concern in 2 John is the third test—orthodox confession about Jesus. The word “truth” is used four times in the first three verses. In theological terms, the issue is Christology, and preaching this short letter gives us the perfect opportunity to exalt our Lord and protect our people from false teaching.

Epistles are “task theology,” meaning that they take orthodox doctrine and apply it to specific circumstances. For example, in Philippians two ladies were fighting, so Paul described how Jesus emptied himself (the “kenosis”) and took the form of a servant. From that theology, Paul exhorted the ladies to be humble and selfless. Similarly, poor churches in Palestine were suffering in a famine, so Paul took up an offering in Corinth. The Corinthians should give generously. Why? Because of theology—Christ gave everything to save the lost, so Corinth should give generously to help the helpless.

In 2 John, the problem was not squabbling or famine but false teachers, and the “task” was helping the “chosen lady” identify them and withhold aid to them. They could be spotted by their stance on Jesus. An early form of Gnosticism was circulating, stating that spirit and matter were entirely separate. Spirit was good and matter was base. Thus, the proto-Gnostic teachers argued that the Christ (spiritual, divine) could not be joined with Jesus (flesh, human). God’s pure Spirit would not dwell in a cesspool, would he?

John answers with the passion of one who loves truth and who guards souls: Yes! That is the gospel. God became human, and the Infinite died. Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ. In theology this is called the hypostatic union. Jesus is the God-man. The Nicene Creed puts it this way: “God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made . . . who came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man.” The false teachers did not believe this. As the elder states, they “do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh” (v. 7).

Two other theological themes orbit the sun of Christology. The first is Satan/antichrist and the spiritual warfare they wage. The devil and his emissaries maliciously oppose Christ and his church, so they deprecate Christ and lure his bride from the truth.

The second is eschatology, specifically the doctrine of rewards. Like the theme of spiritual warfare, this theme is mentioned but not developed at any length in 2 John. A one-papyrus-sheet letter did not permit anything longer, yet the theme of rewards motivates the elder’s pastoral concern. He says that we must watch ourselves, “so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward” (v. 8). (Note: in Mark 13:23 Jesus uses the same words—“watch yourselves,” or “be on your guard”—in a discourse about false teachers who will arise in the last days). The doctrine of rewards is hazy in Scripture, but Jesus talked about it often to motivate faithful stewardship.

My Encounter with 2 John

That is what motivates me to study and preach 2 John—an earnest and sober recognition of my commission as a pastor. And lest, the above section on application sound too dire and dour, remember verse 12: we care for the flock so “that our joy may be complete.” May the joy of the Lord be our strength even as we refuse and reject counterfeits.

Commentaries

David Jackman, The Message of John’s Letters: The Bible Speaks Today (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1988).

Karen H. Jobes, 1, 2, 3 John: Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014).

John R. W. Stott, The Letters of John, rev. ed.: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989).

[1] Broadcast on MSNBC on August 21, 2002. Accessed electronically August 29, 2002, http://www.msnbc.com/news/MSNBCTRANSCRIPTSMAIN.

Jeffrey Arthur is professor of preaching and communication at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary.