Latest Posts
View the latest posts in an easy-to-read list format, with filtering options.
Second and Third John are short letters of instruction from John “the elder.” Both of these follow familiar themes and patterns seen in First John and in John’s gospel. Some believe that these were written by an elder named John who was not the apostle by the same name. However, the apostle’s normal habit was to refer to himself somewhat obscurely—quite different from the Apostle Paul, who identified himself clearly at the start of his epistles.
Hence, there is no substantial reason to doubt that these memos were written by the apostle himself, who was also an elder in the Eastern church. The questions centered primarily on authorship and apostolic authority, not theology. Their content was orthodox, but their brevity and limited distribution raised questions. Being private letters, they were not circulated widely at first, as, for instance, Paul’s letters were.
Clement of Alexandria (150-202 A.D.) accepted these as authentic. Fragments of his writings (quoted by later writers) indicate that he regarded them as authored by John the Apostle. Origen (184-253 A.D.), who was also from Alexandria, agreed. Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea in the early 4th century, quoted Origen in his Ecclesiastical History, Book 6, Chapter 25 (6.25.8–10):
“John… left behind a Gospel… and also an epistle of very few lines; perhaps also a second and a third, for not all say that these are genuine.”
Eusebius was quoting one of Origen’s books that did not survive, so we do not know precisely which book he was citing. Hence, we possess Origen’s statement only because Eusebius (the first true church historian) preserved it. In Ecclesiastical History (3.25), Eusebius classifies 2 and 3 John among the “disputed but known” writings. The dispute was not doctrinal, but canonical recognition and authorship certainty.
In Festal Letter 39, Athanasius (296-373 A.D.), the famous defender of Nicene orthodoxy regarding the doctrine of the Trinity in 325, writes (paraphrased):
“Again it is not tedious to speak of the books of the New Testament. These are the four Gospels… the Acts… the seven so-called Catholic Epistles… of John, three… and after these, fourteen epistles of Paul [including Hebrews]… and the Revelation of John.”
His influence and reputation probably silenced all doubters of the time. (His theology deeply shaped Latin theologians such as Jerome and Augustine.) Some decades later, by the late 4th century (Council of Carthage, 397 A.D.), both letters were universally recognized in the New Testament canon.
The earlier debate was mild compared to controversies over the book of Hebrews (whose authorship was debated in the West), Peter’s second epistle (whose authenticity was debated), and the book of Revelation (whose apostolic authorship was doubted in some Eastern circles).
John’s second and third letters were accepted first in Syria and Asia Minor, near Ephesus, where John ministered. The Western (Latin) Church, being more remote, did not fully accept the letters until the 4th century, when the matter was fully settled in both East and West.
Second John
The Second Letter of John is the shortest book in the New Testament (by verses), yet it carries concentrated apostolic authority. It reads like a pastoral memo, but its themes are deeply Johannine, emphasizing truth, love, obedience, and fidelity to the human nature of Christ.
2 John 1, 2 begins,
1 The elder to the chosen lady and her children, whom I love in truth; and not only I, but also all who know the truth, 2 for the sake of the truth which abides in us and will be with us forever.
“The elder” indicates an authoritative voice which could easily include apostolic authority. The title conveys authority that is rooted in seniority, pastoral oversight, and a relational voice consistent within Johannine circles of fellowship.
Some believe that this “chosen lady” is actually a reference to a particular church, rather than to an individual. This hardly makes a practical difference, simply because the principles that John set forth certainly applied to a wider audience—as well as to the church today. As believers “who know the truth,” we are all “her children.” John’s closing greeting (verse 13) seems to identify his own local congregation as the chosen lady’s “chosen sister.”
13 The children of your chosen sister greet you.
John’s terminology is rooted in the broader principle that makes faith in Christ the criterion for “chosen” status with God. This is consistent with Paul’s assertion in Romans 11:7, where the small remnant of grace in Israel was actually chosen, while the rest of the Israelites were “blinded” (NASB) or “hardened” (KJV).
In other words, those who “know the truth” are God’s chosen people (i.e., “the elect”). Those who do not accept the truth of Jesus’ calling (as Messiah) are, in effect, blind and therefore not chosen. This reflects Christ’s teaching in John 15:16,
16 You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you.
2 John 3 says,
3 Grace, mercy and peace will be with us, from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.
In John’s thought, truth is not abstract proposition; it is reality, embodied in Christ. The phrase “love and truth” means love shaped by revelation, love that refuses compromise, and love that walks in obedience.
Many have taught that love is somehow divorced from the laws that define love according to the nature of God Himself. In their way of thinking, love replaces law, making love lawless. But because God is love, He retains the right to define it according to His own nature. Hence, the entire law hangs upon the command to love God and one’s neighbor (Matthew 22:40).
Paul too mentions, “speaking the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15). In other words, truth must be expressed within the parameters of love.
2 John 4 says,
4 I was very glad to find some of your children walking in truth, just as we have received commandment to do from the Father.
Not all of “your children” (believers) actually walk fully in truth. John admits here that some believers, who are justified by faith, have not moved on into obedience. The pattern goes back to Israel in the wilderness under Moses. They were all justified by faith through Passover when they left Egypt, and they were all baptized in the sea (1 Corinthians 10:2), yet they had not yet reached Mount Sinai to receive the revelation of the law.
Jesus gives a sharp warning to such people—even to those who perform miracles in Jesus’ name—saying in Matthew 7:23,
23 and then I will declare to them, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.”
Paul confirms this in Romans 6:19,
19 … For just as you presented [in the past] your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification.
Paul goes on to explain that the flesh desires to sin, and so it wars against the spirit (Romans 7:23). The spiritual man, then, joyfully agrees with the law of God (Romans 7:22). We see then that John rejoiced that some of the lady’s children (members) had moved on from justification (Passover) into sanctification (Pentecost).
2 John 5, 6 continues,
5 Now I ask you, lady, not as though I were writing to you a new commandment, but the one which we have had from the beginning, that we love one another. 6 And this is love, that we walk according to His commandments. This is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, that you should walk in it.
Divine love walks according to God’s commandments. Any attitude or behavior that departs from such obedience is evidence of partial blindness and may lead to outright lawlessness. John makes it clear that there is a distinction between justification by faith and sanctification by obedience.