9. Destination. — The Ep. being written, then, in the scenes of the closing stage of Jolin's apos- tolic ministry, it is most rcastmable to sujipose it to have been written for readers belonging to those parts. It has been supposed, indeed, to have lieen addressed to Palestinian Christians (Benson). But there is nothing to favour such a supposition, the contents of the Ep. pointing to a Gentile- Chrstian audience rather than a Jewisli-Christian. Some have thought it directed to a single Church, that of Ephesus (Hug), or even that of Corintli (Lightfoot). But its wide scope and encyclical chaiacter are inconsistent with that. Otliers have regarded it as adilressed to Christians outside the scene ot tlie life and ministry of John in his old age (Holtzmann), or as an encyclical of the widest scope (Uilgenfeld). But the terms which are said to bear this out do not meet the case. The /tai iiuv and itai iij.(7s in P do not sulRce to establish a distinction between the Asiatic Chris- tians among whom John was writing and those to whom his letter is directed ; and while the character of the Ep. suits its designation as a Cathn/ir Ep., there are things in it, especially the references to particular forms of error, which so far limit and define its destination.
The most curious thing connected with this qnestion of the readers that are in view, is the fact that Augustine, in quoting 3-, speaks of the passage as being in John's ' Epistle to the Parthians' (quod dictum est a Joanne in epistola ad Parthos, Qiimst. Evaruj. ii. 39). That is the only certain occurrence, indeed, of this designation in Augustine's works. It is given, however, in the Benedictine edition of his Tractates on the Ep., in the title ; in the Indiculus operum S. A ugtistini of Possidius ; in one or two manu- scripts; in the contra Varimaclum Arianum of (dacius Clams or VigUius Tapsensis ; and in Bede's (if it is genuine) Prologus super septem "pistolas canoniras, where it is said that many ecclesiastical writers, and among them the great Athanasius, affirm this Ep. to be ' written to the Parthians.' Hence it has been supposed liy some (Grotius, etc.) that the Ep. was addressed to Je\vish Christians living beyond the Euphrates within the limits of the Partliian empire. But we hear of no connexion between John and Parthia, and the designation ad Parthos appears to have been unknown to the Church of the East, and even to the Church of the West before Aqgustine's time. It is a pure puzzle, a curiosity on which nothing can be based. It has been
accounted for as a mistake for ud Pathmuii (Serrarius), ad sparsus (Wetstein), adjnititu (Semler), ad Spartos (Scliolz, on the authoritj' of a 12th century manuscript), ir/>65 SiaaTtapjaix^novs {'.) (Holtzniiinn, ^langold), npit vivrat (Paulus), rpit wapffifoi'^ ((liescler, etc.). Most favour the last of the.se explanations. Some think that the title Tp6c ira/iWfoi's was given to express the pure condition of the Churches addresse<f (Winston) ; others, that the inscription of the Second E]). (ir/)6s TrapOivovt) as found in .some manuscriiils was transferred aa more suitable to the First (Hug). Some, again, suppose that the title ran €7r((rToX7; toO 'ludfi'ou tou vapdivov, John having the designation airodTiAov koX cOayycXiffTov TrapOivou in the inscription borne by the Apoc. in one manuscript (Corf. Guelpher.); otliers, that Augustine misunderstood what was said by Clem. Alex. (Frarj. 1011) about the Second Ep. being written irp6s TrapOivov%, and transferred the title to the First (Huther). All is conjecture, and can in no way all'ect the probabilities or the case (supported as these are by the tradition bearing on John's residence and work in Asia Minor) that the Ep. had in view the Churches that would be naturally addressed from Ephesus. It is therefore with those Asiatic regions in which Gnostic speculations had become rife (Apoc. 2" "''•), and with that great city in which Paul had planted a Christian Church, and in which John had lived on, according to Irenieus (adv. Hicr. ii. 22', iii. 3'), into the reign of Trajan, that this majestic Ep., with its heavenly ealin and its lofty message of truth and love, is connected in respect both of readers and of writer.
LiTERATPRE. — Amonj; the numerous Commentaries, 8i>ecial mention may be made of those of CEcumenius, Calvin, Dilster- dieck, Liicke, Huther, Ebrard, Rothe (most fruitful of all), Haupt, Alford, Jelf, Westcott, Holtzmann, de Wette-Bruckner, Braune, Alexander (in the Speaker's Cumm.), Ewald, I'lunimer; among books on Introduction^ especially those by Weiss, Reuss, Bleek, Hiljjenfeld, Salmon, S. Davidson, Holtzmann, Julicher, Zahn ; and among works of other kinds, the Expositions by Neonder, F. D. Maurice, R. 8. Candlisb, Lias, and Watson, Erdmann's Prima'. Kp. Joan, argwnentwn, nexus et crmsiLium ; Luthardt's de Primiv Joan. Ep. Compositione ; Flitt's de ajiti- christis et pseudopropketiji in Ep. Joan. ; Gfrbrer's Urchri)>ten- thum : Besser's liilieUtunden ; I'deiderer's Urchristenthum and JJibbert Lectures ; Uarnack's Geschichte der altchrist. Literaiur bis Kusebius.
The Second Epistle.— 1. Contents.— This brief Ep., though it touches the First Ep. at several points, and has also something in common with the Third, has an independent value, and a dis- tinct interest. It is unmistakably a letter, and is distinguished from the First Ep. by its personal and private character. It is addressed, not to a wide circle of readers, as is the case with the First, but to a particular indi\'idual or Church, and it represents a writer who speaks less with the tone of command, but with more of the earnestness that cares for individual Christians, and seeks to come into direct relations with them. As to its origin and much else belonging to it, we have little or nothing to guide us beyond what can be gathered from its own tenor. It seems to have been occasioned by the pressure of dangers arising from false teaching, and its object is to secure the individual or the Church that is addressed against these perils until the writer could visit the scene in person.