There is no doubt that the Second and Third Epistles are from the same hand. Cf. 2 John 1 with 3 John 1; 2 John 4 with 3 John 3, 4; 2 John 10 with 3 John 8; 2 John 12 with 3 John 13, 14. Are they also the work of St. John?
This was a disputed question in the early Church. Eusebius in his chapter “ On the Acknowledged Divine Scriptures and those that
1Ad Smyrn. vi. Cf. Barn. Ep. xx. 2: οὐκ ἐλεῶντες πτωχόν, οὐ πονοῦντες ἐπὶ καταπονουµένῳ . . « ἀποστρεφόμενοι τὸν ἐνδεόμενον Kal καταπονοῦντες τὸν θλιβόμενον.
2 Put by Eus. Η. Ε. ili. 23 in the reign of Domitian (Α.Ρ. 51-06), by Epiphan. Her. li. 33 in that of Claudius (A.p. 41-54).
are not such (περὶ τῶν ὁμολογουμένων θείων γραφῶν καὶ τῶν μὴ τοιούτων) } includes the Second and Third Epistles of John (ἡ ὀνομαζομένη δευτέρα καὶ τρίτη Ἰωάννου) among “those that are controverted yet recognised by most (τῶν ἀντιλεγομένων, Ὑνωρίμων 8 οὖν ὅμως τοῖς todos)’. So Origen:? “He (John) has left an epistle of a very few lines; also, let it be granted, a second and a third, since not all allow that these are genuine. However, there are not a hundred lines in them both.” And in the fourth century an opinion was put forward, which still finds favour, that their author was indeed John, only not John the Apostle but another John denominated “the Presbyter ”’.
There is, however, very strong evidence, both internal and ex- ternal, on the other side. They exhibit coincidences of thought and language which link them with the First Epistle. Cf. 1 John ii. 7 with 2 John 5; 1 John ii. 18, iv. 1-3 with 2 John 7; 1 John ii. 23 with 2 John 9; 1 John iii. 6, 9 with 3 John 11. And the external testimony, though scanty, is weighty. The Muratorian Canon, despite the corruption of the passage, plainly attests the two epistles as works of the Apostle John and as accepted in the Catholic Church (superscripti Fohannis duas in catholica habentur). Irenzeus* quotes 2 John 11 with the preface Ἰωάννης δὲ 6 τοῦ Κυρίου μαθητὴς ἐπέτεινε τὴν καταδίκην αὐτῶν μηδὲ xalpew αὐτοῖς ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν λέγεσθαι βουληθεί. And again, after a reference to the First Epistle, he quotes 2 John 7, 8 as a saying of the Lord’s disciple John “in the aforesaid epistle’’.° This slip of memory only makes the attestation more effective. Irenzeus knew that it was a saying of St. John that he was quoting: the Second Epistle no less than the First was the Apostle’s. Clement of Alexandria too recognised more than one Epistle of St. John, for in one place he quotes 1 John v. 16 as occurring ‘in his larger Epistle (ἐν τῇ µείζονι ἐπιστολῇ), © and elsewhere he speaks of “ the Second Epistle of John”’.?
The ground for the ascription of the two smaller epistles to John the Presbyter is the fact that their author styles himself 6 πρεσβύτ- epos. But it can hardly be maintained in view of his self-revelation in the Third Epistle. He appears there as exercising authoritative supervision over a wide circle of churches, writing to them, visiting them, interfering in their dissensions and settling these by his per-, sonal and solitary arbitrament, sending deputies and receiving their
DH. BE. iti. 25:
2 Comm. in Ev. ¥oan. v. 3 (ed. Lommatzsch, vol. i., p. 165).
3Eus. Η. Ε. iii. 39; cf. Jer. Script. Eccles. under F¥oannes Apostolus; Ραβίας. OT ix) 3. 5 III. xvii. 8, 8 Strom. ii. 15.
7 Adumbrat. in Ep. Foan. ii.
φ 160 INTRODUCTION
reports. This is precisely the sort of ministry which, as we have seen,! St. John exercised in Asia Minor, and it would have been impossible for any lesser personage than an Apostle? It may, moreover, be questioned whether such slight compositions as these two little letters would have won recognition had they not been recommended by the name of the Apostle John. And it was natural that the latter should style himself 6 πρεσβύτερο. The term was not only an official designation (cf. 1 Tim. v. 1, 17, 19). The second generation of Christians used it of their predecessors, “the men of early days,” Mdnner der Vorzeit, who had witnessed the great beginnings. Thus, Papias uses it of the Apostles,? and Irenzeus in turn uses it of Papias and his contemporaries. It was therefore natural that St. John, the last of the Apostles, the sole survivor of “the elder men,” should be known among the churches of Asia as 6 πρεσβύτερος.