2 and 3 John are almost examples of short ancient letters, close to each other in length, which was probably determined by the measurement of a papyrus leaf.

1. Background

   2 and 3 John are similar in their letter format, especially in the opening and closing. Both describe the author as "the presbyter. 2 John has similarities in content to 1 John, particularly in emphasizing the commandment of mutual love and in condemning deceivers who deny Jesus Christ come in the flesh.

   2 John is sent to a Johannine community far from the center. The secession has not yet arrived there, but secessionist missionaries are on their way. The presbyter instructs this community (the chosen Lady and her children) not to let these false teachers into "the house" (the house-church where the community met). The arrival of emissaries, some from the presbyter, others from the secessionists, must have been confusing for such distant Johannine communities. How could they know who carried the truth until they let the emissaries speak? And by then, the damage was done!

2. General Analysis of the Message
   1. Opening Formula (1-3)

      The Sender and Recipient sections are succinctly worded: "The presbyter to a chosen Lady and her children," meaning, figuratively, an unnamed local church and its members within the presbyter's sphere of influence. The fact that the presbyter instructs this church and conveys to it the greetings of the children of "your chosen sister" suggests that he is an authority figure in another Johannine church (perhaps the mother church from which the addressed church was founded). The greeting "grace, mercy, peace," usual for a Christian letter, is followed by the Johannine addition of truth and love.

   2. Body (4-12)
      1. Transitional expression of joy (4)

         In the epistolary format, a statement of joy is often a transition to the body of the letter, and here the mention of a command from the Father is linked to the exposition of the command in v. 5. It is likely that the presbyter's joy at finding "some of your children walking in the truth" uses "some" in a general way, rather than a corrective way ("some but not all").

      2. Message (5-12)

         The insistence on the commandment of love and the need to walk in that commandment echoes the main ethical thrusts of 1 John. Similarly, the Christological impulse of 1 John is echoed by the insistence in 2 John on recognizing the coming of Jesus in the flesh as the mark of differentiation between those whom the presbyter recognizes as beloved children and the antichrist deceivers who have gone out into the world. That the dangerous teaching of the latter, already clearly present in 1 John, is only about to make its appearance among the recipients of 2 John is suggested by the warnings that they should look to themselves and not receive into their "house (church)" those who bring another doctrine. The opponents (actual or potential) are described as "progressive" (literally as "going forward and not staying in the teaching of Christ"). This is consistent with the statement in 1 and 2 John that the writer's Christology and ethics represent what was from the beginning. The fact that the difference is considered crucial is affirmed thus: "He who has the wrong teaching does not have God!"

         In closing the body or message of the letter, the presbyter has a familiar touch: an apology for the brevity of what has been written. The hope of an upcoming visit should be taken in the same conventional vein, not as a threatened oversight discipline, though the presbyter's pastoral heart will rejoice if all goes well.

   3. Concluding Formula (13)

      The fact that the presbyter does not send his own greetings but those of a sister Christian church illustrates that this letter is sent, not as a personal directive, but as part of the Johannine "we" policy.

3. Presbyters

   2 and 3 John are our only Christian examples from the 50-150 period where the sender of a letter gives a title or designation and no personal name. Moreover, the designation "the presbyter" seems to be the usual and/or preferred way by him, by them, or by both, just as the Johannine gospel never names the beloved disciple or the mother of Jesus. Why then does he refer to himself as "the presbyter"? From the other letters, we observe that he speaks authoritatively to the other Johannine Christians about the tradition and assumes that when he comes to visit them, they will want to hear more from him. In 3 John he sends missionaries whom Gaius is asked to receive, even though one regional authority, Diotrephes, is not well disposed. From all this one gets the impression that "the presbyter" has prestige but no judicial authority. If he wrote 1 John, as seems likely, he is part of a Johannine "we" that speaks of the tradition maintained from the beginning. Consider the different uses of "presbyter/elder" among the early Christians.

   1. It refers to an elderly, dignified and important man. However, the Johannine "we" that speaks in Jn 21:24 is clearly distinct from this figure, and "the presbyter" belongs to the Johannine "we" if he wrote 1 John

   2. It refers to church officials, many of whom also bore the title episkopos (overseer) and who, in groups, were responsible for the administration of local churches in the late 1st century. Yet the Johannine writings provide no evidence of an ecclesiastical structure with presbyteroi

   3. He refers to one of the twelve apostles, as evidenced by the fact that Peter describes himself in 1 Pet 5:1 as "sympresbyteros" (fellow presbyter). Papias refers to Philip, Thomas, James, John, and Matthew as presbyteroi. Yet in both of these cases, the names of individuals, not the titles, tell us that apostles are involved; moreover, there is no reference to "apostles" with authority in the Johannine tradition

   4. It refers to a companion of Jesus who was not one of the Twelve, a usage also attested by Papias who, after mentioning the members of the Twelve, speaks of Aristion and the presbyter John, disciples of the Lord, who spoke with authority

   5. He refers to a disciple of the disciples of Jesus and therefore to a person of the second generation who served as a transmitter of the tradition handed down by the first generation. Irenaeus states, "I heard it from a certain presbyter who had heard it from those who had seen the apostles and from those who had taught."

   Since it is quite likely that there was a Johannine school of writers pursuing the vision of the Beloved Disciple, the Beloved Disciple himself could have fit into category (4), whether or not he was known as "the presbyter," while the evangelist, the letter writer, and the Gospel editor could have fit into category (5). It is therefore the latter category that would best fit the use of "the presbyter" in 2 and 3 John.

4. Issue for Reflection

   2 John asks not to welcome false teachers into a house church. We see where a strict interpretation of this ideal can lead when with Latin logic Tertullian argues that heretics have no right to appeal to the Scriptures and later Christians conclude that the surest way to ensure that heretical ideas are not spread is to execute the heretics. It is true that when harm is done to others, even charity has limits; however, fierce exclusivity in the name of truth usually backfires on its practitioners.