Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 21 of 21

Thread: 2 John 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    11,167

    Re: 2 John 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children

    Quote Originally Posted by Soldier_of_Faith View Post
    I know this: That many pastors use this book to justify woman preachers.

    I have always thought of the "elect lady" and "elect sister" to represent female teachers in a house bible study or house church. I have never seen an issue of woman teachers, but Paul certainly seemed to lean away from this idea: I will post examples that make me think this:

    1 Cor 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

    1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

    1 Timothy 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

    Titus 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. 7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; 8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate; 9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.


    John however seems to expand away from this male oriented idea following this principle, (Which Paul Taught interestingly enough...)

    Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

    I wonder if Paul may have been unintentionally biased against Woman because of events in his own marriage or situations involving women... He did say some interesting things regarding wives:

    1 Cor 7:4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. 5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. 6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. 7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.


    Interesting subject, non-the-less..
    John did not "expand away from" some "male oriented idea".
    Paul did not contradict himself as Gal 3:28 is about law and being in Christ (sakvation), and has nothing to do with who should or should not teach or be in leadership.
    Clearly Paul was not married. 1Co 7:8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am.

    Paul's 'bias' was the history and societies he lived. There was no commandment from the Lord either way. Gal 3:38 and the like, being about salvation, cannot be used for woman teaching over men. If that's what it meant and what God declared the apostles would have attempted it and we would have record. I don't have a problem with it but at the time it would not have been accepted. It would have hindered the gospel so God did not do it. Cultures lead by men would have rejected the gospel on this alone. Along with cultural and social bias Paul did not see God choosing and using woman in these roles so that's what he rolled with. He did not have an unintentional bias against women and others not. At least, we cannot gather this from scripture. It just was what is was.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,779
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: 2 John 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    The justification for two or three documents is the natural fact that letter writers often want to say something to the recipient of the letter, that they didn't intend for the larger audience. For instance, consider this verse from 2John,

    10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; 11 for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.

    Apparently the Chosen Lady had the means and the resources to hold church in her house. And apparently it was her habit to invite guest speakers to bring a message from the Apostles. And apparently there were traveling teachers who stayed at her house when they came to town. And John exhorts her to be discriminating with regard to those she might give lodging and other support. This advise was meant for her personally as one who had the means to give lodging to itinerant preachers.
    It really depends on one's view in how they would read that passage, which makes this such an interesting epistle. The "into your house", you should give that your inspection in Greek, because "your" is not there.

    Here is the passage from Green's literal translation:

    1 John 1:7-11 Because many deceivers went out into the world, those not confessing Jesus Christ to have come in the flesh, this is the deceiver and the antichrist. Watch yourselves, that we may not lose the things we worked out, but that we may receive a full reward. Everyone transgressing and not abiding in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. The one abiding in the doctrine of Christ, this one has the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bear this doctrine, do not receive him into the house, and do not speak a greeting to him. For the one speaking a greeting shares in his evil works.

    Even with "do not receive him into your house", the passage still fits a corporate message though. Let me find a like example. Something like this:

    1 Corinthians 6:19-20 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

    The above is a corporate message. The hearers are individuals. "Do not receive him into your house." Kind of the same thing, but again, could be translated without the "your".

    There have been good comments and lots of food for thought in the thread. Thanks for your comments.
    Watchinginawe

    I Samuel 3:10 And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered, Speak; for thy servant heareth.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,779
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: 2 John 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children

    Quote Originally Posted by Slug1 View Post
    Thus why we understand this scripture as a "lesson" to all who are in Christ. The scripture "speaks" change, into the life of one who will walk in "truth." If change is not a product (in this case we can say "to love" when one could not love), then the scriptures are not a lesson, but just... advice.

    There is a difference in that a Christian "will or even must" walk in love (result of heeding the lesson found in the scriptures) compared to "should" walk in love (a result of thinking there is no lesson in the scriptures and taking the verses as advice only).
    I'm pretty sure we see this the same way. I would have just repped you but already have somewhere else.
    Watchinginawe

    I Samuel 3:10 And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered, Speak; for thy servant heareth.

  4. #19

    Re: 2 John 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children

    Quote Originally Posted by watchinginawe View Post
    Welcome to Bibleforums. If you want to start a thread regarding "the Elect", you have all the necessary privileges to do that. I'm not sure why your opening post would be so divisive, separating yourself apparently from "synergists". I guess at the proper time and place, I'll give you a go on that, but that isn't what this thread is really about.
    No, I am not here to begin a thread about the glorious doctrine of predestination, yet as you quoted it, II John opens, The elder unto the elect lady and her children..., designating the topic is a part of the letter. You read far too much into the post; synergism by default denies election, and in all my 21 years as a charismatic, not one preacher really dared address the fact these are in the Bible. Since synergism is a description of the multiples' work in soteriology, it is a fitting description of their beliefs as opposed to monergism. Frankly, exegetical work seems to be at its all-time low.

    I am a bit befuddled, though, since you highlighted the term elect in the text, G1588 ἐκλεκτός, why it is not a topic of the discussion, seeing as the beloved John designates this woman as a believing child of God, further evidenced by their dwelling as well as walking in truth. Good day.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    12,634
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: 2 John 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children

    I think the 3rd letter might help understanding the second.

    3Jn 1:1 The elder unto the wellbeloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.

    Here he writes to a person so I think it's likely he wrote to a person in the second.


    3Jn 1:2 Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.
    3Jn 1:3 For I rejoiced greatly, when the brethren came and testified of the truth that is in thee, even as thou walkest in the truth.
    3Jn 1:4 I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.
    3Jn 1:5 Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers;
    3Jn 1:6 Which have borne witness of thy charity before the church: whom if thou bring forward on their journey after a godly sort, thou shalt do well:
    3Jn 1:7 Because that for his name's sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles.
    3Jn 1:8 We therefore ought to receive such, that we might be fellowhelpers to the truth.
    3Jn 1:9 I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not.
    3Jn 1:10 Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.
    3Jn 1:11 Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.
    3Jn 1:12 Demetrius hath good report of all men, and of the truth itself: yea, and we also bear record; and ye know that our record is true.
    3Jn 1:13 I had many things to write, but I will not with ink and pen write unto thee:
    3Jn 1:14 But I trust I shall shortly see thee, and we shall speak face to face. Peace be to thee. Our friends salute thee. Greet the friends by name.


    And it ends with the same wording...meeting face to face and not including some things in ink.
    James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,478
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2 John 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children

    Quote Originally Posted by Noeb View Post
    John did not "expand away from" some "male oriented idea".
    Paul did not contradict himself as Gal 3:28 is about law and being in Christ (sakvation), and has nothing to do with who should or should not teach or be in leadership.
    Clearly Paul was not married. 1Co 7:8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am.

    Paul's 'bias' was the history and societies he lived. There was no commandment from the Lord either way. Gal 3:38 and the like, being about salvation, cannot be used for woman teaching over men. If that's what it meant and what God declared the apostles would have attempted it and we would have record. I don't have a problem with it but at the time it would not have been accepted. It would have hindered the gospel so God did not do it. Cultures lead by men would have rejected the gospel on this alone. Along with cultural and social bias Paul did not see God choosing and using woman in these roles so that's what he rolled with. He did not have an unintentional bias against women and others not. At least, we cannot gather this from scripture. It just was what is was.
    I don't necessarily believe that Paul was biased. I just wonder, because I see a lot of human characteristics in Paul, that I see in me and others who struggle with the amazing male/female design that God put in place. I was taught though Church that Paul may have been married at one time. And I don't think there are clear-cut scriptures to prove one way or another.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Qualification for being an Elder
    By matthewhenry in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: Apr 27th 2017, 06:05 PM
  2. Church elder's brutal murder leave children orphaned.
    By L'Ange in forum Prayer for the Persecuted Church
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Sep 16th 2016, 03:21 PM
  3. Replies: 168
    Last Post: Oct 17th 2014, 04:56 AM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: Dec 28th 2012, 12:22 AM
  5. Qualifications for an Elder
    By TexUs in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: Jul 29th 2010, 05:40 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •