Elect Lady

2 John 1, "The elder unto the elect lady and her children…" There are many different theories about who (or what) this “elect lady” is. Some say she is a metaphor for the church, chosen of God. Since the church is the bride of Christ (Ephesians 5:25,32; 2 Corinthians 11:2), some say John used the imagery of a chosen woman as a metaphor for the Lord’s church. Others believe, since the meaning of Bible names often have significance, the Greek word translated lady in our Bibles was actually her name, Cyria, while others say her name was Electos (elect). I believe John wrote to a particular woman, and addressed her as “the elect lady” just as it’s written. It's always best to believe what the Bible says. There are many different theories and they can’t all be right. However, this truth is not such a weighty matter that we need to fight and argue about it. Truth is important – all truth is important. But some truths have a greater weight than others (Matthew 23:23).

Truth matters. You might say, "What's the big deal, what you believe about who this lady is?" It's very possible for two people to be wrong about the elect lady and still apply the text of 2 John the same way. But there are potential consequences for misinterpreting this passage. Once you begin to allegorize parts of Scripture, without Biblical cause, where does it end? If the "elect lady" is a church, then is the "house" in verse 10 a house? If not, what does the house represent and why? What about the "paper and ink" in verse 12? What does that represent? If the lady is not a lady, but a metaphor, how do I know if ink is ink? Good Biblical interpretation takes the passage literally unless there is Biblical justification to do otherwise. So it may not be a big deal, who this lady is in the grand scheme of things, but how you get to what you believe could have ramifications. Little foxes spoil the vine.

If the letter was written to a church, and not an individual, the letter takes on a completely different tone. The aged John writes to a  woman, whose husband, for whatever reason, is out of the picture. She continues to preserve, along with her children, following her Lord and Saviour. John warns her of men, who prey up on widowed women and their kind hospitality, to introduce damnable heresy. If the letter was written to a church, the letter gets less specific, and the application of verse 10 to "receive [false teachers] not into your house, neither bid him God speed," becomes unclear. Also, just read the letter, substituting "Lady" with a woman's name, Samantha, for example. It's clear and understandable. You can see John writing a letter to his dear friend in Christ. Now, substitute 'Lady" with Buffalo Valley Baptist Church. Not only does it seem a little clunky, but it raises questions about being "children" of the church and what that even means, and why the children where away from the assembly. And, since not all of her children were walking in truth, why was John not concerned with church discipline? A big part of the letter becomes unclear. 

Truth matters. And while some truth may be weightier than others as Jesus said, He did not mean to say some truths are not important. He condemned the Pharisees for being so scrupulous about tithing, but neglecting the "weightier matters of the law." Their problem was not paying attention to small things, but neglecting the big things.  

Objective Truth

John's second letter is quick and to the point and that point is truth. Just a little over 300 words, the word truth is found 5 times in the first 3 sentences. Adding the times John talks about doctrine or the commandments of God, we can see John's heart for truth. He writes about knowing the truth, and walking in the truth, but he says we need to live by the truth and disassociate ourselves with those who deny the truth.  With such particular and life-altering applications (John himself was exiled for truth) we can straightway see that truth must be definable and it must be objective.

In times past, many would say truth about God is ultimately unknowable. Now, many people think they have their own truth. Who's to say I’m right and your wrong? Quite frankly, the definable and objective truth is who tells us we are wrong. Truth isn’t defined by your feelings. Truth isn’t defined by your heart. Webster’s Dictionary says truth is, “the body of real things, events, and facts; the state of being the case.” Some things we all still agree is truth. Water is wet and 100 is more than 99. But I wouldn’t be surprised if even mathematical axioms will begin to be called into question, especially if I can be called a bigot for daring to say gender is objectively definable. Objective truth,  means truth is not influenced by feelings, just the facts. In a world that denies objective truth, our feelings become the final arbiter. A rational, logical human being, when confronted with facts that are contrary to the way we feel or think, should, at the very least, pause and consider why new information is contrary to the way we feel. Instead, we get emotional and call people bigots, haters, and try to silence their voice.

Even in the realm of spiritual things, you don’t get to decide what is truth. There are a lot of religious assemblies who meet to worship every Sunday. Sadly, not every organization preaches the same gospel. We can’t all be walking in the truth if we disagree. If you have two contrary gospels, they can’t both be right. It matter very little how many people believe a particular doctrine, or how passionately someone believes it. The only thing that matters is, “is it true?” As a Christian, the truth is not found within me, it’s found outside of me, in the Bible. The truth isn’t in a mystical feeling, because my feelings might be different than yours, and if so, who is right? Truth, very often, is contrary to my feelings and contrary to what I feel is the right thing. The truth is revealed to us by God,  in the 66 books of the Bible, by rightly dividing that word of truth. The Bible has a meaning and to know truth, we must know what the Bible actually says and means; living with  joy  and confidence in the certainty of objective truth.

Happy Father's Day

I ran across this while looking up the words to a Watts hymn.

"When teenager Isaac Watts complained to his father about the monotonous way Christians in England sang the Old Testament Psalms, his father, a leading deacon, snapped back, 'All right young man, you give us something better.'

To Isaac Watts, the singing of God's praise was the form of worship nearest to Heaven and he went on to argue: 'It's performance among us is the worst on earth.' Young Isaac accepted his father's challenge and eventually wrote a total of more than 600 hymns, earning him the title 'The father of English hymnody.'

Even as a child Isaac had shown a passion for poetry, rhyming and such mundane things as everyday conversation. 

His serious-minded father, after several warnings, decided to spank the rhyming nonsense out of his son. But the tearful Isaac helplessly replied,

'Oh father do some pity take,
and I will no more verses make.'

Historical Context

The Bible is a spiritual, supernatural, and living book. It is the inerrant, infallible, sufficient Word of God. But the Bible didn't float down from Heaven in a mystical scroll. God used men as the instruments to pen the words of God. Moved by the Holy Spirit, men wrote the very words of God. Our Lord didn't give the writers an idea and let them interpret it the best they could. God didn't give them themes, and then they filled in the pages with their own thoughts.

God used men, but also used men in history, in certain situations, with their unique frames, to give us the words He wanted us to know, in the way He wanted us to know it. Amos was a farmer-prophet who God sent to the "Big City" to preach to the rich aristocrats. We know this from the text of Amos, when he gives us a little biography of himself.  When we read Amos 4:1, where her said, "Hear this word, ye kine of Bashan," we can get a flavor for what was going on. This rough around the edges farmer, goes to the rich women in Jerusalem and calls them a bunch of fat cows. Coarse? Absolutely. I can't imagine Daniel or the Apostle John saying such things. And that's the point. Amos is the instrument God used to deliver His word. Amos' life, upbringing, education, and language was exactly tuned to give the certain sound God ordained for this prophesy. Sometimes, the word needed a violin. Sometimes it needed a claw-hammer banjo. God tuned and used men as the instruments, which tuned and flavored the text, just as God wanted.

Historical context is important too. We use caution, of course, because we all know history belongs to the victors, so man's history is flavored by whose writing it. A history of 1776 may read differently from a British author than an American. History revealed in Scripture is there for a reason. Take Hebrews 4:3-8, for example. The main point of this passage is to show there remains a rest for the people of God, so we need to believe in the gospel, and not be like Israel, who because of unbelief, died in the wilderness. God promised Israel rest in the promised land, and some did not enter because of unbelief. God rested on the 7th day, but that rest, even though foundational for the Sabbath day, was God's rest, not man's. Then he tells us David wrote in Psalm 95, inspired of God (Hebrews 3:7), the word "Today".  Why is that important? The rest that remains can't be the 7th day of creation, because God rested on the 7th day from HIS work. It can't be the rest promised to  Israel entering into the Promised Land because David wrote, "today" talking about our rest, long after Joshua died. Since David lived after Joshua and wrote, "today", the author of Hebrews proves there remains a rest for the people of God today.