2 John

It’s No Small Message—Big Messages From Short Bible Books

A Sermon by Jim Hammond

The Song and the Philosophy

The month was June.  The year was 1967.  The Group who wrote the song that hit to the top of the charts was the Beatles.  The song was ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE.  Do you like the song?  What do you think of the philosophy of the song?  Many more believe “All you need is love” today than did in 1967.  In fact I’m beginning to see this philosophy pushed under the guise of different phrases, phrases like “tolerance.”  In fact the word “tolerance” did not mean the same thing in 1967 as it does today.  In 1967 what it meant was to tolerate people you don’t agree with.  Be nice, don’t be mean.  Today, “tolerance” means you have to value other people’s viewpoint.  We are not allowed to say their viewpoint is wrong even if that’s what we believe.  It is not enough to tolerate the people and be nice, we have to affirm their views or we will be called “intolerant”.  We live in a world that is attempting to give “equal rights” to all values.  In order to do that, the supreme value is “tolerance.”  This only works if your values have no claim to be absolute values, or absolute truth.  The moment the Christian message crosses this pluralistic philosophy with the absolute statements of Christ, Christians are portrayed as “intolerant.” 

I.  A Relational fallacy:  “All you need is Love”. 

Is that true that “All you need is love”?  No.  This isn’t just a relational fallacy it is a religious fallacy.  I want to read to you an article that shows you the logical end to this philosophy.  It is an article about John Walker called “The Road to Treason”.

THE ROAD TO TREASON

By Jeff Jacoby The Boston Globe

December 13, 2001

It isn't the case that the parents of John Walker -- the Marin County child of privilege turned Taliban terrorist -- never drew the line with their son.
    True, they didn't do so when he was 14 and his consuming passion was collecting hip-hop CDs with especially nasty lyrics.
    And true, they didn't put their foot down when he announced at 16 that he was going to drop out of Tamiscal High School -- the elite "alternative" school where students determined their own course of study and only saw a teacher once a week.
    And granted, they didn't interfere when he abruptly decided to become a Muslim after reading The Autobiography of Malcolm X, grew a beard, and took to wearing long white robes and an oversized skullcap.  On the contrary: His father was "proud of John for pursuing an alternative course" and his mother told friends that it was "good for a child to find a passion."
    Nor did they object when he began spending more and more time at a local mosque and set about trying to memorize the Koran.
    Nor when he asked his parents to pay his way to Yemen so he could learn to speak "pure" Arabic.
    Nor when they learned that his new circle of friends included gunmen who had been to Chechnya to fight the Russians.
    Nor when he headed to Pakistan to join a madrassah in a region known to be a stronghold of Islamist extremists.
    His parents also didn't balk when he went to fight in Afghanistan -- but that, at least, they didn't know about: Walker hadn't told them. Perhaps by that point he had learned to take their consent for granted.
    Only once, it seems, did Frank Lindh and Marilyn Walker actually deny their son something he wanted.  When he first adopted Islam and took the name Suleyman, they refused to use it and insisted on calling him John. After all, he had been named for one of the giants of our time: John Lennon.
    Their refusal must have amazed him.  For as long as he could remember, his oh-so-progressive parents had answered "Yes" to his every whim, indulged his every fancy, permitted -- even praised -- his every passion. The only thing they insisted on was that nothing be insisted on. Nothing in his life was important enough for them to make an issue of: not his schooling, not his religion, not his appearance, not even whether he stayed in America or moved -- while still a minor -- to a benighted Third World oligarchy halfway around the world.  Nothing.  Except, of course, their right to call him by the name of their favorite Beatle.
    Devout practitioners of the self-obsessed nonjudgmentalism for which the Bay Area is renowned, Lindh and Walker appear NEVER to have rebuked their son or criticized his choices.  In their world, there were no absolutes, no fixed truths, no mandatory behavior, no thou-shalt-nots. If they had one conviction, it was that all convictions are worthy -- that nothing is intolerable except intolerance.
    But even in Marin County, there are times when children need to hear "No" and "Don't."  They need to know that there are limits they must respect and expectations they must try to live up to.  If they cannot find those limits and expectations at home, they are apt to look for them elsewhere. Newsweek calls it "truly perplexing" that Walker, who "grew up in possibly the most liberal, tolerant place in America  . .  was drawn to the most illiberal, intolerant sect in Islam."  There is nothing perplexing about it.  He craved standards and discipline.  Mom and Dad didn't offer any. The Taliban did.
    Even when it was clear that their son was sinking into Islamist fanaticism, they wouldn't pull back on the reins.  When Osama bin Laden's terrorists bombed the USS Cole and killed 17 American servicemen, Walker e-mailed his father that the attack had been justified, since by docking the ship in Yemen, the United States had committed "an act of war." Lindh now says that the message "raised my concerns" -- but that didn't stop him from wiring Walker another $1,200.  After all, says Dad, "my days of molding him were over."  It isn't clear that they ever began.
    It undoubtedly came as a jolt to his parents when Walker turned up at the fortress near Mazar-i-Sharif, sporting an AK-47 and calling himself Abdul Hamid.  But the revelation that their son had enlisted in Al Qaeda and supported the Sept. 11 attacks brought no words of reproach -- or self-reproach -- to their lips.
    Walker deserved "a little kick in the butt" for keeping them in the dark about his plans, his father said, but otherwise they just wanted to "give him a big hug."  His mother, meanwhile, was quite sure that "if he got involved with the Taliban he must have been brainwashed. . .   When you're young and impressionable, it's easy to be led by charismatic people."
    Yes, it is, and it's a pity that that didn't occur to her sooner. If she and Lindh had been less concerned with flaunting their open-mindedness and more concerned with developing their son's moral judgment, he wouldn't be where he is today.  Walker is responsible for his own behavior and he will pay the price the law requires. But his road to treason and jihad didn't begin in Afghanistan.  It began in Marin County, with parents who never said "No."

It really is a shame that John Walker’s parents never understood the truths we will be looking at today in the little letter of 2 John.  In this little letter we are going to briefly study this morning, twin pillars are emphasized.  Do you know what the twin pillars are?  Love AND Truth.  Not just love and not just truth, but love AND Truth. 

It is a religious fallacy that all we need is love.  We need both love AND truth.  Too many have focused on one or the other.  There has to be both and both in proper balance.  Love has to have discernment as boundaries.  Without boundaries, love is unleashed like a lake whose dam busted.  The borders keep love in the right place.  Love without discernment destroys like a flood. 

How does your faith stand up to the pluralistic philosophy that is growing in almost militant power in America today?  A Muslim would say there is no god but God and we call him Allah.  A Muslim looks at the Christian’s assertion that Jesus is fully divine as blasphemy!  Christians view Jesus’ claim to divinity as at the core of our faith.  Pluralists would like to say that both are true.  But both Muslims and Christians would say that’s impossible for both to be true! 

A popular notion today about religions is the concept that each religion has only part of the picture.  College professors love to tell the story to show by way of analogy how differences in religion can be explained as differences of viewpoint.  They tell the analogy of the blind clergymen as they are introduced to an Elephant for the first time.  If they had never seen an elephant or heard about an elephant they would only know the elephant by what was revealed to them in there own experience.  One priest would describe the tail to which he was introduced saying an Elephant is a flexible cord like animal.  Another priest who had been introduced only to his tusk would disagree and say he is hard and inflexible.  Still another who had been introduced to the large side would describe the same creature as a massive wall of a creature.  And so on, the different viewpoints would account for the different understandings of a single truth, the existence of an Elephant.  Pluralists would even go so far as to say each of the clerics who try to disprove the others are arrogant, narrow-minded and wrong.

At first this parable sounds like wisdom to the students of world religions.  They nod their heads in agreement.  But wait, the only way this parable makes any sense at all is if you already have a picture of a whole elephant in your mind.  Guess who thinks they understand the whole elephant?  The pluralists.  What the pluralist professors of world religion are really saying is that they are correct because they know there is a whole Elephant and the other blind priests don’t.  Pluralists who believe this are guilty of the arrogance they accuse Christians of.  The analogy only makes sense if there is a picture of a whole elephant.  The bottom-line question then is who really has an accurate picture of the whole elephant?  I don’t believe it is the pluralist.  This simplistic analogy fails to give an accurate theology.

Today, because of events like 9/11 we are being fed a line that goes something like this:  Muslims and Christians love the same God.  There are political reasons for saying Islam is a religion of peace.  The government doesn’t want to promote internal chaos between faiths and races.  I agree that not all Muslims are violent terrorists.  But I disagree with the attempt at identifying Allah with the God of Chirstianity.  Muhammad was a righteous warrior according to Muslims.  Killing infidels was familiar to Muhammad and statements from the Koran.  It is no wonder then that Christians are being targeted in all Islamic controlled countries and persecutions are killing Christians around the globe today.  Muslims do not peacefully coexist with Christians.  Islamic teachings offer no tolerance for those who reject Mohammed for Christ.  Mohammed ruled by military force in Mecca.  The main difference between Muslims and Christians is there view of the deity of Christ.  Muslims do not consider Jesus, God’s son, and do not consider Jesus’ death on the cross to be a saving death. 

I tell you all this now because what we read in the Bible written nearly 2,000 years ago in the New Testament still applies to us when we encounter pressure to dilute the truth about Jesus.

Christians in our culture are being pressured to reduce their faith to nothing but some mushy sentimentality they call spirituality.  The pluralists don’t even mind us having a Christianized sentimentality like “Jesus is my friend.  I love him so much” as long as our beliefs don’t have anything to do with them.  Once we start talking about absolute truths, we are meddling with them you see.  They don’t like exclusive claims.  Absolute love is one thing, and it fits rather well with pluralism, but absolute truth is another.  Pluralists don’t want to hear about any absolute truths.  This bothers and offends them.

Jesus has too many “friends” and not enough “disciples.”  The truth is he is Lord.  He is Master.  Friendship with Jesus is a lot less rigorous than discipleship with Jesus.  It is difficult to follow in the steps and in the spirit of Jesus.  We spend time with friends when we want to.  We obey masters whether we feel like it to or not.  The good news is that we can have love and truth.  We can want to spend time with our good Master, like we want to spend time with a friend, even though he is our master.  Obedience can become the joy of friendship.  But we must not treat him as a friend only, allowing only the fuel of our feelings to motivate us.  This is nothing but mushy sentimentality, an undefined “spirituality” if you will.  Jesus didn’t leave us guessing.

When truth is diluted, even when you emphasize something as important as love, one is in grave danger.

A.  This is the Danger of Diluted Truth

Diluted truth lacks the potency to change us. 

From before the time Christ came to the earth till now, there has always been opposition to Christ, a concerted effort to disarm his powerful impact on our lives.  The opposition is often disguised in religious garb or Christian sounding language.  The effort to dilute the message of Christ has come in many forms but it is constantly before the church and Christian individuals need to be taught to stand firmly against any effort to dilute the cornerstone of truth, the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Focus:  (The Big Message) Christian individuals need to be taught to stand firmly against any effort to dilute the cornerstone of truth, the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Background

The second letter of John is a short one chapter letter that followed, as you can guess, John’s first letter.  The series of letters called First, Second, and Third John are all related.  One letter leads to the next.  An understanding of First John is important for understanding Second John.  John’s first letter addressed a major problem of false teaching.  The problem was a heresy called Gnosticism.  The false teachers had a view of knowledge that was a special knowledge for people who were “in the know.”  In contrast to this mystical special knowledge the Gnostic heretics were advocating, the Apostle John emphasized what you Can Know through God’s revelation of himself through Jesus Christ.[i]

Context of Second John

In the first letter, it is apparent that these false teachers left the church.

1 John 2:19 (NIV) ¹⁹They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

John in the Second letter refers to this group that has left, as those who have made the breech final (now they are considered “deceivers who have gone into the world”).  They are antichristian even if they speak about Christ.  Here’s the problem simply put, these false teachers went out from them but, “THEY’RE BACK”

These false teachers were systematically attempting infiltration and a chance to gain an audience and a following so that they could continue to promote their false teachings.

The nature of their false teachings:  They diluted the truth about the person and work of Christ.  The first heresy in the church was not one that goes like this: “Jesus wasn’t God he was a mere man.”  The reason this was not the first heresy is that Jesus made too much impact for the early heresies to go like this.  The first heresy went along opposite lines.  It went like this: Jesus couldn’t have been a man truly; he couldn’t truly have come in flesh.  He came only in spirit.  The Deceivers (antichrists) were teaching that matter is evil and spirit is good, therefore Christ could not have come in the Flesh, but only spirit.  This heresy affects the doctrine of atonement at its core.  If Jesus did not come in flesh, then he didn’t die in the flesh as our substitute.  You can see how dangerous heresies can be.  When you attack the core you are attacking the foundations we stand on.

3 THINGS TO LOOK FOR AS YOU Read 2 John

1)      The Main Theme:  Look for two key words.

2)      WHO IS HE WRITING TO?  “the chosen lady” Is this an individual or a reference to the church?

3)      What instructions does he give?

2 John (NIV)

¹The elder, to the chosen lady and her children, whom I love in the truth—and not I only, but also all who know the truth—²because of the truth, which lives in us and will be with us forever:   ³Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Father’s Son, will be with us in truth and love.
    ⁴It has given me great joy to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as the Father commanded us. ⁵And now, dear lady, I am not writing you a new command but one we have had from the beginning. I ask that we love one another. ⁶And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love.
    ⁷Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. ⁸Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. ⁹Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. ¹⁰If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. ¹¹Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.
    ¹²I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete.
    ¹³The children of your chosen sister send their greetings.

How well equipped are you to recognize false teaching?  This letter serves as a wake-up call to all of us to be alert, to be careful, and to be solidly grounded in the faith.

II. A Rationalist fallacy:  All you need is Truth

The fallacy:  If only we can get our thinking right, all else will fall into place.  The Truth is more complex:  Right thinking follows and informs and only sometimes precedes right living.  I’m glad John emphasized both love and truth.  There are many who know the truth that aren’t living the truth.

A.  This is the Danger of Diluted Love

Where diluted truth lacks the potency to change us, diluted love is the lack in our will to change.  Truth gives us the power; love gives us the will.  With diluted love, we know better but we don’t love enough to do what we know because we don’t want to.  How is it with your heart?  Is it full of love for God?  Do you love Jesus Christ personally?  Would you not think of hurting him because you love him so much?  If you are struggling here, what has diluted your love?  Is it love for something else that is playing mistress with you? 

⁶And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love.

Maybe an illustration will help here.  The truth only approach goes like this.  God commanded that you don’t lie.  You blew it when you lied.  Now repent, confess your sin and you will be forgiven and don’t lie again.  There is truth there, but we need love to have the power to change.  Here’s a fuller understanding.  You lied.  You won’t be able to stop lying till you discover the reason you lie.  You lied because you love people’s approval more than God’s approval.  You haven’t learned to see your worth in terms of God’s love for you.  Once you learn that your lying doesn’t satisfy you because it hurts your love for God and makes you unhappy, you will be motivated by your love for God not to lie.  John Piper put it something like this, Sin is what we do when we are not fully satisfied with God.  We have to replace the payoffs we are finding in sin with what is better, the payoffs we find in loving God.  God begins to fill us with his love and transform us from within.  That’s why love is powerful.  Truth and love changes us inside and out.  The New Testament approach is the Truth and Love approach. 

Ø      There are too many who are only “Believers” and not enough are “Behavers”

⁵And now, dear lady, I am not writing you a new command but one we have had from the beginning. I ask that we love one another. ⁶And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love.

Truth gives us the power to change.  Love gives us the will to change. 

III.              When you Love, Remain Faithful to Truth

Understanding the original context is everything when it comes to interpreting this letter.  John is not advocating shutting the doors on everyone who believes wrongly.  Here are the truths we must learn from the 2 John context.

1.      False teachers were systematically attacking the core of their faith.  These were not debates about periphery issues but about who Jesus was, and as a result the central message of the Gospel was affected. 

2.      False teachers like these were to be denied a teaching platform.  Don’t support any ministry that undermines the person and work of Christ.  I have invited into my home “missionaries” from cult groups for discussions, but I have never given them access to teach our congregation, or supported their work.  Hospitality in John’s day gave the false teachers the means to continue their missionary teaching platform.

3.      The firm behavior (in this case, denying them hospitality), which will be labeled as unloving, is to be reserved only for those who will damage the church if such firmness is not applied.  It is not to be applied to everyone who believes falsely, only to those who will destroy the church with their false teaching if given the chance.  We should demonstrate love to those who are lost.  But we must guard the church from destructive teaching and influence.

4.      Tolerance is not the ultimate virtue.  Taking a firm stand is appropriate when individuals jeopardize the very integrity of the church.  Tolerance has its limits if the church is to maintain its integrity.

5.      Theological Doctrine is important.  All heretics use portions of truth.  If they didn’t use some truth they would not be dangerous.  Therefore, it is a good idea to have a firm knowledge of historic Christianity as understood by the Apostles and maintained throughout the centuries.  We must “continue in the teaching.” (1:9)

 ⁹Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.

A.    Don’t run Ahead of Christ

⁹Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.

2 Ways We Might “Run Ahead” of Christ:

1.                   Beware of the tendency to always want to discover “new” truth.  New insights are a joy to discover, but this craving can lead you to heresy as you keep digging deeper for new truths.  In your quest for discovery don’t forget that our faith is built on all the old truths that come from the teachings of Christ.  I have found that it is not the discoveries of new truths that keep my faith fresh, but the joy of passing the old truths on to someone else for the first time.  Their joy of discovery keeps my faith fresh.  I see through their eyes the old truths with freshness again.  Instead of trying to dig deeper and deeper, stay close to the doorknob of the kingdom and introduce others to the great old truths that transform our lives.  When you do that, I guarantee your faith will become fresh again.  Don’t run ahead, build on the good old truths.  Pass them along.

2.                   Don’t leave Christ behind as you go about doing your “Christian” duty.  Take time to tune up your heart.  Love him.  Worship.  Give yourself to Him.  “It is possible to be so active in the service of Christ as to forget to love him.  Many a man preaches Christ but gets in front of him by the multiplicity of his own works.  Christ can do without your works; what he wants is you.  Yet if he really has you, he will have all your works”. [ii] 

B.  Guard the message of Christ.

There is one central theological doctrine that overshadows all else.  We have life only through Jesus Christ, God’s son, who truly became one of us for our salvation.  Our culture will constantly attempt to dilute this message that they find offensive.  This pressure we will face to dilute the message of Christ is no different from the pressure faced by the people John wrote this little letter to.  The form of dilution was different but the pressure is the same.  We must guard the message of the church. 

Which pillar of the twin pillars do you need more emphasis on today, truth or love?  Here’s another way to ask the same question:  Which “will” do you need to work on most, your will or God’s will?  Do you need to know God’s will better (Understand the Truth), or do you need to address the difficulty you are having submitting your will to the already known will of God?  The first is a truth issue, the second is a love, or trust issue.  Which is diluted in your life right now love or truth or both?

Bolted to the Foundation

Many things were learned from the Coalinga California earthquake in 1983.  Homes that were not bolted firmly to their foundations crumbled.  We need a living relationship with the foundation--into it as well as on it.

The builders of the Golden Gate Bridge would tell you the safest place to be during an Earthquake in San Francisco would be on that bridge.  That bridge is suspended on two towers that are bolted firmly to the bedrock beneath the bay.  John tells us to make sure our lives are on that bridge suspended on those twin towers, Truth and Love.  Those two towers are bolted firmly to the bedrock of Jesus Christ.  Jesus claimed to be the bedrock of truth and the bridge to God when he said, “I am the way and the truth and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6)  In these uncertain times, are you bolted to the foundation of Christ?