Agriscience: Fundamentals and Applications 6th Edition L. Devere Burton - Ebook PDF Instant Download
Agriscience: Fundamentals and Applications 6th Edition L. Devere Burton - Ebook PDF Instant Download
https://ebooksecure.com/download/agriscience-fundamentals-and-
applications-ebook-pdf/
https://ebooksecure.com/download/agriscience-fundamentals-and-
applications-sixth-edition-ebook-pdf/
ebooksecure.com
https://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-heat-and-mass-transfer-
fundamentals-and-applications-6th-edition/
ebooksecure.com
https://ebooksecure.com/download/fundamentals-of-dimensional-
metrology-ebook-pdf/
ebooksecure.com
https://ebooksecure.com/download/encyclopedia-of-materials-composites-
composites-volume-1-ebook-pdf/
ebooksecure.com
(eBook PDF) Chemistry: An Atoms First Approach 3rd Edition
https://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-chemistry-an-atoms-first-
approach-3rd-edition/
ebooksecure.com
https://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-gardners-art-through-the-
ages-a-concise-history-of-western-art-3rd-edition/
ebooksecure.com
https://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-microbiology-with-diseases-
by-body-system-5th-edition/
ebooksecure.com
https://ebooksecure.com/product/original-pdf-principles-of-finance-
with-excel-3rd-edition/
ebooksecure.com
https://ebooksecure.com/download/forensic-textile-science-ebook-pdf/
ebooksecure.com
McGraw Hill Physics Review and Workbook 1st edition -
eBook PDF
https://ebooksecure.com/download/mcgraw-hill-physics-review-and-
workbook-ebook-pdf/
ebooksecure.com
Australia • Brazil • Mexico • Singapore • United Kingdom • United States
Agriscience: Fundamentals and Applications, © 2019, 2015 Cengage
6E Precision Exams Edition
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be
L. DeVere Burton
reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, except as permitted by U.S.
SVP, GM Skills & Global Product Management: copyright law, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.
Jonathan Lau
Product Director: Matt Seeley For product information and technology assistance, contact us at
Cengage Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706
Product Manager: Nicole Robinson
For permission to use material from this text or product,
Executive Director, Development: Marah Bellegarde submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions.
Senior Content Developer: Jennifer Starr Further permissions questions can be e-mailed to
Product Assistant: Nicholas Scaglione permissionrequest@cengage.com
in nearly 40 different countries and sales in more than 125 countries around the
Wynn; (third image) Water with Boat: © Vladislav world. Find your local representative at www.cengage.com.
Gajic/Shutterstock.com; (bottom image) Plants:
© David Kay/Shutterstock.com
Unit Opener image credits: Unit 1: © Garsya/ Cengage products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd.
shutterstock.com.; Unit 2: © Don Farrall/Photodisc/
Getty Images.; Unit 3: Courtesy of USDA/ARS
#K-1968-13.; Unit 4: © iStockphoto/Leah-Anne To learn more about Cengage platforms and services, register or access your online
Thompson.; Unit 5: © Goodluz/Shutterstock.com.; learning solution, or purchase materials for your course, visit www.cengage.com.
Unit 6: © iStockphoto/Lise Gagne.; Unit 7: Notice to the Reader
© SNEHIT/Shutterstock.com.; Unit 8: © biletskiy/ Publisher does not warrant or guarantee any of the products described herein or perform any independent
Shutterstock.com.; Unit 9: © luigi nifosi’/ analysis in connection with any of the product information contained herein. Publisher does not assume,
Shutterstock.com.; Unit 10: © Christopher Barrett/ and expressly disclaims, any obligation to obtain and include information other than that provided to it by
the manufacturer. The reader is expressly warned to consider and adopt all safety precautions that might be
Shutterstock.com.; Unit 11: © Wildnerdpix/
indicated by the activities described herein and to avoid all potential hazards. By following the instructions
Shutterstock.com.; Unit 12: © Vladislav Gajic/ contained herein, the reader willingly assumes all risks in connection with such instructions. The publisher
Shutterstock.com.; Unit 13: Courtesy of Boise makes no representations or warranties of any kind, including but not limited to, the warranties of fitness for
National Forest.; Unit 14: Courtesy of USDA/ARS particular purpose or merchantability, nor are any such representations implied with respect to the material set
forth herein, and the publisher takes no responsibility with respect to such material. The publisher shall not be
#K-3663-15.; Unit 15: Courtesy of USDA/ARS.;
liable for any special, consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or part, from the readers’ use of,
Unit 16: Courtesy of USDA/ARS #K3212-1; Unit 17: or reliance upon, this material.
© iStockphoto/Sandralise; Unit 18: © Alexander
Raths/Shutterstock.com; Unit 19: © tristan tan/
Shutterstock.com; Unit 20: © Tomas Pavelka/
Shutterstock.com; Unit 21: © Zeljko Radojko/
Shutterstock.com; Unit 22: © Tyler Olson/
Shutterstock.com; Unit 23: © Nadia Zagainova/
Shutterstock.com; Unit 24: © Le Do/Shutterstock
.com; Unit 25: © Nessli Orpmas/Shutterstock.com;
Unit 26: © iStockphoto/Alexandru Nika; Unit 27:
© photomak/Shutterstock.com; Unit 28: Courtesy
of USDA/ARS #K-2681-13; Unit 29: © Serdar Tibet/
Shutterstock.com; Unit 30: Courtesy of USDA/ARS
#K-4166-5; Unit 31: © Zuzule/Shutterstock.com;
Unit 32: © iStockphoto/Serhiy Zavalnyuk;
Unit 33: Courtesy of Price Chopper Supermarkets;
Unit 34: Courtesy of DeVere Burton; Unit 35:
© Elena Elisseeva/Shutterstock.com; Unit 36:
© mangostock/Shutterstock.com; Appendix A:
© Michal Bednarek/Shutterstock.com.;
Appendix B: © Michal Bednarek/Shutterstock.com.
c
Preface / xii
How to Use This Textbook / xviii
c
Sec o 5 he Quest for More and Better Plants! / 317
T
ti
n
U 15 Plant tructures and axonomy / 318
nit
S
T
U 16 Plant Physiology / 338
nit
U 17 Plant Reproduction / 356
nit
Sec o 6 Crop cience / 383
S
ti
n
U 18 Home Gardening / 384
nit
U 19 Vegetable Production / 403
nit
U 20 Fruit and ut Production / 426
nit
N
U 21 Grain, il, and pecialty Field-Crop
nit
O
S
Production / 443
U 22 Forage and Pasture Management / 470
nit
Sec o 7 rnamental Use of Plants / 491
O
ti
n
UNIT 23 Indoor Plants / 492
U 24 urfgrass Use and Management / 514
nit
T
U 25 rees and hrubs / 539
nit
T
S
Sec o 8 nimal ciences / 559
A
S
ti
n
U 26 nimal natomy, Physiology, and utrition / 560
nit
A
A
N
UNIT 27 nimal Health / 579
A
UNIT 28 Genetics, Breeding, and Reproduction / 597
UNIT 29 mall nimal Care and Management / 615
S
A
UNIT 30 Dairy and ivestock Management / 636
L
UNIT 31 Horse Management / 663
c
Sec o 10 Putting It ll ogether / 737
A
T
ti
n
U 34 Marketing in griscience / 738
nit
A
UNIT 35 gribusiness Planning / 761
A
UNIT 36 ntrepreneurship in griscience / 781
E
A
Appendix A: Reference Tables / 797
Appendix B: Supervised Agricultural xperience / 801
E
Appendix : Developing a Personal Budget / 813
C
Appendix D: Plan Supervised Agricultural xperience / 815
E
References / 823
Glossary / Glosario / 825
Index / 861
Contents
Preface / xii
How to Use This Textbook / xviii
ONTENTS
Sec o 3 atural Resources Management / 131
N
ti
n
UNIT 7 Maintaining ir Quality / 132
A
ir Quality / 133
A
U 8 Water and oil Conservation / 151
nit
S
he ature of Water and oil / 153 and rosion and oil
T
N
S
L
E
S
Conserving Water and Improving Conservation / 163
Water Quality / 160
A
rigin and Composition of oils / 176 Plant-Growing Media / 188
O
S
oil Classification / 180 oil Chemistry / 191
S
S
Physical, Chemical, and Biological Hydroponics / 197
Characteristics / 183
U 12 quaculture / 254
nit
A
he quatic nvironment / 255
T
A
E
Sec o 4 Integrated Pest Management / 271
ti
n
U 13 Biological, Cultural, and Chemical Control
nit
of Pests / 272
ypes of Pests / 273 Pest-Control trategies / 285
T
S
Integrated Pest Management / 282
xii
xiii
Preface
Revisions in this new edition are the work of current Cengage agri-
science author L. DeVere Burton. He is also the author of three other
textbooks in the agriscience series: Agriscience & Technology, Second Edi-
tion; Fish and Wildlife: Principles of Zoology and Ecology, Third Edition; and
Introduction to Forestry Science, Third Edition. He also edited a new textbook
titled Environmental Science Fundamentals and Applications. Each of these
works, including this edition of Agriscience: Fundamentals and Applications,
reflects the premise on which agricultural education was founded—that
most students learn best as they apply the principles of science and agricul-
ture to real-life problems.
Organization
This edition of Agriscience: Fundamentals and Applications is organized
into 10 sections and 36 units. Each section introduces the subjects that
will be covered in the individual units. The text and illustrations for each
section have been revised. Each unit begins with a stated objective and
a list of competencies to be developed. Important terms are listed at the
beginning of each unit and highlighted in the text. They are also included
in the glossary at the end of the book. Each unit contains profiles on sci-
ence, careers, and agriculture and concludes with student activities and
a section on self-evaluation. The book includes a complete and thorough
index.
Extensive Teaching/
Learning Materials
A complete supplemental package is provided with this textbook. It is
intended to assist teachers as they plan their teaching strategies by provid-
ing materials that are up to date and efficiently organized. These materials
are also intended to assist students who want to explore beyond the con-
fines of the textbook. They include the following resources:
Lab Manual
ISBN: 978-1-13368-689-7
The lab manual has been updated to correlate to the content updates made
in the textbook. This comprehensive lab manual reinforces the text content. It
is recommended that students complete each lab to confirm understanding
of essential science content. Great care has been taken to provide instructors
with low-cost, strongly science-focused labs to help meet the science-based
curriculum needs of the Introductory Agriscience course in secondary schools.
New to this edition, optional Internet supplements offer additional
research opportunities and educational resources to learn more about top-
ics covered in the lab exercises. Each lab exercise has been enhanced with
new photos and illustrations to help stimulate visual learning.
Classmaster CD-ROM
ISBN: 978-1-13368-734-4
This technology supplement provides the instructor with valuable
resources to simplify the planning and implementation of the instruction-
al program. It has been expanded for this edition to include the following
support materials:
■■ Performance Objectives, Competencies to Be Developed, and
Terms to Know lists with definitions for each unit
■■ A PDF version of the Instructor’s Manual. The Instructor’s Manual
has been expanded for the sixth edition to provide the following
materials for instructors:
■■ Teaching Aids and Suggested Resources, including Suggested
Class Activities and ideas for Supervised Agricultural Experiences
■■ Lesson Plans for each unit
xv
Preface
®
in PowerPoint format focusing on key points for each chapter.
Approximately 700 slides (about 20–25 slides per unit) are available
to accompany the textbook.
Acknowledgments
The author and publisher wish to express their appreciation to the many
individuals, FFA associations, and organizations that have supplied
photographs and information necessary for the creation of this text. A
very special thank you goes to all the folks at the National FFA organi-
zation and the USDA photo libraries, who provided many of the excel-
lent photographs found in this textbook. Because of their efforts, this is a
better book.
The author and publisher also gratefully acknowledge the unique
expertise provided by the contributing authors to the text. Their work
provided the core material upon which successive editions have expanded.
The contributing authors are the following:
Robert S. DeLauder,
Agriscience Instructor, Damascus, Maryland;
Thomas S. Handwerker, PhD,
Department of Agriculture, University of Maryland at Princess Anne;
Curtis F. Henry,
Business Manager, College of Agriculture, University of Maryland at College Park;
Dr. David R. Hershey,
Assistant Professor, Department of Horticulture, University of Maryland at College Park;
Robert G. Keenan,
Agriscience Instructor, Landsdowne High School, Baltimore, Maryland;
J. Kevin Mathias, PhD,
Institute of Applied Agriculture, University of Maryland at College Park;
Renee Peugh,
Biological Science Consultant, Boise, Idaho;
Regina A. Smick, EdD,
Academic Advisor and Instructor, College of Agriculture, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg; and
Gail P. Yeiser,
Instructor, Institute of Applied Agriculture, University of Maryland at College Park.
Christina Griffith
Agriculture Instructor
Milan High School
Milan, TN
Mary Handrich
Grades 8–12 Teacher/Agriculture
Fall Creek School District
Fall Creek, WI
Elizabeth Harper
Agriscience Teacher
NAAE member
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Lowell E. Hurst
Agricultural Educator Emeritus
Watsonville High School, Ret.
Watsonville, CA
Jim Satterfield
Agriculture Teacher
Jefferson County High School
Dandridge, TN
Tom Willingham
Instructor
Blythewood High School
Blythewood, SC
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
§ 6.] LITERARY HISTORY Ixi not, at any rate, justify the
usual treatment of the two shorter letters as a pair of inseparable
twins. With the possible exception of one phrase (ἀπ᾿ αὐτῆς τῆς
ἀληθείας) in Papias’ quotation, or summary, of the words of the
Presbyter, we find no certain trace of language of the Third Epistle
till the time of Augustine and Jerome. It was known to Origen,
whose influence on Eusebius is perhaps most clearly seen in his
treatment of the books which form the first section of his “
Antilegomena.” It is possible that his predecessor Clement treated it
as Scripture. But it seems to have been very little used. It is quoted
by Augustine and Jerome, and formed part of the Bible out of which
Augustine selected his “Speculum,” which must, of course, be clearly
distinguished from the Lider de Divinis Scripturis, generally known as
‘m,’ in which there is no quotation from the Third Epistle. The text
found in the Speculum is, of course, Vulgate, whether that text goes
back to S. Augustine himself, as Professor Burkitt supposes (/Z\S xi.
263 ff., 1910), or is due to subsequent alteration. Sabatier’s attempt
to reproduce fragments of an old Latin translation of the Third
Epistle from the quotations in Augustine and Jerome, shows that it
probably existed in an old Latin pre-Vulgate text,—a fact which is
placed beyond doubt by the fragment contained in the Latin of
Codex Bezae. The history of the smaller Epistles is closely connected
with that of the substitution of the seven-letter Canon of Catholic
Epistles for the three-letter Canon of the East, and of which a short
sketch must now be given. In the East the Epistle of James, which
Origen certainly treated as Scripture in some sense, though not
without recording the doubts which were felt about it, was soon
added to the generally recognized Epistles, τ Peter and 1 John.
‘These three letters form the Canon of Catholic Epistles in the
Peshitta. And this three-letter Canon is found in all the provinces
which were under the influence of Antioch. Chrysostom, who was
moved from Antioch to Constantinople in 398, knows and uses no
other Catholic Epistles. The same Canon is found in the Cappadocian
Fathers, Basil, Gregory of Nazianzum, and Gregory of Nyssa in the
last quarter of the fourth century. According to Lietzmann,! the same
can be proved to have been the usage of Methodius of Olympus
about 300 a.p. During the fourth century the process of replacing
this shorter Canon by the fuller seven-letter Canon was begun and in
most places carried through. It is fully recognized by Eusebius in
several places, and his formal list, in which the five Epistles, James,
Jude, 2, 3 John, 1 ** Wie wurden die Biicher des Neuen Testaments
heilige Schrift?” (Lebens Fragen, ed. Weinel), Tiibingen, 1907,
xii THE EPISTLES OF S. JOHN [§ 7. 2 Peter are separated
off from the rest of the Antilegomena, suggests that it is the Canon
which he himself preferred. In this he was no doubt influenced by
the statements of Origen about these letters. In 367, Athanasius put
it forward in his thirty-ninth Festal Letter as the official list of Egypt.
It is, however, found still earlier in Cyril of Jerusalem (340). The fact
that the letters always are found in the same order, wherever this
Canon is used in the East, suggests that here its adoption was a
matter of definite policy, due probably to the necessity for uniformity
felt by the Nicenes in their struggle with the influence of the Court.
The varying orders found in the West point to a more natural and
gradual process of adoption. It may be noticed that Gregory of
Nazianzum names all. seven Epistles in his list of the Canon, but his
own practice seems to have been to quote only those found in the
shorter Canon. Both the threeand the seven-letter Canons are
mentioned in the list of Amphilochius of Iconium in Lycaonia. In the
Island of Cyprus, Epiphanius is a supporter of the seven-letter
Canon. On the other hand, Theodoret of Cyrus (430-450) apparently
uses in his writings only the three letters. In the Syriac Bible the
seven Epistles appear first in the recension of Philoxenus of Mabug
(500). Enough has been said of the history of the reception of the
Johannine letters in the West. The acceptance of the Athanasian
Canon, which contained the three letters of S. John, and its final
supremacy in the West, were due to the influence of Augustine and
Jerome. As we see from the Canon Mommsenianus, it did not pass
without protest. Thus the literary history of the letters shows that
the assignment of an early date to the two shorter letters, especially
to the Third, depends on the internal evidence of their character and
content rather than on external attestation. Their final acceptance
was undoubtedly due to the belief of the men of the fourth century,
and in part of the third, in their Apostolic origin. During the earlier
period of their obscurity they would hardly have been preserved but
for the respect felt for their author. Internal evidence is practically
decisive against the hypothesis of forgery. The question of their
authorship is part of the wider problem, which still awaits a
satisfactory solution, of the authorship and date of the ‘‘ Ephesian
Canonical Writings” and of the personality of the Ephesian ‘ Elder.”
δ᾽): ΤῊ LEXT, The following list gives most of the older and more
important manuscripts and authorities for the text of the Epistles:
§ 7.] THE TEXT lxiii B. δι. Codex Vaticanus. Rome. Vat. Gr.
1209 (iv.). 52. Codex Sinaiticus. Petersburg (iv.). . Codex Ephraimi.
Paris. Bibl. Nat. 9 (v.); 1 Jn. 1. 1 τους---(2) ewpal Koper], iv. 2 exrev
—(3 Jn. 2) ψυχη. A. 64. Codex Alexandrinus. London. Brit. Ψ Oz oo
ws Mus. Royal Libr. I. D. v.—viii. (v.). . 66. Athos. Lawra 172 (852)
(viii.—ix.). ἢ 648. Paris. Bibl. Nat. Gr. 14 (ix.—x.). ‘). 6257. Oxford.
Bodl. Misc. Gr. 136 (A.D. 1391). P. a3. Petersburg. Bibl. Roy. 225
(ix.). Palim): sest. I Jn. ili, 20—-v. I Tov. 389. «74. Patmos. Ιωαννου
16 (x.). 25. a103. London. Brit. Mus. Harley 5537 (a.D. 1087). 1 Jn.
v. 14-2 Jn. 5 missing. 61. a162. London. Brit. Mus. Add. 20003, and
Kairo βιβλ. πατριαρχ 351 (A.D. 1044). Apl. 261. a7. Sinai 273 (ix.). S.
a2. Athos. Lawra 88 (a88) (viii.—ix.). L. a5. Rome. Angel. 39 (ol. A.
2. 15) (ix.). 384. 254. Chalki. Eyzop. SyoAn 26 (x.). 9. a189.
Cambridge Univ. Libr. Kk. vi. 4 (xi.xi), See Westcott, p. 91, who gives
a list of the interesting readings contained in this MS. It is not
included in von Soden’s list of the manuscripts of which he used
collations for the text of the Catholic Epistles. 132 {Ξ23. Ὁ 48 (= τος
8. Ὁ Old Latin Version. h. Fleury Palimpsest, ed. S. Berger, Paris,
1889, and Buchanan, Old Latin Biblical Texts, Oxford (v.). 1 Jn. i. 8-
111. 20. 4. Ziegler, /tala Fragmente. Marburg, 1970: oak π᾿ {|| O—V.
21: m. Liber de divinis Scripturis sive Speculum, ed. Weihrich. Vienna
Corpus xii., 1887. The following verses are quoted: 1 Jn. 20 35S. Q,
1k, G, 10. 21: 23, i, 7-10, 16--18, IV, 1, Ὁ, 15; 16, Vol. Oo, τὸ 29:
21; 2 [Π- 7, 10, 11Augustine’s Tractatus. τ Jn. 1. I-v. 12. Egyptian
Versions. Sahidic. Balestri, Sacrorum Bibliorum Frag. Copto-Sahid.
Mus. Borgiant. Vol. iii. (continuation of Ciasca). 1904. 1 Jn. i. 2-v. 15;
2 Jn. 5-13; 3 Jn.
Ixiv THE EPISTLES OF S. JOHN [§ 7. Woide, Appendix ad
editionem N.T. Graect. Oxford, 1799. 1 πὶ τον 2 τ 2 πὸ; 3 Jn:
Delaporte, Revue Bibl. internat. Nouvelle Serie ii., 1905. I Jn.i. 1-ili.
7, iil. 9--21, ili. 24-.-ἰἰν. 20. Gives by far the most interesting form of
the Sahidic text. Bohairic. Horner, Zhe Coptic Version of the N.I. in
the Northern Dialect. Vol. 4. Oxford, 1905. Armenian Version.
Armenian Bible, ed. Zohrab. Venice. These Epistles do not offer
many problems of special difficulty or interest so far as the
determination of the true text is concerned. A comparison of the
texts published by Westcott and Hort with Nestle’s text, shows how
few instances there are in which serious doubt exists. The chief
interest of the textual problems which they present lies in the history
of the glosses which have been inserted into their text, and a few
paraphrases which have been substituted for the true texts. The
most famous of these glosses, the addition of the ‘‘ Heavenly
Witnesses,” does not stand by itself. The tendency to gloss is most
marked in Latin authorities, but it can be traced in the Egyptian and
other versions, and cursive Greek manuscripts offer a few instances
of its presence in Greek. An attempt has been made to collect the
evidence for the Old Latin text of the Epistle in an Appendix. The
critical notes which have been added to each verse are based on
Tischendorf’s eighth edition, supplemented where possible from later
sources of information. For the Egyptian Versions (Bohairic and
Sahidic), fresh collations have been made, and also for the
Armenian. ‘Tischendorf’s information has been reproduced, as it
stands in his edition, where it appears to be correct. Corrections and
additions are given under the symbols boh, sah, arm. The heavier
type should make it possible to see at a glance the extent to which
Tischendorf’s information has been supplemented or modified. The
attempt has also been made to extract from von Soden’s Die
Schriften des Neuen Testaments, 1. ii. C, the variants in the text of
these Epistles which are to be found in Greek MSS, quoted by him,
but which are not contained in Tischendorf’s critical apparatus. The
number of instances in which it has been necessary to add a note of
interrogation may form some indication of the difficulty of using von
Soden’s book for this purpose. It is much to be hoped that the stores
of interesting information as to the readings of Greek MSS, especially
min
§ 7.] THE TEXT Ixy uscules, which are contained in his
great work, may be published in some form which would render
them available for general use. In the citation of these readings von
Soden’s system of notation has been reproduced, so that the new
material is easily distinguishable. At the end of each group of MSS
quoted, the number which the 77st MS in the group bears in
Gregory’s list has been added in brackets. Inthe case of 8 MSS (i.e.
those which contain the Gospels as well as the Acts and Catholic
Epistles, etc.), Gregory’s Gospel number has been given. It may be
noticed that several of the readings of 86 (W) are of considerable
interest. As the Latin text has been dealt with in an appendix, no
attempt has been made to revise Tischendorf’s presentation of its
evidence. It may be worth while to give some account of von
Soden’s assignment of variants to his different groups. For the /~-A/
— text he claims the following readings : 1 Jn. i. 4. ἡμεῖς (υμιν, C
Kas). li. 19. εξ nuwv σαν (ησαν εξ ἡμων). ili. 2. om. de (after
odapev) (habet K Las), ili, 14. Om. Tov αδελῴον (after o μὴ ayarwv)
(habet C Ka 5). iv. 12. τετελειωμενὴ εστιν εν ἡμιν (TET. εν ἡμῖν
εστιν). Vv. 10. εαὐτω (αυτω). Vv. 20. και οἰδαμεν, A ἃ (οιδαμεν δὲ:
Om. και). 2 πη. 5. καινὴν γραφων σοι (γραφων σοι καινην). The
following cases he regards as uncertain : I Jn. il. 10. εν avtw οὐκ
εστιν (ουκ ἐστιν ev avtw, W™), iii. 23. evtoAnv] + ἡμῖν (om. K Las).
2 Jn. 12. vw (ημων, W™). πεπληρωμενὴ 7. 3 Jn. 9. εἐγραψα] -Ὁ τι
(om. τι, K Las: ay, 13 8). #7, Uncertain : I Jn. iii, 5. om. ἡμῶν after
ἀμαρτιας (habet ἡμων, 8 Cas). iii, 7. (Ὁ) παιδια, W™ (τεκν α). iii, 19.
την καρδιαν (τας καρδιας). 2 Jn. 9. προαγων (παραβαινων). ““
Sonderlesarten ” I Jn. 11. 18. om. o before ἀντιχριστος (habet o, A K
Las). 1. Variants due to reminiscences of other passages: 1 7π|1.-:
4. ὑμῶν; W™! (ἡμῶν) Cf. Jn. xv. τι. 1 2,6. the margin of Westcott
and Hort’s edition.
Pins: li. 27. ii. 28. ie, lil. 15. Vv. 20. “-ανυτὴ εστιν. ἐπαγγελια
(αγγελια). μενετω (μενει). ἐχωμεν (σχωμεν). THE EPISTLES OF 5.
JOHN Chin ito: Cf. ver. 24. εἐπαγγελια (αγγελια). avTw, (εαυτω,
W™). adnOwwov) + Geov. ἢ Gon yn. Cf. i. 2, ii. 255 Jn. xiv. 6.
Doubtful cases of a similar kind: Ee) i: Ὁ: ἽΝ ὃ: 1: Ὁ: Ὁ Ὁ. ἢ .Τω
νὼ. . ~aupate. . . vLw (θεω). απαγγελλομεν ~eV υμιν οὐκ εστιν.
αμαρτιας] + ἡμῶν. . vpov (yur). Cf. Mt. vi. 15. ae Cf. ver. 22. ΟΕ γα,
ΜΠ ν᾿ Ὁ; . ““πατρι.. . . νιω. . δικαιοσυνὴν] pr. την. Vie 1.22.
(avayy-). om. εν. Cf. context. . . Χῶ (Tw ονοματι του vLoV . . ΘΙ 28:
ΟΕ 2. ive τὴ. Cf. ii. 25. GE iver... Ck Jn. .xyii.. 9: Cf. ver. 2. Givers. Cf
vers, til. 15. Ch τὸ αὐχῶν πὶ sr: , πρωτον (πρωτος). . OM. pever
(2°). b αγαπωμεν) + το ονοματος] + αὐτου. παρα (απο). Cf. iii. 24
([μενει], W). v Ov. Cf. ver. 20. . voart. Cf. Jn. xix. 34. Cf, ver. τοῦ; Cie
τ] πῦν το So. 195. ΘΙ 2 Jnsa: Doubtful cases of other kinds:
καθαρισει (-ση). Tn. 1 Ὁ: its Ὁ: Om. ουτως. ~OUTWS και AUTOS. .
OM. ἐκ. . wa)+r7us. Cf. Jn. ii. 25. . €avtous (εαυτα It . ὕμων (ημων).
απο (παρα). ** Sonderlesarten ἢ: 1 ΠΠ| 1} <3: 1:8. ll. 26. il. 29.
111: τὴ: om. δε. ἡμῖν (vey). πλανοντων. ιδητε (ειδητε). γεγενηται.
θεωρει (-ρη). [8 7.
Io. Il. THE TEXT . πεισωμεν. . μίσει (-o7n). 5 Olin, ἔνα, AY -
OM. auTw, . ηβουληθην. . TavTns (τουτων). » γενωμεθα (γιν-). .
ἐγραψα) -Ἐ αν. Om. εκ. ο, 25) Ἡ δε. K. Uncertain: 1 jn. Mb. 15. ill.
17. Vv. 20. AC. T {Π| 11] τ. 111: τὸ. ill. ΤῸ iv. 16. ἵν. 20. 75 Io. Io
avtw (εαυτω, W™), θεωρει (-ρη). γινωσκωμεν. OM. καὶ ἐσμεν. om.
εν. πεισωμεν. Om. μένει (2°). μίσει. ἡμῶν. εαυτω. . “-Ὁ θεος μιν. .
γινώσκομεν. . €QUTOUS. . γενωμεθα. Om. εκ. “ Sonderlesarten” ΚΤ;
τ 7Π| 11: 27. ili, 24. Zens τς. : zt o (2°)|+ de. ὑόν. ΣΡ ΠΡ ὃ: (1 π τι:
ili. 17I Jn. iil. ro. 111. 18. iv. 16. ““πατρι . . » UL om. και (3°).
EXOMEV. lxvii απολεσητε . . . epyacacbe . . . απολαβητε avTw.
Gewpe. Cf. 1.) δικαιοσυνηὴν | for τὴν. om. ev. om. μενει (2°). Α΄.
“Sonderlesarten” : Pins ts: 75. 1. ἢ: li. 4. OM. ort. . adeAdot
(αγαπητοι). nkovoarte) + απ apxns. om. και (2°); 10] + Xv.
μι ω σι μι μι wm -_ ν Οὐ ἢ nono THE EPISTLES OF 5. JOHN
«γράφω (eypaya). . UpLets) + ουν. . €V υμιν μένει. avto (αυτου).
μένειτε (μενετε). . oray (ear). . ΟΠ. και (W™), . vpas (nmas). - Om.
και αδελφοι) + μου. . τιθεναι (θειναι). . τεκνια] + μου. . γινωσκομεν
(γνωσομεθα). . καρδια] + μων. . παρ (απ). . Om. τον. Ιησουν] + Xv.
+ Xv ev σαρκι εληλυθοτα. . ἀγαπωμεν)ὴ + avTov. πως (ov). .
τήρωμεν (ποιωμεν). υμων. om. δε. . OM. καὶ πνευματος. . nv (ort). .
WOLWVLOV EXETE. ἐχετε) + και ινα πιστευητε. ~Tols πιστευουσιν---
θεου ante wa . παρ (a7). ‘ Ιησου] pr. kv. . “στιν ἡ εντολη. . εἰσηλθον
(εξηλθον). . διδαχὴ (2°)| του XB. . dew (γενεσθαι). om. τη. . εθνων
(εθνικων), . ἀπολαμβανειν (υπ-). . οἰδατε (οιδας). : γραφειν
(γραψαι). om. σοι. γραψαι (γραφειν). --[ὃ 7.
§ 7.] THE TEXT Ixix **Sonderlesarten ” of unknown origin :
I Jn. il. 23. exer exer (2.6. om. ο 2°—exer 2°). lll I. OM. και ἐσμεν. 2
Jn. 6. om. eva (1°). IJn.iv. 2. γινωσκεται. 2 Jn. 11. ὁ yap λεγων. 2Jn.
8. απολεσωμεν . .. eipyacapea ... απολαβωμεν. 3 Jn. 5. εἰς τους
(τουτο). Where it seemed necessary for the sake of clearness, the
other variant or variants have been added in brackets. The readings
adopted by Westcott and Hort and by Nestle have been underlined.
If the agreement of these two authorities may be taken as affording
a rough standard of what is probably the true text, it will be seen at
once that the variants which von Soden claims for the I-H-K text, if
we neglect differences in the order of words, are with one exception
(καὶ ouapev for οἰδαμεν de) those which have been accepted as part
of the true text by the best critics. The same is, however, true of
most of the small class of readings which he attributes, mostly with
some expression of doubt, to the “H” text. Indeed, by the test of
intrinsic probability, these readings stand as high as those claimed
for the I-H-K text. It is difficult to believe, for instance, that προάγων
(2 Jn. 9) is not the true text, softened down by later influences to
παραβαίνων. It is also difficult to suppose that the occurrence of the
word in Mk. x. 32 (Jesus “going before” His disciples on the way to
Jerusalem) had any influence on the Johannine text here. But von
Soden’s treatment of the “H” text may perhaps throw valuable light
on the readings where the other authorities for the “‘H” text part
company with 61-2 (BX), a subject which needs further
investigation. It is also interesting to notice how seldom the readings
assigned to “I” or “K” have been accepted as original. The inclusion
of the omission of και πνευματος (1 Jn. v. 6) among the
“‘Sonderlesarten” of K is interesting. Does this imply that the true
text of the passage ran o ἐλθων δὲ voatos Kat αἱματος Kat
πνευματος, and that the words και πνευματος Were removed in the
“‘ K” recension because of the absence of corresponding words in
the second half of the verse ἢ On the whole, it would seem that we
must wait for the publication of von Soden’s Greek text before we
can make much use of the information contained in his section on
the text of the Catholic Epistles, except in so far as it supplies us
with information about new readings not known before, or at least
not recorded in the apparatus criticus of the ordinary editions. It
may, however, be worth while to append a list of the MSS which he
assigns to his three Recensions, and which have been
Ixx THE EPISTLES OF S. JOHN [§ 7. fully examined for the
purposes of his great work. The symbols used by Tischendorf and
Gregory are given below the von Soden numbers. 1. H Recension. δὶ
62 63 64 86 848 =257 5 ἢ 103%) 162 BN Ο At @ το ΚΠ eso) Fen 6.
2. I Recension. 15. 7o -I0I 7 -264 200-382 6505 252 505 40, \
Apl261 275, 3 8: 231 69,(31AK) , 308 8459 8203 —5300 : 3 552 489
(195AK) 808(265AK) 218 (65AK) 4217 845 170 175 102 502 397 —
205 —106 a as 208s Bro 515 ΠῸ θ᾽, “51 179 -164 -261 184 158
68157 —6507 τος 142 — 395 547 (202AK) 241 (104AK) 56 Ὁ 65
L100 335 6254 (? 7254) —110 1 22, 7, 317 « πε e222 26 332 -0457
—6500 5156 256 361 209 (95AK) 205 (93AK) 226 (108AK) 24 248
ΤΙΣ gio 235 332: ΤΟ ΟΣ 365.2306 1472 399. B206 253 498 214 —
312 69 242(105AK) 2, (8) 78 -157 469 8370 — 29 215 1149
(288AK). 1 (αὐ 298. yo ἜΠῸ iss 207 353 — 1276. (β) 364 -486 τι4
-174 506 τ 335 252 09: 3. K Recension. 2 5 54 186 8255 = 394 500
S L 384 223 58(3sAK) — 45. K*. 186 8255 223 57 (35AK). K*. (used
for 1 Jn. v. only). 358 462 8463 38 169 656 (213AK). 1 In
accordance with von Soden’s usage, when a number is given without
a preceding letter it belongs to the a group (Acts and Catholic
Epistles, etce.).
§ 8.] COMMENTARIES, ETC. xxi § 8. COMMENTARIES, ETC.
The following list of Commentaries, Articles, and Books has been
compiled more especially with reference to what has been used in
the preparation of this edition. The fullest bibliographies are to be
found in Holtzmann (Hand-Kommentar) and Luthardt (Strack-
Zockler). Ancient Greek— Clement of Alexandria, only extant in
Cassiodorus’ Latin Summary of the Adumbrationes on Jn. i. ii.
(Clement, al., ed. Stahlin, iii. p. 209, 1909). Oecumenius.
Theophylact. Catena, ed. Cramer. Latin— Augustine, Zvactatus x. in
Epistolam Ioannis ad Parthos (Migne, 11. 1. P.L. 34). Bede. Modern
— Wettstein. Bengel. Licke, 1820-1856. Translation, Commentary on
the Epp. of S. John. Thomas Clark, 1837. Huther (in Meyer, 1855-
1880). Translation, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the General
Epp. of James and 1 John. T.& T. Clark, 1882. F. Ὁ. Maurice, Zhe
Epistles of S. John. Macmillan & Co., 1857. Ebrard, “ Die Briefe
Johannis,” Konigsberg, 1859 in (O/shausen’s Biblischer Commentar).
Ewald, Die Johanneischen Schriften. Gottingen, 1861. Haupt, z John.
1869. Translation, Zhe First Epistle of S. John. (Clark’s Foreign
Theological Library, 1879.) Rothe, Der Erste Johannis Brief
praktischerklart, 1878. A most valuable Commentary. Westcott, Zhe
Epistles of S. John. Macmillan, 1883-1892. Plummer (Cambridge
Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges). 1884-1886. Pulpit
Commentary. 1889. Lias (Cambridge Bible for Schools). 1887. B.
Weiss (Meyer. 6th edition, 1899). In the preparation of the notes of
the present book the 5th edition (1888) was used. Luthardt (Strack-
Zickler Kurzgef. Kommentar, iv.). 1895.
Ixxii THE EPISTLES OF S. JOHN [8 8. Poggel, ZZ, 777.
John. 1896. W. Karl, Johanneische Studien, i., der 1° Johannesbrief.
1898. Belser. 1906. Baumgarten (J. Weiss, Die Schriften des NT. ii. 3,
pp. 315-352). 1907. Holtzmann (and-Commentar zum NT. iv.). 1908
(‘“‘besorgt von W. Bauer”). D. Smith (Zxposttor’s Greek Testament,
v.). 1910. Windisch (Lie¢zmann’s Handbuch zum NT. iv. 2). 1911.
Monographs and Articles : Hilgenfeld, Das Lvangelium und die Briefe
Johannis nach threm Lehrbegriff dargestellt. 1849. Holtzmann, Das
Problem des 1 Johannesbr. in seinem Verhdltniss sum Evang.
Jahrbuch fiir Protestant. Theologie. 1881, 1882. Haring (Theodor),
‘“‘Gedankengang τ. Grundgedanke des 1 Joh.” (Zheolog.
Abhandlungen Carl von Weizsacker gewidmet), Freiburg in B. 1882.
Harnack, Ueber den 777 Joh. Texte u. Untersuchungen, xv. 3, 1897.
Stevens, Zhe Johannine Theology. New York, 1894. Wilamowitz,
Hermes, 1898, p. 531 ff. Weisinger, Studien u. Kritiken, 1899, p. 575
ff. J. R. Harris, Expositor, 1901, p. 194 ff. Wohlenberg, Weue
Kirchliche Zettschrift. 1902. Gibbins, Zxfosttor, 1902, p. 228 ff.
Wurm, Die lrrlehrer im 1" Johannes Brief. 1903. Chapman, Journal of
Theological Studies, 1904, pp. 357 ff., 517 fff. Bartlet, 77S, 1905, p.
204 ff. (in answer to Chapman). Clemen, Zeitschrift fiir NT.
Wissenschaft (Preuschen), 1905, ἢ: 275. Salmond, article in
Hastings’ Bible Dictionary. P. W. Schmiedel, articles in Lucyclopedia
Biblica, also Relizionsgeschichtliche Volksbiicher: Das 4 Evangelium
gegeniiber den 3 ersten. Evangelium, Briefe, u. Offenbarung des
Joh. nach threr Entstehung u. Bedeutung. 1906. Expositor, June
1907. Correspondence between Drs. Westcott and Hort. The
Divisions of the First Ep. of S. John. Law, Zests of Life (Lectures on 1
Jn.). T. & T. Clark, 1909. Findlay, Fellowship in the Life Eternal.
Hodder, 1909.
8.9.7] SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES. AUTHORSHIP Ixxiii
General: Wellhausen, Zrwetterungen u. Anderungen im gten
Evangelium. Spitta, Das 4 Evangelium. 1910. Pfleiderer, Das
Urchristentum. Berlin, 1902. Translation. Primitive Christianity.
Montgomery. London, 1906. Knopf, Wachapostolische Zeitalter, p.
328 ff., 1905. Zahn, Einlettung in das NT. First edition, 1897.
Translation (from the 2nd edition), 1909: T. & T. Clark. Jiilicher,
Zin/ectung. Translation. Ax Introduction to the New Testament. J. P.
Ward. London, 1904. § 9. THE SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES.
AUTHORSHIP. The Second and Third Epistles of S. John naturally
form a pair. They are almost exactly of the same length. Their length
is probably determined by the size of an ordinary papyrus sheet
(Zahn, Zim. ii. 581. Rendel Harris). It is hardly necessary to discuss
the question of their common authorship. The similarity between
them is too close to admit of any explanation except common
authorship or conscious imitation. It would tax the ingenuity of the
most skilful separator to determine which is the original and which
the copy. They probably do not deal with the same situation, though
many writers have found a reference to the Second Epistle in the
Third (ἔγραψά te τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ). But the similarity of their style and
the parallelism of their structure point clearly, not only to common
authorship, but to nearness of date. The following phrases show the
close similarity of their general structure : Β΄ I’ ὁ πρεσβύτερος. ὃν
ἐγὼ ἀγαπῶ ἐν ἀληθείᾳ. ἐχάρην γὰρ λίαν... μαρτυρούντων σου τῇ
ἀληθείᾳ καθὼς σὺ ἐν ἀληθείᾳ περιπατεῖς. ἵνα ἀκούω τὰ ἐμὰ τέκνα ἐν
τῇ ἀληθείᾳ περιπάτουντα. ὁ πρεσβύτερος. ods ἐγὼ ἀγαπῶ ἐν
ἀληθείᾳ. ἐχάρην λίαν ὅτι εὕρηκα ἐκ τῶν τέκνων σου περιπατοῦντας
ἑν ἀληθείᾳ. πολλὰ ἔχων ὑμῖν γράφειν. οὐκ ἐβουλήθην διὰ χάρτου καὶ
μέλανος. ἀλλὰ ἐλπίζω γενέσθαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. καὶ στόμα πρὸς στόμα
λαλῆσαι. ἀσπάζεταί σε τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἀδελφῆς σου. πολλὰ εἶχον
γράψαι σοι. ἀλλ᾽ οὐ θέλω διὰ μέλανος καὶ καλάμου σοι γράφειν.
ἐλπίζω δὲ εὐθέως σε ἰδεῖν. καὶ στόμα πρὸς στόμα λαλήσομεν.
ἀσπάζονταί σε οἱ φίλοι.
Ixxiv THE EPISTLES OF S. JOHN [3 9. It may be a question
how much of this should be referred to epistolary convention, and
how much should be regarded as the sondergut of the writer. But
the close resemblance, coupled with complete independence in the
parts where circumstances and subject-matter naturally lead to
diversity, can hardly be explained on any other theory except that
the two letters are by the same hand. A more serious question is
raised when the two letters are compared with the First Epistle. Here
there is a certain amount of evidence, both external and internal,
which is not conclusive of difference of authorship, but at least
needs serious consideration. They have many phrases which recall,
or are identical with, those of the First Epistle. μένων ἐν τῇ διδαχῇ, 2
Jn. 9. τὴν ἀλήθειαν τὴν μένουσαν ἐν ἡμῖν, Ὁ. πο ἃ περιπατοῦντας ἐν
ἀληθείᾳ, 2 Jn. 4; cf. 3 Jn. 3. περιπατῶμεν κατὰ Tas ἐντολάς, 2 Jn. 6.
ὁ κακοποιῶν οὐχ ἑώρακεν τὸν θεόν, Byline tk. ὁ ἀγαθοποιῶν ἐκ τοῦ
θεοῦ ἐστίν. ἡ μαρτυρία ἡμῶν ἀληθής ἐστιν, 3 Jn. 12 (cf. Jn. xxi. 24).
ἀλήθεια thrice in each Epistle. ἡ ἀλήθεια twice in 2 Jn., thrice (four
times) in 3 Jn. οὗτος καὶ τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱὸν ἔχει, 2 Jn. 9. θεὸν
οὐκ ἔχει, 2 Jn. 9. (ἐντολὴν) ἣν εἴχομεν am’ ἀρχῆς, 2Jn. 5. καθὼς
ἠκούσατε ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς, 2 Jn. 6. οἱ μὴ ὁμολογοῦντες ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν
ἐρχόμενον ἐν σαρκί. οὗτός ἐστιν. . . ὁ ἀντίχριστος, 2 Jn. 7ἡ
μαρτυρία ἡμῶν ἀληθής ἐστι, 3 Jn. 12. οὐχ ὡς ἐντολὴν γράφων σοι
καινήν, 2 |e Sp ἐλπίζω γενέσθαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. .. ἵνα ἡ χαρὰ ἡμῶν
πεπληρωμένη ἧ, 2 Jn. 12. αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἀγάπη, ἵνα περιπατῶμεν o
dio lft δὰ οὔτε ἐπιδέχεται... καὶ κωλύει, 3 Jn. 10. We may notice the
following : ὁ μένων ἐν τῇ ἀγάπῃ, I Jn. iv. 16. ὁ λογὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν
ὑμῖν μένει, I Jn. ii. 14. ἐν τῷ φωτὶ περιπατῶμεν, I Jn. 1. 7. καθὼς
ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν I Jn. ii. 6. τὸν θεὸν ὃν οὐχ ἑώρακεν, I Jn. iv.
20. πᾶς ὁ ἁμαρτάνων οὐχ ἑώρακεν αὐτόν, I Jn. iii. 6. ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ
ἐστέ, I Jn. iv. 4. ἀληθές ἐστιν καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ψεῦδος, I Jn. 11. 27.
once in I Jn. eight times in I Jn. πᾶς ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν υἱὸν οὐδὲ τὸν
πατέρα ἔχει. ὁ ὁμολογῶν τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει, τ] Π 1}. 29:
ἐντολὴν παλαιὰν ἣν εἴχετε ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς, τ} π| ἢ: ἣν ἠκούσατε ἀπ᾽
ἀρχῆς, I Jn. ill. 11. ὃ ὁμολογεῖ Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα, I
Jn. iv. 2. οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἁντίχριστος, ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν πατέρα καὶ
τὸν υἱόν, I Jn. il. 22. εἰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαμβάνομεν, I
Jn. Vv. 9. οὐκ ἐντολὴν καινὴν γράφω. ὑμῖν, I Jn. 1: ἢ: ταῦτα
γράφομεν ἡμεῖς ἵνα ἡ χαρὰ ἡμῶν 7 πεπληρωμένη, I Jn. i. 4. αὕτη
ἐστὶν ἡ ἐντολὴ αὐτοῦ ἵνα πιστεύωΕν, I Jn. iii. 23. Cf. οὔτε... ἔχεις
καὶ... ἐστιν, Jn. iv. II. We may also notice the thoroughly Johannine
method of emphasizing an idea by parallel clauses, one positive and
the other negative. Cf ΤΟ 3° Jn. rr.
§ 9.] SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES. AUTHORSHIP Ixxv A
careful comparison of these instances of words, phrases, and
constructions which are common to the two smaller Epistles and the
larger Epistle establishes beyond the possibility of doubt the intimate
connection between the two. A knowledge of the First Epistle, or of
its contents, seems almost necessarily presupposed in some
passages of the smaller Epistles. Cf. especially 2 Jn. 9, 3 Jn. τ᾿. 2 Jn.
12 need not contain an actual reference to 1 Jn. i. 4, but it gains in
point if it is written in view of what is said there about the “fulfilment
of joy.” In the one case it is the written, in the other the spoken,
word that is lacking to assure the fulness of joy which comes of
fellowship. And it is interesting to notice the similarity of the results
obtained by a comparison of 2 and 3 John with 1 John to those
which appear when we compare the Gospel and the First Epistle.
The connection is indisputable. We are compelled to choose between
common authorship and conscious imitation. And the freedom with
which the same and similar tools are handled points clearly to the
former as the more probable alternative. The internal evidence of
different authorship on which Pfleiderer depends is not conclusive.
He notices (1) the anonymous and general character of the First
Epistle, as compared with the address of the Second to a particular
Church, and the Third to an individual, hamed Caius, and the use of
the title “The Presbyter” by the author in both. (2) The common
identification of this ‘‘Presbyter” with John the Presbyter is supported
by no valid reasons. There must have been many other ‘‘
Presbyters,” and those addressed would know who was meant,
though it was not the famous “ Presbyter” of Papias. We really know
nothing of Papias’ Presbyter except that he “handed down” a
Chiliastic saying attributed to the Lord. Such an one was not likely to
have busied himself with Gnostic theology and anti-Gnostic polemic.
In his case the term “Elder” is used in the natural sense of the term;
in these Epistles it is a title of office, used by one who claims respect
for his official position, who dictates to the faithful as to the
company. they are to keep, gives letters of commendation to
wandering preachers, and is offended at their being neglected. (3)
The anti-Gnostic aay of 2 John is the same as that of Polycarp, ad
Phil. vii. 1, pure docetism, as found in Ignatius, and not the milder fa
later separation between Jesus and Christ. Of these reasons some
are pure assumptions, and others are fully accounted for by the
(possible) differences of circumstance. There is nothing in the
Epistles which necessitates an official use of the term “Elder,” though
one who is aged may be in a position to speak and act with
authority. The authority which Cs
Ixxvi THE EPISTLES OF S. JOHN [§ 9. the author claims is
far greater than ever attached to the office of “ Presbyter.” The
question of whether “pure Docetism” is earlier than ‘dualistic
separation” of the kind attributed to Cerinthus is an open one. But
where is the justification for differentiating between the Second and
the First Epistles in this respect? The language of the Second is
hardly intelligible without reference to the First. It may certainly be
interpreted in the same sense. The reasons brought forward by
Jiilicher (Zzn/ertung, p. 218) are not more convincing. The
expressions ἐχάρην λίαν, βλέπετε ἑαυτούς (cf. τ Jn. v. 21, φυλάξατε
ἑαυτά), μισθὸν πλήρη ἀπολαμβάνειν, συνεργοὶ γινώμεθα,
ἀγαθοποιεῖν, do not prove much. The use of the singular only of
Antichrist is equally unconvincing, especially in view of 1 Jn. ii. 22.
The difference between ἐληλυθότα and ἐρχόμενον is at least less
striking than the resemblance of the rest of the passages. The
apparent contradiction between 3 Jn. 11, ὃ κακοποιῶν οὐχ ἑώρακεν
τὸν θεόν, and Jn. i. 18, 1 Jn. iv. 12, could easily be paralleled by
similar ‘ contradictions” in the Gospel (cf. also Jn. xiv. 9). Both
writers also lay stress on the external evidence. That the two smaller
Epistles found their way into the Canon apart from the First is partly
true. There is, however, considerable evidence for the acceptance of
wo Johannine Epistles, z.e. 1, 2 Jn., before the three were generally
recognized. And the private character of the smaller Epistles, as well
as their relative unimportance, are quite enough to account for their
more gradual acceptance, even if they were written by the author of
the First. Pfleiderer’s statement, that the Second and Third Epistles
are described in the Muratorian Fragment as written in John’s name
to do honour to him, rests on a very doubtful interpretation of the
passage in which two Johannine Epistles, almost certainly the First
and Second, are mentioned, after which comes the sentence dealing
with the Wisdom of Solomon. Schwartz! regards the two Epistles as,
‘“‘in contrast to the First, genuine letters of a real Elder,” whose
name, however, cannot have been John, or it would not have been
necessary ‘to cut away his real name, in order to bring these
interesting documents into the Canon.” This is an excellent reason
for supposing that the name John never stood in these Epistles. It
does not help us to determine the probability or improbability of the
view that the letters were written by one John, who described
himself as “‘ the Elder” without adding his name. The impossibility of
a Chiliast such as Papias’ “John the Elder” having any part in the
composition of the Johannine literature is emphasized by many
writers, especially by Pfleiderer 1 Ueber den Tod der Sohne Zebedat,
p. 47.
§ 9.] SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES. AUTHORSHIP Ixxvii
and Réville (‘ce presbytre Jean en qui le millénaire Papias saluait un
de ses maitres,” Ze Quatri¢éme Evangile, p. 50). All we know of him,
if in this case we may trust Irenaeus more than many writers are
usually willing to do, is that Papias recorded on his authority the
famous Chiliastic saying about the fruitfulness of the Messianic
kingdom. In what sense he interpreted it we do not know. If the
Presbyter to whom Papias owes his account of S. Mark is the same,
as would seem most probable, he was certainly capable of sound
judgment and careful appreciation. And one phrase which occurs in
the Third Epistle recalls, or is recalled by, the words of Papias’
preface (ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς τῆς ἀληθείας). It is somewhat hasty to assume
that the “ Presbyter venerated by the Chiliastic and stupid Papias ”
(Réville, p. 316) was incapable of anything “spiritual.” He handed
down a ‘Chiliastic” saying, or one which was perhaps too grossly
‘Chiliastic” in its literal meaning to have been taken literally, even by
the Elder who handed it down. His views were probably Millenarian.
It would be difficult to find any one “venerated” at the end of the
first or beginning of the second century who did not in some sense
share the ordinary Chiliastic expectation of most Christians. But as to
how “gross,” or how “stupid,” his views were we really know nothing.
Even Papias may have been better than Eusebius thought him. In
any case we have but slender evidence to justify the transference of
all his “stupidities ” to the Elder John whose traditions he has
preserved. The position of authority, not claimed so much as used
and acted upon, by the author of these two Epistles, is such as
perhaps could only belong to a representative of the older
generation. Whether it would be natural for John the Apostle to
describe himself as “the Elder” is at least open to question. There
can be no doubt of the naturalness of the title if used by such an
one as John the Elder, the disciple of the Lord. We have every
reason to believe that an “Elder” held a predominant position in Asia
Minor about the close of the first century. There are valid reasons for
calling him John. His relation to John the son of Zebedee is a
mystery which, at present at least, we have not enough evidence to
enable us to solve. | Harnack’s conjecture, based on the most
natural interpretation of the fragment of Papias’ preface which
Eusebius has preserved, that he was a pupil of John the Apostle, and
in some sense a disciple of the Lord, is perhaps the hypothesis which
leaves fewest difficulties unsolved. That he is the author of the two
smaller Epistles is the view which seems to be best supported by
external tradition and by internal probability. The arguments in
favour of different authorship for Gospel, First Epistle, and the two
shorter Epistles are not negligible, but they are not con
Ixxviii THE EPISTLES OF S. JOHN [§ 9. clusive. The theory
which attributes to him some share at least in the writing of Gospel
and First Epistle is the most probable ‘conjecture that we can at
present make. To what extent he is answerable for the matter of
either is a difficult problem, perhaps insoluble in the present state of
our knowledge. Most of the difficulties which every historical inquirer
must feel to stand in the way of attributing the Gospel (in its present
form) and the Epistle (they are less in this case than in that of the
Gospel) to the son of Zebedee are modified, though they are not
removed, by the hypothesis that a disciple is responsible for the final
redaction of his master’s teaching. The longer and the more carefully
the Johannine literature is studied, the more clearly one point seems
to stand out. The most obviously ‘‘ genuine ” of the writings are the
two shorter Epistles, and they are the least original. To believe that
an author, or authors, capable of producing the Gospel, or even the
First Epistle, modelled their style and teaching on the two smaller
Epistles, is a strain upon credulity which is a/most past bearing. Are
we not moving along lines of greater probability if we venture to
suppose that a leader who had spent his life in teaching the contents
of the Gospel, at last wrote it down that those whom he had taught,
and others, “‘ might believe, and believing might have life in His
name”; that after some years he felt that the message of the Gospel
had not produced the effect on their lives and creed which he had
expected, and that he therefore made the appeal of the First Epistle,
6 ἠκούσατε ar ἀρχῆς μενέτω, bidding them make use of what they
already knew, and assuring them that in it they would find the help
they needed to face the circumstances in which they now found
themselves placed? The differences between the two writings may
well be due to the needs of a simpler and more popular appeal. It is
the circumstances of the hearers and their capacity to understand
which determine his message, rather than any very clear change in
his own position or opinions. At the same time or at a later period he
may have had to deal with the special circumstances of a particular
Church or particular individuals, and again the special circumstances
of his hearers and their intellectual and spiritual capacity have
determined the form and the substance of his appeal. The term
“Catholic” is a misleading one. It has perhaps misled the critical even
more than the conservative interpreters of these Epistles. It is
impossible to understand these letters if they are regarded as having
been originally composed as a message to the whole Church, or for
all time. The writer knows those whom he addresses. He writes with
full knowledge of their immediate circumstances and of their spiritual
powers. If we are to interpret his words, we must consider, not so
much what he could
§ 10.] THE SECOND EPISTLE » Ixxix have said himself, as
the circumstances which tied him down to saying that which his
readers could understand. It is possible that advancing years may
have modified his views, and even weakened his powers. But the
special circumstances which called for his intervention, and perhaps
the vw6pdrys of his hearers, offer a far more probable explanation
of the difference which we cannot but feel between the spiritual
heights of the Gospel and the common-place advice of the shorter
Epistles. He who proclaimed 6 λόγος σάρξ ἐγένετο may still have
believed it, though he finds himself compelled to write μὴ μιμοῦ τὸ
κακὸν ἀλλὰ τὸ ἀγαθόν, and to make appeals to his personal
authority in the case of those to whom his deeper thoughts were as
a sealed book. § 10. THE SECOND EPISTLE. The chief object of this
letter is to give the Church or the family to whom it is addressed,
clear advice and instruction about the reception of Christians from
other Churches. The duty of hospitality was recognized and
enforced. We may compare He. ΧΗ]. 2. It was a necessary part of
the duty of each Church, or of some leading members in it, during
the whole of the period when the union of the various members of
the Christian body was being secured by the work of ‘‘ Apostles,
Prophets, Evangelists, Teachers,” who went about from place to
place, while the resident officers were expected to submit to the
authority of the higher xavzk. In the opinion of the Elder, who clearly
claims to exert his authority over all the Churches in the sphere in
which he lives, there was danger of the abuse of hospitality. False
teachers are taking advantage of the opportunity to disseminate
their errors. So he lays down the two practical tests which may form
guiding principles in offering hospitality to strangers. They are the
same points which are insisted upon in the First Epistle. Those who
carry out the Gospel in their lives, who “ walk in love,” and who
recognize fully the reality and the permanence of the Incarnation,
who “confess Jesus Christ coming in the flesh,” are to be received.
The Progressives who do not abide in the “teaching of the Christ”
must be refused. Even to give them greeting is to participate in their
evil works. Incidentally the Elder takes the occasion thus offered to
encourage those who are faithful, who are ‘“ walking in truth,” and
to urge on them once more the duty of “walking in love” as well as
of remaining true to the teaching which they had heard “from the
beginning.” He reserves what he has to say at greater length, till he
has the opportunity of seeing and
1xxx THE EPISTLES OF S. JOHN [8 10. conversing with
them, on the visit which he hopes soon to be able te pay them. The
situation recalls that of the Didache, where the same difficulty of
how the “ Prophets” are to be received is seriously felt and discussed
at length. There the danger is rather of those who make a regular
custom of demanding maintenance as Prophets who come in the
name of the Lord, and so of living in idleness at the expense of
others. In the Epistle the dissemination of false teaching is the chief
danger to be guarded against. It would be rash to describe the
situation found in the Didache as a later development than that
which is suggested in this letter, At the same time the similarity of
the circumstances does not necessitate the assignment of both
writings to exactly the same date. Development was at different
rates in different places. From what we know of the history of the
Asiatic Churches, we might naturally expect stages to be reached
there at an earlier date than in some other regions. The evidence,
therefore, of this resemblance to the Didache should be used with
caution in determining the date of the Epistle. In itself the parallel is
clear and interesting. We may also compare the praise bestowed on
the Smyrnaeans by Ignatius for their hospitable reception of Philo
and Agathopus (Ign. Sm. 10), or Polycarp’s thanks to the Philippians
for their kindness to the prisoners (Pol. ad Phil. 1). The well-known
controversy about the destination of this Epistle shows no signs of a
final settlement. The view that it was addressed to an individual lady
and not to a Church has of late been most vigorously supported by
Rendel Harris (Zxfositor, 1901). Advocates of this view have found
her name either in Electa or in Kyria, which is not unknown as the
name of a woman (cf. Liicke, p. 444). The names of Mary and
Martha have also been suggested, the former because of the
incident recorded in Jn. xix. 27, the latter for a supposed play on the
name (Martha-dominaKyria). It is hardly necessary to discuss
seriously these conjectures of Knauer and Volkmar. The name Electa
is almost certainly excluded by ver. 13, and by the improbability of
two sisters bearing the same name. If the letter is addressed to an
individual, the name is clearly not given. The use of Kupéa is very
Welcome to Our Bookstore - The Ultimate Destination for Book Lovers
Are you passionate about testbank and eager to explore new worlds of
knowledge? At our website, we offer a vast collection of books that
cater to every interest and age group. From classic literature to
specialized publications, self-help books, and children’s stories, we
have it all! Each book is a gateway to new adventures, helping you
expand your knowledge and nourish your soul
Experience Convenient and Enjoyable Book Shopping Our website is more
than just an online bookstore—it’s a bridge connecting readers to the
timeless values of culture and wisdom. With a sleek and user-friendly
interface and a smart search system, you can find your favorite books
quickly and easily. Enjoy special promotions, fast home delivery, and
a seamless shopping experience that saves you time and enhances your
love for reading.
Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and
personal growth!
ebooksecure.com