Another important woman lost in translation...

[Tom Wetmore]

I was just studying 2 John and was curious about the woman that John was writing to. He addresses her as the "chosen" or "elect lady". As is the case quite often, the English translation may not fully convey the meaning. So studying the original Greek sometimes opens up a better understand.

The first word translated as "chosen" or "elect" is commonly used in the NT and most often carries the implication of one chosen of God. So this woman was one of the elect or God's chosen.

It is the word "lady" that doesn't quite capture the nuance of the original Greek word kyria, especially the modern usage of lady. Common usage conveys politeness and respectability or refinement, but it is largely synonymous with woman. Perhaps the old English or even British English comes closer to conveying a meaning as an aristocratic title.

This is the only time in the NT that this feminine noun is used. (A few commentators suggest it to be a proper name, although it is not translated as such, except by Young. But the modifying word "chosen" renders it awkwardly, making that less likely to be her name.) Strongs unsatisfactorily says it is the woman to whom John is addressing the letter. Vines suggests it may convey her special relation with the local church.

However, the masculine form of the word, kyrios, is used very frequently and is most often translated as "Lord", "lord" or "master". That word conveys superiority, even supremacy. It is one in control of and having authority over others and was the title with which servants greeted their master. It was also the title for addressing a civil ruler or authority.

The literal meaning of kyria is that it is simply the feminine form of lord or master.

What does this tell us of how John regarded this woman? (He certainly was not as obsequious to the recipients of his other two letters.) Was he conveying something about how others regarded her, such as the church, as suggested by Vines? Was she the one chosen to be in charge?

Not surprisingly, I am inclined to think that is quite possible. The direct message and warning given by John leaves an implied context that the false teachers would be expected to be coming to her. If she was not the one in charge or of some significant position in the church why would they come to her anyway? And for that matter, why would John feel a need to warn some ordinary woman of the church, especially for such a serious antichrist teaching? It would seem more probable that John would send such a warning to the one in charge, the pastor or elder of the church.

Like Phoebe, this unnamed woman leader of the NT church, gets downgraded to just a dear lady by the patriarchal tradition handed down by the church fathers that preceded and influenced the translators.

[Woody]

cool

[Kevin H]

WOW!!!

[Q.E.D.]

Saw something similar to this on 3ABN I think it might have been Steven Bohr.

[Tom Wetmore]

I hadn't seen that. I'll have to search for it to see if they have it archived on the 3ABN site.

[CoAspen]

With all the research you have posted lately......I keep hearing....silence.

[doug yowell]

Like Phoebe, this unnamed woman leader of the NT church, gets downgraded to just a dear lady by the patriarchal tradition handed down by the church fathers that preceded and influenced the translators.

Given the overriding negative influence of the overwhelming majority of Bible translators opposing the importance of women, why don't you correctly translate a woman friendly version from the existing Greek manuscripts? Extrapolating specific words to the point where one creates a historical scenario that is completely removed from the obvious context of the text itself may be exciting but it also stretches the limits of credibility to new levels.If the above interpretation and following commentary of the "elect lady" is true it introduces an even more interesting scenario. II John ends with the statement of vs.13 which reads:"The children of your elect sister greet you." So did this lady have a sister that was also a leader of another church? Were one of these women the leader of the church in Babylon (I Pet.5:13)? Could one of them later evolved into "that woman Jezebel , who calls herself a prophetess..."(Rev.2:20)? Where does one stop? If the word "elect" does not refer to a personal name than a simple and more contextual reading of the letter would be to understand that John was addressing some church body as the elect lady, not referring to some important position of individual leadership.

[Tom Wetmore]

Doug, you need to read more carefully. The word "elect" was not the significant word here. The woman at the end, John refers to as "sister", not as kyria.

[Tom Wetmore]

Someone just brought to my attention this article - http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/the-chosen-lady-in-2-john/ .

[Woody]

[Overaged]

With all the research you have posted lately......I keep hearing....silence.

Hmmm, you must be checking at a different board. Some of us have decided to just cal it spam.

[Overaged]

Not surprisingly, I am inclined to think that is quite possible. The direct message and warning given by John leaves an implied context that the false teachers would be expected to be coming to her. If she was not the one in charge or of some significant position in the church why would they come to her anyway? And for that matter, why would John feel a need to warn some ordinary woman of the church, especially for such a serious antichrist teaching? It would seem more probable that John would send such a warning to the one in charge, the pastor or elder of the church.

Like Phoebe, this unnamed woman leader of the NT church, gets downgraded to just a dear lady by the patriarchal tradition handed down by the church fathers that preceded and influenced the translators.

Too much implied theology here, and too many ifs. You keep wanting to polarize by relegating genders to status of various kinds. No such thing as "ordinary" women in my church.

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: CoAspen

With all the research you have posted lately......I keep hearing....silence.

Hmmm, you must be checking at a different board. Some of us have decided to just cal it spam.

Spam to some, food to others...

Seriously, you need to get a better understanding of what spam is. These topics aren't spam. Not even close. Now there are some posts that may be spam-like, such as the ones posting off topic or that offer nothing of substance to contribute to the conversation.

[Tom Wetmore]

Too much implied theology here, and too many ifs. You keep wanting to polarize by relegating genders to status of various kinds. No such thing as "ordinary" women in my church.

Missing the point...

Not so much about theology as it is about historical and linguistic accuracy.

[Gail]

I'm enjoying the topic! I think I will go and read 2 John...

Thanks, Tom, for providing the insight.

[CoAspen]

For those wishing to argue with 'informed opinions', it is not about pro or con, but about haveing the information available to form an opinion

[Woody]

For those wishing to argue with 'informed opinions', it is not about pro or con, but about haveing the information available to form an opinion

[Christopher]

[John317]

I was just studying 2 John and was curious about the woman that John was writing to. He addresses her as the "chosen" or "elect lady". As is the case quite often, the English translation may not fully convey the meaning. So studying the original Greek sometimes opens up a better understand.

The first word translated as "chosen" or "elect" is commonly used in the NT and most often carries the implication of one chosen of God. So this woman was one of the elect or God's chosen.

It is the word "lady" that doesn't quite capture the nuance of the original Greek word kyria, especially the modern usage of lady....

There are a good number of things about this letter that indicate it was written to a congregation and not to an individual.

First of all, much of 2 John is written in the second person plural-- i.e., "you all" or "you people." For instance, see verses 6, 8, & 10. If John were writing to a single indivdiual woman, he wouldn't say, "you [plural] have heard... that you [plural] walk in love...You [plural] watch out that you [plural] do not lose what you [plural] have worked for... If anyone comes to you [plural]... you [plural] do not receive him..."

Second, 1 John 5 asks that the recipient of the letter and the writer "love one another." This is something that the apostle John is more likely to say in the context of a congregation than to say to a particular female Christian. The phrase makes better sense if addressed to a church.

Third, the word "church" in Greek is feminine in gender, and "lady" would harmonize well with that.

Fourth, elsewhere in John's writings, the church is depicted as a "bride" (Rev. 21: 2,9; 22: 17).

Fifth, the Greek word kyria ("lady") referred to a social subunit in the Greek city-state. John may use this word for a local congregation instead of the more common feminine word ekklesia.

Finally, the last verse of 2 John suggests that John writes from one congregation to another, which he terms "your elect sister."

[Woody]

Quote:

Like Phoebe, this unnamed woman leader of the NT church, gets downgraded to just a dear lady by the patriarchal tradition handed down by the church fathers that preceded and influenced the translators.

Excellent work Tom.

[John317]

The first word translated as "chosen" or "elect" is commonly used in the NT and most often carries the implication of one chosen of God. So this woman was one of the elect or God's chosen.

You first need to show evidence that John is writing to a woman rather than to a church.

[John317]

It is the word "lady" that doesn't quite capture the nuance of the original Greek word kyria, especially the modern usage of lady. Common usage conveys politeness and respectability or refinement, but it is largely synonymous with woman. Perhaps the old English or even British English comes closer to conveying a meaning as an aristocratic title.

According to all the Greek-English lexicons, kyria means "lady," and all of the English translations give it as "lady" or "dear lady" (NIV).

What is your evidence that it should not be so translated? If you were translating 2 John, how would you render it?

[John317]

Like Phoebe, this unnamed woman leader of the NT church, gets downgraded to just a dear lady by the patriarchal tradition handed down by the church fathers that preceded and influenced the translators.

There's no valid evidence that either Phoebe or the "lady" of 2 John 1 & 5 were "downgraded" by anyone, let alone by a "patriarchal tradition handed by down by the church Fathers that preceded and influenced the translators."

As I've shown, the evidence is that the recipient of 2 John was a church, not an indivudal woman.

[Woody]

Quote:

Like Phoebe, this unnamed woman leader of the NT church, gets downgraded to just a dear lady by the patriarchal tradition handed down by the church fathers that preceded and influenced the translators.

Excellent Point Tom.

[olger]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

Like Phoebe, this unnamed woman leader of the NT church, gets downgraded to just a dear lady by the patriarchal tradition handed down by the church fathers that preceded and influenced the translators.

There's no valid evidence that either Phoebe or the "lady" of 2 John 1 & 5 were "downgraded" by anyone, let alone by a "patriarchal tradition handed by down by the church Fathers that preceded and influenced the translators."

As I've shown, the evidence is that the recipient of 2 John was a church, not an indivudal woman.

I agree. This seems to be spin-doctoring, of which we have a heavy infestation lately.

G