Receive Him Not Into Your House

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 74]

     In the Firm Foundation, Oct.30, 1962, a brother in the Lord used more than a page to deal with my understanding of 2 John 9. After giving his own interpretation he asked, "Why then should any one think 'the doctrine of Christ' in 2 John 9 should be limited to mean the teaching concerning the deity of Christ?" I want to answer that question because I believe the meaning of this verse is relevant to reduction of factionalism and restoration of unity to the saints of God. The expression, "If any man come and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house," has been used as a basis for treating with cold disdain every brother who could not in good conscience conform to the party norm. "This doctrine" has been made to refer to varied views relative to instrumental music, missionary societies, the millennium, colleges, cups, classes, charitable institutions, radio and television programs, and every other unwritten creed compiled to harass and hamper the heirs of a noble restoration movement which was originally begun as a project to unite the Christians in all sects."

     It is my conviction that the apostle of love had no intention of handing us a convenient club with which to batter our brethren who sincerely disagree with us about these, or kindred matters. His purpose was to prevent the disciples from being exploited by those who would deny the very foundation of the faith rather than furnish a foundation for the strife and division which today exists among believers in the Messiahship and Sonship of Jesus. The limited space available to me will not allow a detailed explanation but I suggest the following points for consideration.

     It is generally conceded that John wrote his gospel record and his first and second letters to combat Gnosticism. Ephesus, where he resided, was also the home of Cerinthus, leader of the faction which was dividing every congregation in the Greek world. Basic to every form of gnosticism was the belief that all matter was evil and the material world could not have been created directly by God. This led to a denial of the incarnation. Jesus was considered to have been the son of Joseph and Mary, and adopted as the Son of God at his baptism when the Holy Spirit descended from heaven to abide upon Him. It was concluded that, since God could not

[Page 75]

die, the Spirit returned to heaven before His crucifixion. The Docetics regarded Jesus as a mere phantom and without reality. John was spared to strike the death blow to this combination of Greek philosophy and Oriental mysticism exactly as Paul had rescued the called ones from the narrow confines of Judaistic legalism.

     In 1 John, chapter 1, he refutes the Docetics by affirming the visual, audible and manual proof of Jesus. Immediately he lays down the principle that Jesus is the eternal life, that he shared preexistence with the Father, and was manifested unto men. Incidentally, he affirms that it is this message which is the basis of our fellowship with the Father and Son, as well as with each other. In 2:18 the apostle refers to certain characters whom he designates as antichrists. In the following verse he shows they were schismatists and separatists. In verse 22 he labels them "liars" and in verse 26 "deceivers."

     These are clearly identified. "Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son." In 4:1, he proposes a test of the spirit motivating the teachers and proclaimers. In the following verses the test itself is provided. "Every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God." He adds, '~This is the spirit of antichrist."

     The second epistle is addressed to an excellent lady accustomed to entertaining Christian teachers in her house. Perhaps the ekklesia of God convened there for worship. In verse 7 the apostle refers to the fact that "many deceivers have gone out into the world, men who will not acknowledge the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh; such a one is a deceiver and the antichrist." In the immediate context he declares that "any one who does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God; he who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son." A comparison with 1 John 2:23 shows that "No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also." Thus, John equates "not abiding in the doctrine of Christ" with "denying the Son." He shows that such denial has to do with the incarnation. He equates "abiding in the doctrine of Christ" with "confessing the Son." This is the ground upon which one has both the Father and the Son.

     John is warning against "deceivers who have gone out into the world" (2 John 7) whom he identifies as "false prophets that have gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1). In both instances these are identified as those who deny that Jesus has come in the flesh. He warns the elect lady, "If any one comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting." Fortunately our brethren are better than their unwritten creeds. Those who take the position that this doctrine refers to divergent views about instrumental music, orphan homes, cups, classes, colleges, or the millennium, not only receive into their houses those who hold such divergent views, but will spend huge sums of money on advertising trying to get them to "come unto them." When one does come, the ushers will run halfway across the house to "give him greeting" and hand him a songbook so he can "join in the worship" with them. Of course, they would not call upon him to pray, but will encourage him to speak to God in "psalms, hymns and spiritual songs."

     I think it is obvious that whoever is referred to in this passage must not be allowed to come into a Christian assembly. He must be met at the door of the house and turned back without greeting. If the brethren apply this passage to all who differ with them on matters of interpretation or opinion they sin every time they invite one of them to come into their house or grant him the courtesy of a greeting. As usual, our orthodoxy drives us to some strange and ridiculous evasions of plain teaching. Those who assert that "this doctrine" implies a correct view of everything the apostles wrote find themselves in the unenviable position of disobeying what the apostle wrote about what to do with those who disobey. Our mistaken brethren are not antichrists.