Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 3 John 1:1
The elder unto the well-beloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.
1. The Address
1. This Epistle, like the Second, and most others in N.T., has a definite address, but of a very short and simple kind: comp. Jas 1:1. It has no greeting, properly so called, the prayer expressed in 3Jn 1:2 taking its place.
The Elder ] See on 2Jn 1:1. From the Apostle’s using this title in both Epistles we may conclude that he commonly designated himself thus. If not, it is additional evidence that the two letters were written about the same time: see on 3Jn 1:13-14.
unto the wellbeloved Gaius ] More exactly, to Gaius the beloved: the epithet is the same word as we have had repeatedly in the First Epistle (1Jn 2:7, 1Jn 3:2; 1Jn 3:21, 1Jn 4:1; 1Jn 4:7; 1Jn 4:11) and have again in 3Jn 1:2 ; 3Jn 1:5 ; 3Jn 1:11. The name Gaius being perhaps the most common of all names in the Roman Empire, it is idle to speculate without further evidence as to whether the one here addressed is identical with either Gaius of Macedonia (Act 19:29), Gaius of Derbe (Act 20:4), or Gaius of Corinth (Rom 16:23). See Introduction, Chap. IV. sect. ii. pp. 60, 61.
whom I love in the truth ] Better, whom I love in truth: see on 2Jn 1:1. This is not mere tautology after ‘the beloved;’ nor is it mere emphasis. ‘The beloved’ gives a common sentiment respecting Gaius: this clause expresses the Apostle’s own feeling. There is no need, as in the Second Epistle, to enlarge upon the meaning of loving in truth. In this letter the Apostle has not to touch upon defects which a less true love might have passed over in silence.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
This brief Epistle, written to a Christian whose name was Gaius, of whom nothing more is known (compare the notes at 3Jo 1:1), and in respect to which the time and place of writing it are equally unknown, embraces the following subjects:
I. The address, with an expression of tender attachment, and an earnest wish for his welfare and happiness, 3Jo 1:1-2.
II. A commendation of his character and doings, as the writer had learned it from some brethren who had visited him particularly;
(a)For his attachment to the truth, and,
(b)For his kindness shown to the members of his own church, and to strangers who had gone forth to some work of charity, 3Jo 1:3-8.
III. The writer then adverts to the fact that he had written upon this subject to the church, commending these strangers to their attention, but that Diotrephes would not acknowledge his authority, or receive those whom he introduced to them. This conduct, he said, demanded rebuke; and he says that when he himself came, he would take proper measures to assert his own authority, and show to him and to the church the duty of receiving Christian brethren commended to them from abroad, 3Jo 1:9-10.
IV. He exhorts Gaius to persevere in that which was good – in a life of love and kindness, in an imitation of the benevolent God, 3Jo 1:11.
V. Of another person – Demetrius – who, it would seem, had been associated with Gaius in the honorable course which he had pursued, in opposition to what the church had done, he also speaks in terms of commendation, and says that the same honorable testimony had been borne of him which had been of Gaius, 3Jo 1:12.
VI. As in the second Epistle, he says, in the close, that there were many things which he would be glad to say to him, but there were reasons why they should not be set down with ink and pen, but he hoped soon to confer with him freely on those subjects face to face, and the Epistle is closed by kind salutations, 3Jo 1:13-14.
The occasion upon which the Epistle was written is no further known than appears from the Epistle itself. From this, the following facts are all that can now be ascertained:
(1) That Gaius was a Christian man, and evidently a member of the church, but of what church is unknown.
(2) That there were certain persons known to the writer of the Epistle, and who either lived where he did, or who had been commended to him by others who proposed to travel to the place where Gaius lived. Their particular object is not known, further than that it is said 3Jo 1:7 that they went for his names sake; that is, in the cause of religion. It further appears that they had resolved not to be dependent upon the pagan for their support, but wished the favor and friendship of the church – perhaps designing to preach to the pagan, and yet apprehending that if they desired their maintenance from them, it would be charged on them that they were mercenary in their ends.
(3) In these circumstances, and with this view, the author of this Epistle wrote to the church, commending these brethren to their kind and fraternal regards.
(4) This recommendation, so far as appears, would have been successful, had it not been for one man, Diotrephes, who had so much influence, and who made such violent opposition, that the church refused to receive them, and they became dependent upon private charity. The ground of the opposition of Diotrephes is not fully stated, but it seems to have arisen from two sources:
(a)A desire to rule in the church; and,
(b)A particular opposition to the writer of this Epistle, and a denial of any obligation to recognize his instructions or commendations as binding. The idea seems to have been that the church was entirely independent, and might receive or reject any whom it pleased, though they were commended to them by an apostle.
(5) In these circumstances, Gaius, as an individual, and against the action of the church, received and hospitably entertained these strangers, and aided them in the prosecution of their work. In this office of hospitality another member of the church, Demetrius, also shared; and to commend them for this work, particularly Gaius, at whose house probably they were entertained, is the design of this Epistle.
(6) After having returned to the writer of this Epistle, who had formerly commended them to the church, and having borne honorable testimony to the hospitality of Gaius, it would seem that they resolved to repeat their journey for the same purpose, and that the writer of the Epistle commended them now to the renewed hospitality of Gaius. On this occasion, probably, they bore this Epistle to him. See the notes at 3Jo 1:6-7. Nothing more is known of Diotrephes than is here specified. Erasmus and Bede supposed that he was the author of a new sect; but of this there is no evidence, and if he had been, it is probable that John would have cautioned Gaius against his influence. Many have supposed that he was a self-appointed Bishop or Pastor in the church where he resided; but there is no evidence of this, and, since John wrote to the church, commending the strangers to them, this would seem to be hardly probable. Compare Rev 2:1, Rev 2:8,Rev 2:12, Rev 2:18; Rev 3:1, Rev 3:7,Rev 3:14. Others have supposed that he was a deacon, and had charge of the funds of the church, and that he refused to furnish to these strangers the aid out of the public treasury which they needed, and that by so doing he hindered them in the prosecution of their object. But all this is mere conjecture, and it is now impossible to ascertain what office he held, if he held any. That he was a man of influence is apparent; that he was proud, ambitious, and desirous of ruling, is equally clear; and that he prevailed upon the church not to receive the strangers commended to them by the apostle is equally manifest.
Of the rank and standing of Demetrius nothing more is known. Benson supposes that he was the bearer of this letter, and that he had gone with the brethren referred to in order to preach to the Gentiles. But it seems more probable that he was a member of the church to which Gaius belonged, and that he had concurred with him in rendering aid to the strangers who had been rejected by the influence of Diotrephes. If he had gone with these strangers, and had carried this letter, it would have been noticed, and it would have been in accordance with the apostolic custom, that he should have been commended to the favorable attentions of Gaius. In regard to the authenticity and the canonical authority of this Epistle, see the introduction at the beginning of the Second Epistle.
The elder – See the notes at 2Jo 1:1.
Unto the well-beloved Gaius – Three persons of this name are elsewhere mentioned in the New Testament – Gaius, whom Paul in Rom 16:23 calls his host, and whom he says 1Co 1:15 he baptized, residing at Corinth, (see the notes at Rom 16:23); Gaius of Macedonia, one of Pauls companions in travel, who was arrested by an excited mob at Ephesus, Act 19:29; and Gaius of Derbe, who went with Paul and Timothy into Asia, Act 20:4. Whether either of these persons is referred to here, cannot with certainty be determined. If it were any of them it was probably the last mentioned – Gaius of Derbe. There is no objection to the supposition that he was the one unless it is from the fact that this Epistle was probably written many years after the transaction mentioned in Act 20:4, and the probability that Gaius might not have lived so long. The name was not an uncommon one, and it cannot be determined now who he was, or where he lived. Whether he had any office in the church is unknown, but he seems to have been a man of wealth and influence. The word translated well-beloved, means simply beloved. It shows that he was a personal friend of the writer of this Epistle.
Whom I love in the truth – Margin, or truly. See the notes at 2Jo 1:1.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
3Jn 1:1
The elder unto the well-beloved Gaius.
Some first century Church members
It has been said that in the drama of life the scenery shifts and the draperies change, but the plot is the same and the characters the same. This is true; and because of this the most ancient history is in its essentials the story of to-day. Gaius, Diotrephes, and Demetrius are ancient names, but modern characters; dead men, but living spirits.
I. Gaius, or the Christian in complete armour. Of his position in the Church, of his personal history, we know nothing. The light falls on him only for a moment; but in that moment we can see clearly that he was a full-orbed, symmetrical Christian.
1. His soul prospered–i.e., his inner life of prayer and fellowship with the Father was going on so well–the man was making such manifest progress in spiritual life–that St. John could form no higher wish for him than that he might prosper in all things and be in health, as his soul was prospering.
2. But his spirituality did not evaporate in feeling. There was nothing flabby or weak about the man. He was strong in the Lord. I rejoiced greatly when brethren came and bare witness to thy truth. We do not know all that lies beneath this sentence. Evidently truth had been attacked, and Gaius had stood up in defence.
3. And as he prayed and spoke, so he lived: even as thou walkest in the truth. The true defenders of the faith, the invincible champions of truth, are all the souls that do the truth. Holiness is an unanswerable argument.
4. He was an active Christian (verses 5-7). Here we catch just a glimpse of the evangelising activity of the early Church. Error was busy. Many deceivers had gone forth into the world. But truth was busy also. She had taken the field. Christian men had gone forth for the sake of the Name. Gaius probably could not go forth, but he could help those who did. He could give them a home, could secure for them a favourable hearing, and send them on their way rejoicing. And he did so, thoroughly. He did this, as he did everything else, as unto the Lord. Gains did this, and so became a fellow-worker with the truth. People often speak of the workers in the Church as if they were a small and easily defined class. But who are the workers? Those who preach, and teach, and visit, and sing, and organise? Yes; but not these only. Those who can only give small gifts from their poverty those who pray for us in secret, who smile on our efforts, who wish us well, who love us–behold, these too are workers, fellow-workers with the truth! Thank God for quiet people, kind people, hopeful people! What could the workers do without the fellow-workers?
II. Diotrephes represents officialism out and out. I am sorry to say that there is little doubt that he was the minister of the Church in which Gaius was a member–a minister in name–in fact, a tyrant, a slanderer, a bad man.
1. He loveth to have the pre-eminence among them. He did not call it by that name. He called it principle, or conscience, or high sense of duty, for if you want to find the worst things you must not look for them under the words crime, or despotism, or sin, but under conscience, duty, patriotism, and principle. But fine words notwithstanding, the core of this mans character was love of power and pride of place.
2. If I come, says the apostle, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth, prating against us with wicked words. Yes, if I come, Diotrephes will find that John was not called the son of thunder for nothing. It ought not to be left to St. John to bring Diotrephes to book. The Church ought to have done this, The Church was partly guilty of this tyrant. I know motherll give it me if I scream, said a child. Ay, ay, that is the policy of most agitators. I believe in screaming is the one article of Diotrephes creed in every age. Weak mothers, weak nations, weak Churches alike surrender to the scream. We owe it to Diotrephes to tell him the truth. Whether St. John come or not, slander should be condemned and tyranny opposed.
3. But the real danger to the Church lay, not in this mans despotic action, but in the infectious nature of his tyranny. There is a little Diotrephes in all men–all love to lead; and there was a danger lest this outside Diotrephes should stir up and call out the Diotrephes inside other members–lest opposing him they should still imitate him. Therefore St. John implores even Gaius, Beloved, imitate not that which is evil, but that which is good.
4. He that doeth good is of God: he that doeth evil hath not seen God. Let who will be bad, be you good. Though the very angels fall, do you stand. By Allah, said Mahomet, when he was tempted, if they placed the sun on my right hand and the moon on my left to persuade me, yet while God bids me I will go on. Yes! heed not the sun or moon. Hear God. Though even Diotrephes turn tyrant, let Gaius be Gaius still. A single man with God is the majority.
III. Demetrius stands for the inspiring Christian. He was a man whose life was such that John felt he had only to name him in order to inspire Gaius with courage. Yes, we all know names that for us are charged with inspiration. To see them or hear them makes us stronger, braver, better. We need not be rich, nor famous, nor learned in order to inspire men–only to be good, and honest, and loving, and pure. We too, by faith in Christ and by Gods grace, may live in such a way that even our names may be to some few souls words of inspiration and means of grace. (J. M. Gibbon.)
The quietness of true religion
I. Let us see whether, without passing over the bounds of historical probability, we can fill up this bare outline with some colouring of circumstance.
1. Three persons of the name Gaius or Caius appear in the New Testament (Act 19:29; Act 20:4; Rom 16:23; 1Co 1:14).
2. Demetrius is, of course, a name redolent of the worship of Demeter, the Earth-Mother, and of Ephesian surroundings. No reader of the New Testament needs to be reminded of the riot at Ephesus, which is told at such length in Act 19:1-41. The conjecture that the agitator of the turbulent guild of silver smiths who made silver shrines of Diana may have become the Demetrius, the object of St. Johns lofty commendation, is by no means improbable. The very words of Demetrius about Paul evince that uneasy sense of the powers of fascination possessed by the apostle which is often the first timid witness of reluctant conviction.
II. We may now advert to the contents and general style of this letter.
1. As to its contents.
(1) It supplies us with a valuable test of Christian life, in what may be called the Christian instinct of missionary affection, possessed in such full measure by Caius.
(2) The Church is beset with different dangers from very different quarters. As the second Epistle warns the Church of peril from speculative ambition, so the third Epistle marks a danger from personal ambition, arrogating to itself undue authority within the Church.
(3) This brief Epistle contains one of those apparently mere spiritual truisms, which make St. John the most powerful and comprehensive of all spiritual teachers. He had suggested a warning to Caius, which serves as the link to connect the example of Diotrephes which he has denounced, with that of Demetrius which he is about to commend. Beloved! he cries, imitate not that which is evil, but that which is good. A glorious little Imitation of Christ, a compression of his own Gospel, the record of the Great Example in three words.
2. The style of the Epistle is certainly that of an old man. It is reserved in language and in doctrine. Religious language should be deep and real, rather than demonstrative. It is not safe to play with sacred names. To pronounce them at random for the purpose of being effective and impressive is to take them in vain. What a wealth of reverential love there is in that–for the sake of the Name! This letter says nothing of rapture, or prophecy, of miracle. It lies in the atmosphere of the Church, as we find it even now. It has a word for friendship. It seeks to individualise its benediction. A hush of evening rests upon the note. May such an evening close upon our old age! (Abp. Wm. Alexander.)
Christian character
I. The ideal Christian.
1. A renewed heart.
2. A loving deportment.
II. The highest affinity. The Christian character draws to itself–
1. Our esteem.
2. Our kindness.
3. Our fellowship. (The Weekly Pulpit.)
The ideal Christian
This is not a salutation in the sense of Christian greeting usual at the beginning of the Epistles of Paul and Peter, but a simple address, to point out the person for whom the Epistle was intended.
I. The true characteristic of a believer in Jesus Christ–Beloved. This term is applied both to the Son of God and to the saints, and frequently used by the apostles. It is a term of endearment, and implies a relationship and an affinity of the highest order.
1. Loved. One with a renewed heart, one of tenderness and sympathy instead of hardness, ill-feeling, and cruelty.
2. Loving. The love of God in his heart was not a stagnant pool, but a running rill. Take the Christian life in its composite character, and it will be seen that love permeates the whole. As to the inner resources of thought and desire, there is in them a sweetness which reveals the well of love in the heart. In the life of Gaius, St. John saw the reflection of the greater love which laid down its life for its friends.
3. Lovable. It is almost unnecessary to state that the object of Gods love will have attractions for all pure minds.
II. The reciprocal affinity–Whom I love in truth. The remembrance of the beloved Gaius awakens the love of the beloved John.
1. Whom I love by the power of truth. The gospel reveals in us the force of love, and in our fellow-Christians the worthy object of that force. The Christian character draws to itself our esteem.
2. Whom I love for the sake of truth. No effect has a greater influence on the Christian heart than the saving influence of the gospel. A more effective spectacle to win the affection of an apostle could not be found.
3. Whom I love in furtherance of truth. Tell the Christian worker that you honour him and love him for his works sake, and you will strengthen his hands and rejoice his heart. (T. Davies, M. A.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
THE THIRD EPISTLE OF JOHN.
Chronological Notes relative to this Epistle.
-Year of the Constantinopolitan era of the world, or that used by the Byzantine historians, and other eastern writers, 5593.
-Year of the Alexandrian era of the world, 5587.
-Year of the Antiochian era of the world, 5577.
-Year of the world, according to Archbishop Usher, 4089.
-Year of the world, according to Eusebius, in his Chronicon, 4311.
-Year of the minor Jewish era of the world, or that in common use, 3845.
-Year of the Greater Rabbinical era of the world, 4444.
-Year from the Flood, according to Archbishop Usher, and the English Bible, 2433.
-Year of the Cali yuga, or Indian era of the Deluge, 3187.
-Year of the era of Iphitus, or since the first commencement of the Olympic games, 1025.
-Year of the era of Nabonassar, king of Babylon, 834.
-Year of the CCXVIth Olympiad, 1.
-Year from the building of Rome, according to Fabius Pictor, 832.
-Year from the building of Rome, according to Frontinus, 836.
-Year from the building of Rome, according to the Fasti Capitolini, 837.
-Year from the building of Rome, according to Varro, which was that most generally used, 838.
-Year of the era of the Seleucidae, 397.
-Year of the Caesarean era of Antioch, 133.
-Year of the Julian era, 130.
-Year of the Spanish era, 123.
-Year from the birth of Jesus Christ, according to Archbishop Usher, 89.
-Year of the vulgar era of Christ’s nativity, 85.
-Year of Artabanus IV., king of the Parthians, 4.
-Year of the Dionysian period, or Easter Cycle, 86.
-Year of the Grecian Cycle of nineteen years, or Common Golden Number, 10; or the year before the fourth embolismic.
-Year of the Jewish Cycle of nineteen years, 7; or the year before the third embolismic.
-Year of the Solar Cycle, 10.
-Dominical Letter, it being the first year after the Bissextile, or Leap Year, B.
-Day of the Jewish Passover, the twenty-seventh of March, which happened in this year on the Jewish Sabbath.
-Easter Sunday, the third of April.
-Epact, or age of the moon on the 22d of March, (the day of the earliest Easter Sunday possible,) 9.
-Epact, according to the present mode of computation, or the moon’s age on New Year’s day, or the Calends of January, 17.
-Monthly Epacts, or age of the moon on the Calends of each month respectively, (beginning with January,) 17, 19, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 24, 25, 27, 27.
-Number of Direction, or the number of days from the twenty-first of March to the Jewish Passover, 6.
-Year of the Emperor Flavius Domitianus Caesar, the last of those usually styled the Twelve Caesars, 5.
-Roman Consuls, Domitianus Augustus Caesar, the eleventh time, and T. Aurelius Fulvus or Fulvius.
-The years in which Domitian had been consul before were, A. D. 71, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 80, 82, 83, and 84.
It should be observed that the date of this epistle is very uncertain. The above is only upon the supposition that it was written about A. D. 85.
III JOHN.
The apostle’s address to Caius, and his good wishes for his
prosperity in body and soul, 1, 2.
He commends him for his steadiness in the truth, and his general
hospitality, especially to the itinerant evangelists, 3-8.
Speaks of the bad conduct of Diotrephes; his abuse of his power
in the Church; and his slander of the apostles, 9, 10.
Exhorts Caius to avoid his example, and to follow what is good,
11.
Commends Demetrius, 12.
Excuses himself from writing more fully, and proposes to pay him
a visit shortly, 13, 14.
This epistle being of nearly the same complexion with the former, and evidently written about the same time, and incontestably by the same person, it is not necessary to give it any particular preface; as the subject of the authenticity of all the three epistles has been treated already so much at large, not only in the introduction to them, but in the notes in general.
This and the preceding epistle are, by Dr. Lardner, supposed to have been written between A. D. 80 and 90. There are no notes of time in the epistles themselves to help us to fix any date, therefore all is conjecture concerning the time in which they were written: but to me it appears as likely that they were written before the destruction of Jerusalem as after; for it is scarcely to be supposed that so signal a display of the justice of God, and such a powerful argument in favour of Christianity and of the truth of Christ’s predictions, could be passed unnoticed and unappealed to by any of the inspired persons who wrote after that event. However, where there is no positive evidence, conjecture is useless.
NOTES ON III. JOHN.
Verse 1. The elder] See on the first verse of the preceding epistle, and also the preface.
The well-beloved Gaius] Gaius, is the Greek mode of writing the Roman name Caius; and thus it should be rendered in European languages.
Several persons of the name of Caius occur in the New Testament.
1. In the Epistle to the Romans, Ro 16:23, St. Paul mentions a Caius who lived at Corinth, whom he calls his host, and the host of the whole Church.
2. In 1Co 1:14, St. Paul mentions a Caius who lived at Corinth, whom he had baptized; but this is probably the same with the above.
3. In Ac 19:29, mention is made of a Caius who was a native of Macedonia, who accompanied St. Paul, and spent some time with him at Ephesus. This is probably a different person from the preceding; for the description given of the Caius who lived at Corinth, and was the host of the whole Church there, does not accord with the description of the Macedonian Caius, who, in the very same year, travelled with St. Paul, and was with him at Ephesus.
4. In Ac 20:4, we meet a Caius of Derbe, who was likewise a fellow traveller of St. Paul. This person cannot be the Corinthian Caius, for the host of the Church at Corinth would hardly leave that city to travel into Asia: and he is clearly distinguishable from the Macedonian Caius by the epithet , of Derbe.
5. And lastly, there is the Caius who is mentioned here, and who is thought by some critics to be different from all the above; for, in writing to him, St. John ranks him among his children, which seems, according to them, to intimate that he was converted by this apostle.
Now, whether this Caius was one of the persons just mentioned, or whether he was different from them all, is difficult to determine; because Caius was a very common name. Yet if we may judge from the similarity of character, it is not improbable that he was the Caius who lived at Corinth, and who is styled by St. Paul the host of the whole Church; for hospitality to his Christian brethren was the leading feature in the character of this Caius to whom St. John wrote, and it is on this very account that he is commended by the apostle. Besides, St. John’s friend lived in a place where this apostle had in Diotrephes a very ambitious and tyrannical adversary; and that there were men of this description at Corinth is evident enough from the two epistles to the Corinthians, though St. Paul has not mentioned their names. See Michaelis.
The probability of this Caius being the same with the Corinthian Caius has suggested the thought that this epistle was sent to Corinth; and consequently that the second epistle was sent to some place in the neighbourhood of that city. But I think the distance between Ephesus, where St. John resided, and Corinth, was too considerable for such an aged man as St. John is represented to be to travel, whether by land or water. If he went by land, he must traverse a great part of Asia, go through Thrace, Macedonia, Thessaly, and down through Greece, to the Morea, a most tedious and difficult journey. If he went by water, he must cross the AEgean Sea, and navigate among the Cyclades Islands, which was always a dangerous voyage. Now as the apostle promises, both in the second and in this epistle, to see the persons shortly to whom he wrote, I take it for granted that they could not have lived at Corinth, or anywhere in the vicinity of that city. That St. John took such a voyage Michaelis thinks probable; “for since Corinth lay almost opposite to Ephesus, and St. John, from his former occupation, before he became an apostle, was accustomed to the sea, it is not improbable that the journey or voyage which he proposed to make was from Ephesus to Corinth.”
In answer to this I would just observe, 1. That the voyage was too long and dangerous for a man at John’s advanced age to think of taking. 2. That John had never been accustomed to any such sea as the AEgean, for the sea of Galilee, or sea of Tiberias, on which, as a fisherman, he got his bread, was only an inconsiderable fresh water lake; and his acquaintance with it could give him very few advantages for the navigation of the AEgean Sea, and the danger of coasting the numerous islands dispersed through it.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
This Gaius was well known by the apostle, not only to be a stedfast professor of the truly Christian, uncorrupted faith, (which is implied in his avowing his love to him in the truth, or upon the Christian account), but to be so improved and well-grown a Christian, that he reckons he might well make the prosperous state of his soul the measure of all the other prosperity he could wish unto him.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
I emphatical. Ipersonally, for my part. On Gaius or Caius, see my Introductionbefore Second Epistle.
lovein the truth (2Jo1:1).Beloved is repeated often in this Epistle, indicating strongaffection (3Jo1:1,3Jo1:2,3Jo1:5,3Jo1:11).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Ver. 1. The elder unto the well beloved Gaius,…. The elder is the writer of the epistle, the Apostle John, who so styles himself on account of his age, and office, as in the preceding epistle. The person to whom he writes is “the well beloved Gaius”; not that Gaius, who was the Apostle Paul’s host, Ro 16:23, for though their characters agree, being both hospitable men, yet neither the place nor time in which they lived. The Apostle Paul’s Gaius lived at Corinth, this is in some place near to Ephesus, for the apostle in his old age purposed to come and see him shortly; the other was contemporary with Paul, this with John; there were thirty or forty years difference between them: besides, the Corinthian Gaius was baptized by Paul, and was doubtless one of his spiritual children, or converts, whereas this Gaius was one of the Apostle John’s spiritual children, 3Jo 1:4; nor does he seem to be the same with Gaius of Macedonia, Ac 19:29, or with Gaius of Derbe, Ac 20:4, who seem to be two different persons by their country, though both companions in travel of the Apostle Paul; for which reason, as well as the time of their living, neither of them can be this Gaius, who was a settled housekeeper, and resided at some certain place. His name is a Roman name, and the same with Caius, though he seems to have been a Jew, as he might, it being usual with the Jews in other countries to take Gentile names. His character is, that he was “well beloved”; that is, of God, as it appears he was from the grace bestowed on him, from the prosperous estate of his soul, and from the truth that was in him, and his walking in it; and of the Lord Jesus Christ, for the same reasons; and also of all the brethren and saints that knew him; he being a person not only truly gracious, and of faithfulness and integrity, but of great liberality and beneficence, which must gain him much love and esteem among them; and he was well beloved by the Apostle John; and so the Syriac version renders it, “to my beloved Gaius”: though his love to him is expressed in the following clause,
whom I love in the truth; as being in it, or for the sake of it, or truly and sincerely; [See comments on 2Jo 1:1].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| Salutation and Prayer. | A. D. 90. |
1 The elder unto the wellbeloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth. 2 Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.
Here we see, I. The sacred penman who writes and sends the letter; not here indeed notified by his name, but a more general character: The elder, he that is so by years and by office; honour and deference are due to both. Some have questioned whether this were John the apostle or no; but his style and spirit seem to shine in the epistle. Those that are beloved of Christ will love the brethren for his sake. Gaius could not question from whom the letter came. The apostle might have assumed many more illustrious characters, but it becomes not Christ’s ministers to affect swelling pompous titles. He almost levels himself with the more ordinary pastors of the church, while he styles himself the elder. Or, possibly, most of the extraordinary ministers, the apostles, were now dead, and this holy survivor would countenance the continued standing ministry, by assuming the more common title–the elder. The elders I exhort, who am also an elder, 1 Pet. v. 1.
II. The person saluted and honoured by the letter. The former is directed to an elect lady, this to a choice gentleman; such are worthy of esteem and value. He is notified, 1. By his name,–Gaius. We read of several of that name, particularly of one whom the apostle Paul baptized at Corinth, who possibly might be also the apostle’s host and kind entertainer there (Rom. xvi. 23); if this be not he, it is his brother in name, estate, and disposition. Then, 2. By the kind expressions of the apostle to him: The well-beloved, and whom I love in the truth. Love expressed is wont to kindle love. Here seems to be either the sincerity of the apostle’s love or the religion of it. The sincerity of it: Whom I love in the truth, for the truth’s sake, as abiding and walking in the truth as it is in Jesus. To love our friends for the truth’s sake is true love, religious gospel love.
III. The salutation or greeting, containing a prayer, introduced by an affectionate compellation–Beloved, thou beloved one in Christ. The minister who would gain love must show it himself. Here is, 1. The apostle’s good opinion of his friend, that his soul prospered. There is such a thing as soul-prosperity–the greatest blessing on this side heaven. This supposes regeneration, and an inward fund of spiritual life; this stock is increasing, and, while spiritual treasures are advancing, the soul is in a fair way to the kingdom of glory. 2. His good wish for his friend that his body may prosper and be in health as well as his soul. Grace and health are two rich companions; grace will improve health, health will employ grace. It frequently falls out that a rich soul is lodged in a crazy body; grace must be exercised in submission to such a dispensation; but we may well wish and pray that those who have prosperous souls may have healthful bodies too; their grace will shine in a larger sphere of activity.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
The beloved ( ). Four times in this short letter this verbal adjective is used of Gaius (here, 3John 1:2; 3John 1:5; 3John 1:11). See 2Jo 1:1 for the same phrase here, “whom I love in truth.”
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
The elder. See on 2 John 1.
Gaius. The name occurs several times in the New Testament, as Act 19:29; Act 20:4; Rom 16:23; 1Co 1:14. The person addressed here cannot be identified.
The well – beloved. Rev., the beloved. In the Greek order the name comes first. Gaius the beloved.
In the truth [ ] . Rev., properly, omitting the article, in truth. See on 2 John 4.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
INTRODUCTION:
WRITER:Apostle John
DATE:About A.D. 90
TO:Gaius and faithful members of a church disturbed by the domineering influence of a ministerial overlord, named Diotrephes. It is therefore more accurately called a particular or specific (not general) epistle.
PART IGREETING AND OCCASION
1) “The elder” (Greek presbuteros) John identifies himself, not as an apostle, or a bishop, or a bond slave, but simply as “the” elder, meaning ordained brother of spiritual maturity.
2) “Unto the well beloved Gaius” (Greek “to agapeto”) to the intimately beloved one – whose name was Gaius – Thus this is a personal letter, believed to be addressed to a helper of Missionaries in a Church of Asia Minor who had an anti-missionary member Diotrephes, who had treated visiting missionary brethren with unholy contempt.
3) Whom I love in the truth”, John’s love for Gaius was centered (Greek en aletheia) in the truth, the Word of God. Joh 8:32; Joh 8:26; Joh 17:17; Joh 14:6. Jesus as the Living Word is truth and the Holy Bible is His message of truth, without error Joh 1:1; Joh 1:14; Heb 4:12; 2Ti 3:16-17.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
THREE TYPICAL CHURCH MEMBERS
3Jn 1:1-14.
IN the study of the Third Epistle of John, we note progress in the apostolic messages. In the First Epistle, he defends the faith once delivered against false teachers; in the Second Epistle, he conditions the personal walk of the believer in the midst of apostasy, and in this Third Epistle, he presents in clear, concise way, typical church members.
The Apostle John is an old man, pushing on toward the centenary of his birth, and he is compelled, as many of the more aged men of the present, to witness the growth of an apostasy in creed first and ecclesiasticism second. These two are seldom separated. In proportion as men depart from the faith once delivered, they will also oppose that simplicity of church government characterizing the New Testament model, and arrogate to themselves powers and authorities that belong only to the believing bodyknown as the local church.
We can imagine the grief that this dual apostasy brought to this aged Apostle and pastor at large.
It is a circumstance worthy of note that the three outstanding individuals of this Epistle have their successors in practically every church known to the twentieth century, and now, as then, those individuals loom the more conspicuous in a little church. A large church may have a number of such typical members, but a small one commonly has about one of each of these who, in a membership that marks the common lot of the local body, constitute the same.
These three are Gaius, the beloved disciple; Diotrephes, the domineering disciple; and Demetrius, the ideal disciple.
GAIUS THE BELOVED DISCIPLE
It was to him that John wrote. It is well to notice in passing that John doesnt assert authority on the ground of his apostleship. The fact is that the true apostle of Jesus Christ doesnt care to assert his authority or to over-lord the church under any circumstances.
Domineering lordship is, in itself, an apostasy from New Testament practice as certainly as the denial of fundamentals is an apostasy from New Testament precepts. John speaks of himself as the elder merely; and certainly he was that both by reason of his age and of office; and he addresses Gaius as the wellbeloved, whom I love in the truth.
Gaius had excited the ardent admiration of this his senior. Now there are other evidences in the Epistle of John of his cordial relationship with younger members of the ministry, and in fact, with young men in general. There are old men who never lose this contact with youth. They retain the spirit of youth and consequently can keep the fellowship of youth.
In his First Epistle, John says, I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the Word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one (1Jn 2:14).
I doubt if there is any greater proof of a true Apostle than the ability to retain the admiration and love of loyal youth. It was Goethe who said, Tell me with whom thou dost company and I will tell thee who thou art.
There are people who seem a bit proud of the fact that they do not make a great many friends in the church, but John was not among them. He found a sweetness in the fellowships there, and in spite of the fact that some members tried his soul and tested his patience to the limit, others were brothers indeed, sisters, in the spirit; and to such he addressed these inspired Epistles. The Second Epistle was written to the elect lady and her children whom he loved, and this Third one to Gaius, doubtless an official for whom he held an ardent affection.
After all, the Blood-bought are brought into a brotherhood, the strength and sweetness of which is not exceeded by even family ties.
Of the earthly disciples it was said, Behold how they love one another.
Gaius stimulated in John the best of wishes.
I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth (3Jn 1:2).
There may be people who do not count the prayers of the saints an asset. But this writer is not among them. We candidly believe that our work in church and school and Christian Fundamentals Association; our work in evangelistic field and in Bible conference field, and through the printed page, have all received immeasurable benefit through the multiplied prayers of friends. There is scarce a day but the mail brings money, sometimes in small sums; often in larger sums, to our desk. It is sent to aid the work of the church, to set forward the interest of the school, to strengthen the cause of fundamentalism, or to aid in the distribution of literature, and never a cent of it but is attended with prayers. However, along with these letter-enclosures, come scores of letters that contain not so much as a postage stamp, but express sympathy and love and after pleading honest poverty, conclude by saying, But we can and we do pray for you and for your work daily.
It is my candid conviction that these checkless letters represent a contribution to the causes to which I am devoting life, scarcely surpassed by the checks that carry from a single dollar up to thousands.
There are in America hundreds of sainted old people who, through the purchase of our books or the reading of the articles contributed to magazines, are led to write us fully of their affection and strongly assure us of their daily prayers to God in our behalf. In personal life, professional undertaking, and institutional endeavor, we have no finer contributions than these saints of the Most High make in the form of prayer.
There was a time when Peter attempted to walk on the water upon which his Master was safely standing. His faith failed him through fear, and gravity, did its work in sending him into the deep. In answer to his cry, Lord, save me, Jesus put forth His hand and lifted him up and led him safely back to the boat.
In all probability Peter imagined that he owed the Master an immeasurable debt for that days help; and in fact, he did, but no greater, if indeed so great, as he owed for another assistance rendered under circumstances of far greater danger, for while the former involved Peters body, the latter involved his soul, and of that danger Jesus said,
Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not.
Who can tell what temptations he has escaped because somebody has prayed for him? Who can tell what soul-destroying sins have been slain before they ever came to the birth by the prayers of saintly friends? Eternity alone will reveal the riches contributed to any useful life in answer to the petitions that ascended for the same.
We can congratulate Gaius that John, the elder, John, the disciple of Jesus, John, the Apostle by Divine appointment, John, the man that Jesus loved, kept Gaius upon his prayer list.
Gaius had established a good reputation among his fellows.
For I rejoiced greatly, when the brethren came and testified of the truth that is in thee, even as thou walkest in the truth.
I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.
Mark the progress of affection found in this Letter. In the beginning he addressed him as a wellbeloved friend. But now he claims him as his own child in the Gospel, and such he doubtless was.
The ministers converts are so dear to him that they seem to belong to him. Recently a young woman brought us a little kodak picture of herself, on the back of which was written, Your child in the Lord.
There is in life dual generationthat which is natural and that which is spiritual. The first is of the earth; the second is from Heaven. While we are citizens of this world, the first may seem the closer, and the more dear; but it is very doubtful if that will be true when we have once been translated, for in Heaven heavenly relationships will be esteemed.
The question of what is the highest vocation in life men still continue to debate. Social service is now much in the ascendency; the winning of men to Christ, the saving of immortal souls, seems for the present, at least, to be somewhat in eclipse. But we are doubtful if the Divine judgment in the matter has changed in the least.
When the great steamer Titanic went down, it carried into the caverns of the deep a large number of nationally known people. World-figures found a watery grave that day. Among them was William T. Stead, the notable English editor and social reformer, and John Harper, the newly called pastor of the Moody Church, Chicago.
Stead was on his way to America to make other observations with a view to future literary contributions and social endeavors.
Harper was on his way to take the pastorate of a great church.
How Stead spent his last hour we do not know. So far as we can learn, he was busy trying to save the bodies of women and children. So good was his reputation as a social worker that when the Carpathia steamed into the harbor, bringing some of the survivors of the wreck, Mr. J. M. Whitmore said to Mr. M. A. McDonald of Toronto, a great friend of Mr. Steads, Is Mr. Stead on the Carpathia, Mr. McDonald?
No, answered McDonald, he is not on it. Surprised at the sureness of his answer, Whitmore questioned again, Why do you answer with such certainty?
Because, said McDonald, I have known W. T. Stead since he was a young man; and he has never failed to do the thing that he ought to do. When the Titanic went down, if there were others to get into those life-boats, Stead stood aside and saw to their safety first, and I know, that in the end, he went down. He would not save himself at the expense of others.
That is a glorious reputation, and doubtless Stead was worthy of it.
But we have the history of John Harpers end, for survivors, brought to harbor in safety, told the same. When the Titanic was struck by the iceberg that drove in her sides, and sent the ship to the bottom, John Harper was leaning against the rail pleading with a young man to come to Christ, and from that moment until she sank, he, with Stead, was busily trying to save the bodies of women and children and weaker men.
Who will say that the social service of a Stead exceeded in final importance the temporal and eternal service that engaged John Harper that day?
It is a fine thing to have a reputation among your brethren for good, and if possible, it is a finer thing yet to have a reputation not only for good, but for a knowledge of the truth and for the employment of the same in the redemption of other men. Of all the rewards for service, none exceeds that of knowing that ones children walk in truth.
It was a high tribute that John paid to Gaius,
Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers;
Which have borne witness of thy charity before the church: whom if thou bring forward on their journey after a godly sort, thou shalt do well:
Because that for His Names sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles.
We therefore ought to receive such, that we might be fellow helpers to the truth (3Jn 1:5-8).
It is with grief that we turn from the study of Gaius to the consideration of
DIOTREPHES THE DOMINEERING DISCIPLE
The certainty that though times change, men do not, is proven by the age of this Epistle. Nearly 2,000 years ago Diotrephes disturbed the fellowship of the church to which Gaius and Demetrius belonged, and today Diotrephes has far more successors in office than Rome has ever claimed for the Apostle Peter. The description of this churchman found in 3Jn 1:9-11 is as much up to date as though it were written this morning.
Note the following facts: first, he essayed to hold the official pre-eminence; second, he would permit no possible competitor; third, he employed the Pope role of excommunication.
He essayed to hold the official pre-eminence.
Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence.
Dr. A. C. Dixon said that in an aquarium in Italy, he saw a devil fish. It had a dozen hands to take in, but no one to give out anything. He took off his hat and bowed to it and said, How do you do? I have met you ofttimes in America, in the form of a man.
But while the utterly selfish are common, they are scarcely more so than the determined bosses men who love the pre-eminence in church life. If we were asked what one thing has caused more divisions in church life and also in denominational ecclesiasticism than any other thing, we should answer instantly, The love of pre-eminence.
If we come to know the class represented by Diotrephes, it is very easy to believe the biblical record of the fall of Satan. This ambition for office seems to have reached into the very heavens, and to have affected even the angels, and caused the fall of the supreme archangel, the son of the morning, the highest of all created intelligences, who said in his heart, I will ascend into Heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.
It should not be a surprise that the temptation which depopulated Heaven of one-third of its angelic hosts, should disturb the local church of God on earth.
Again, Diotrephes would permit no possible competitor. He had refused to receive the Apostles; he had prated against them with malicious words, and not content therewith, he had rejected also the brethren, who were followers of the Apostle.
We stand amazed sometimes at the high-handed methods of certain men in modern church life. But again, there is nothing new under the sun. This has characterized the ambitious from the beginning. There is many an office holder who counts it his chief job to oppose the preacher, handicap the endeavors of other officers and control the action of the membership; and the strange thing about it all is that he generally imagines that he is the only intelligent man in the church and that if people would only let him alone and let him control absolutely, things would move with marvelous smoothness.
There is a good story told in illustration of this idea. During the early part of the Spanish-American war, Mr. Roosevelt encountered a war government official who was unwilling to carry out the will of his superior. Finally Mr. Roosevelt secured an order that demanded of this officer that the essential thing involved should be done. Mr. Roosevelt went to him and presented the order. He looked at Mr. Roosevelt with a degree of weariness and disgust, though he had nothing against him personally, and throwing himself back in his chair, he said with a sigh, Oh, dear; I had this office running in such good shape, and then along came this war and upset everything.
Mark you, he was an officer in the war department, and yet he supposed that to participate in war was an interruption of his official duties.
There are exactly such officials in the Church of God. They want to hold office and give commands, but they are never willing to have any aggressive warfare waged against the adversary.
Diotrephes employed the pope-role of excommunication. After a few secret meetings, he doubtless assembled enough of his friends to some suddenly called business meeting of the church to cast out all his opponents. Again he has his successors.
Twenty-five years ago in America certain men who secured the pre-eminence among us began to reject the teaching of the Apostles. A few of them were put on trial for their apostasy. Practically none of them were excluded, so tender and considerate were the feelings of the fundamentalists. Now the tables are turned, and while I dictate this sermon, Dr. Barnhouse of Philadelphia, a fundamentalist, is on trial before the Presbytery for fundamentalism; and in the Methodist, Baptist and Congregational denominations many fundamentalist pastors and fundamentalist churches have lately been excluded from denominational fellowship.
Candidly, there is one thing about these apostates from the faith that we admire, and that is that they are not subject to soft sentimentality. Egotists never are! Would-be bosses are never guilty of any such a weakness. When they begin, they go through. They are so self-opinionated, so thoroughly convinced that no one can be right save themselves, that they give no quarter to an enemy. With all the assumed authority of the Pope himself they cast out of the church those who dare to oppose them. There are several instances on record in America where properties, built by people, have been taken bodily from the people who constructed these temples of worship, by self-appointed bosses. In fact, at this moment there are no less than half a dozen suits pending where the ruling minority are demanding of even Congregational and Baptist bodies that the majority vote be ignored and the houses constructed by the money of this majority be turned over to this preeminent minority.
Diotrephes still lives. His spirit goes marching on. Before him there are new fields for conquest; back of him, dishonored pastors, disrupted churches, discouraged majorities. The times change; men remain the same; Diotrephes is a type!
Finally,
DEMETRIUS THE IDEAL DISCIPLE
Demetrius hath good report of all men, and of the truth itself: yea, and we also bear record; and ye know that our record is true.
I had many things to write, but I will not with ink and pen write unto thee:
But I trust I shall shortly see thee, and we shall speak face to face. Peace be to thee. Our friends salute thee. Greet the friends by name (3Jn 1:12-14).
He was universally loved.
Demetrius hath good report of all men.
That is a rare compliment. Few men attain to it. In fact, we take it that the language is accommodated, All men, meaning, that he was well esteemed in the circle of his friends, and acquaintances.
Lord Shaftesbury, the great Christian philanthropist, was a man after that manner. When his funeral procession reached Trafalgar Square, it is claimed that 40,000 factory hands, seamstresses, flower girls and laborers from the east end were awaiting its arrival; and, for more than a mile, the procession moved through such crowds as London itself had scarcely ever seen, with both sides of the street solidly lined with Sunday School children, children from shelter homes and training schools, present to honor the memory of the man who had loved them and whom they loved in turn. When the hearse approached the costermongers, one of their leaders lifted up a banner on which was inscribed the words, I was a stranger, and ye took Me in. As it moved past the school children, one boy lifted another banner on which was written, I was sick, and ye visited Me. On a silken flag which the leader among the working girls raised, was inscribed, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me.
It was a marvelous tribute to a marvelous man. Demetrius seems to have been a man much after the same manner.
Some years ago in Northern Minnesota Frank Higgins was the sky pilot of the lumber men. He has spoken more than once in this church. Finally he was taken sick with a cancer, and they sent him to the city hospital. The big fellows from the camps to whom he had given his life held a consultation and decided that one of their number should go along with him to render any service possible until he was safely in the hospital bed. The man chosen was an oversized fellow, decidedly out of place in the hospital; but he hung around in the corridors waiting to be of some use to Frank. When the time for the operation came, he said, Frank, you know that we love you, and we want to help you. Now while the doctors are operating on you, I will be at the door outside, and if they find, Frank, that they need a quart of blood or a piece of bone or any amount of skin, have them call on me. You can have every drop of blood and every bone in my body, if you need it. Now dont forget, I will be at the door.
It must be a great comfort for a man to face his last hour and have human affection follow him even to the edge of eternity. But there is a further sentence here that doubtless throws light on the former one
He was loyal to the truth. He had a good report of the truth itself. We honestly question whether any man can be loyal to his fellows and disloyal to the truth. We also question whether any man can be justly loved by his fellows who is disloyal to the truth of God.
These are days when men are bandying the truth around. They are not willing to come out openly and say that truth is of no importance, but they do repeatedly affirm that it makes little or no difference what a man thinks or believes if only he is sincere about ita philosophy that repudiates the essential value of truth.
The truth cannot make a man free who sincerely believes a lie in its stead. There are those who do not seem to be able to discern the truth because they have dallied with it so long that it has faded out for them and no longer bears a distinct witness.
Some years ago at Norfolk, Virginia, two cars from an excursion train from Kingston, N. C., plunged through an open drawbridge into the Elizabeth river. Eighteen people were drowned or killed, and thirty-five others were saved only by the promptitude of the farm hand that worked nearby, and who immediately went to their rescue. For a while it seemed impossible to discover the cause of the accident. A signal man insisted that he had displayed a red flag in good time for the engineer to stop before reaching the open draw, and other employees about the place corroborated his assertion. The engineer, who was himself badly hurt, contended that a white flag was shown and the signal indicated the road was clear. Finally to settle the dispute, the flagman was asked to bring the flag and show the same. Instantly the mystery was solved. The flag had been left in the rain so often and the color of the same was of such a character that it had faded out and the distance gave the impression of white. Hence the disaster.
There are men who would fain take the blood out of the banner of Christ, and consequently change the danger signal for those immortals who are driving on into eternity and lead them to suppose that they are safe at the very time of their imminent peril. The truth is that without shedding of blood is no remission. The truth is that the Blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin. A bloodless gospel is a gospel of deception and doubt. The time is on when men should stand for the truth, and absolutely refuse any compromise with error, any truce with falsehood.
Finally, Demetrius was officially certified. John said, using the editorial we, We also bear record; and ye know that our record is true.
It is a fine thing to have the backing of good men. It is a better thing to have the backing of the best men. It is the finest of all things to have the backing of the God-Man, even Christ. When the day of judgment comes, if He certifies for us, our final acceptance is sure; not otherwise.
With one illustration I close. It is a story of Jenny Lind, and dates back to the opera house in London, 1849. The hour of the evening opera was on. Multitudes of people were passing through the doors to hear the worlds most famous singer, when Max Bronzden, the son of a blacksmith, who had shared childhood with Jenny Lind, his next door neighbor, but who in the course of time had become a common gutter drunkard, was staggering the street. At the opera house door he saw the multitude and it slowed his steps. Out from the same at that very moment issued a ringing voice which seemed to awaken memories in him of other days. Looking up, he read the name of his little girl friend, now the worlds most famous woman. It sobered him. He watched his chance, and as the crowd of richly dressed men and women were passing in, he shoved himself to the center, thereby evading the ticket agent, and gained admission. In a dark corner he found a seat not occupied, and hoped that because of its out of the way location no one would come to claim the same. Like a shivering cur he dropped into the same, and instantly his keen ears and musical temperament began to drink in the glorious music that filled the great auditorium.
The number was finished. The tempest of applause shook the house. No one joined in more heartily than Max. Stirred as he had never been since childhood, he forgot himself and forgot his rags. Running forward, he cried, Jenny, my little Jenny; I told you you would do it. I told you you would rule the world with that voice. Speak to me and tell me that you remember me!
Put him out! shouted the multitude. He is crazy! Get rid of him!
Strong arms seized him and started pushing him toward the door, when Jenny, who had been bowing to the crowd, suddenly lifted a finger and silenced all. No, leave him in. Let him hear me. I know that man.
Max Bronzden turned and looked at her. Forgive me, he said, but I was passing and heard your voice, and I stole my way in. It seemed like I had a right to listen for the sake of old times. Once the birds and I were your only auditors, and once I told you that you could be great, and you seemed glad then of my praise, though I was nothing but the barefooted boythe blacksmiths son.
Bending forward toward him, Jenny Lind said, Bring him to the front seat. It is Max Bronzden; my earliest and truest friend. Stand here, Max. I want my audience to know you. You created in my heart the ambition to be great. My stage was a lichen covered forest log and you showered me with wild flowers, which I prized more than I prize these jewels now, and your praises stirred in me the desire to do what these friends have heard me do this night. Be worthy of the trust and confidence that I give you. I have struggled and conquered all difficulties. You can do the same. Be content no longer, Max, to be a vagabond, as you say you are. Be a man! Be worthy of my friendship.
He could scarcely speak, but in hoarse earnestness he said, Jenny, with Gods help, I will.
The house was as silent as death. Then it suddenly burst into a more tumultuous applause than it had given the worlds greatest singer at the conclusion of her last song. Max went out from that place a new man, with new inspiration and new courage, never again to be downed by drink.
If the certification of a great and good woman could accomplish such a victorious inspiration, what is impossible to the man who is not only certified by the great of earth, but still better, by the King of Glory? If the great of earth can secure for you a passage for time, He, the King of kings and the Lord of life, provides a certificate of imputed character which can secure you for eternity.
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
PERSONAL CONFIDENCES AND KINDLY WARNINGS
CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES
3Jn. 1:1. The elder.It cannot be decided whether this was a recognised official title, or an allusion by St. John to his great age. The fact that St. Peter calls himself a fellow-presbyter (1Pe. 5:1) favours the idea that the title is official; and the Jewish Christian communities were likely to call their officials elders, after the pattern of the synagogue elders. Gaius.Or Caius. This man cannot be confidently indentified with any person previously mentioned (Act. 19:29; Act. 20:4; Rom. 16:23; 1Co. 1:14); but the Gaius mentioned in Rom. 16:23 is commended for the hospitality which St. John also praises in his Gaius. In the truth.Not merely, whom I truly love, but, whom I love with Christian love. There is love we have for persons for their own sakes, and love we have for them as brethren in Christ Jesus.
3Jn. 1:2. Above all things.Concerning all things . gives the notion, before, on all sides, at every point. In all respects. Prosper.In circumstances. In health.Of body. St. John desires the all round blessing of this good manGods hand upon him for good, in his soul, his body, and his relations. A model of Christian wishes for friends. Soul prospereth.Notice that of his spiritual health St. John was well assured, but concerning his health and business successes he seems to have had no definite information.
3Jn. 1:3. Truth that is in thee.It was not merely that the conduct and relations of Gaius were rightly toned; it was that they were manifestly inspired by Christian principles and Christian feeling. The truth was in him, and therefore there could be all these kindly and gracious expressions. There was consistency because there was reality.
3Jn. 1:4. No greater joy.. A double comparative. Compare the English word lesser. It may be used to gain intensity, or it may be a mere irregularity. Children.St. Johns affectionate term for the members of the Churches, many of whom regarded him as their spiritual father.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.3Jn. 1:1-4
A Pastors Joy in His People.This finds expression in two very suggestive and striking figures of speech: Even as thy soul prospereth; Walkest in the truth.
I. Soul-prosperity.What he means may be illustrated by enlarging his sentence: I wish for you that your soul may prosper and be in health, even as I wish that your body may prosper and be in health. We cannot think of God without the mental help derived from the forms of humanity; and we cannot think of the soul save as shaped as a sort of counterpart of the body. And its full health and ideal perfection are conceived by us with the help of bodily conditions.
1. What then are the marks of a prosperous soul? That soul is prosperous in which
(1) The truth dwells richly.
(2) The doctrinal and practical parts of religion are well proportioned and united.
(3) There is a happy mixture of the retired and the active.
(4) There is a good degree of public spirit and largeness of heart.
(5) There is no wrong ambition.
2. Why does prosperity of soul render temporal prosperity desirable?
(1) Because it makes temporal prosperity safe.
(2) Because it secures the welfare of others, and promotes the general good. (Part from A. Fuller.)
II. Walking in the truth.This properly includes two things:
1. The knowledge of the outward substantial body of truththe gospel of the grace of God, and of Jesus as our Saviour.
2. A heartfelt possession and enjoyment of the truth, not merely in the intellect, but also in the heart.
SUGGESTIVE NOTES AND SERMON SKETCHES
3Jn. 1:2. Soul-prosperity.John makes soul-prosperity the standard and rule of prayer for other things. This would be a dreadful rule with regard to many. Such praying, if answered, would ruin them. Yes, if they were to prosper in temporal things as they prosper in spiritual, they would become the poorest, meanest wretches on earth, for they are strangers to everything like the true riches; and if their bodies were to be as healthful as their souls, their dwelling would become an hospital, their bed of ease a bed of languishing: they would be blind, for they have no spiritual understanding; deaf, for they never bear the voice of God; dead, for the Spirit of the living God is not in them. Yet this seems to be the only safe rule; for unless religion keeps pace with our outward prosperity, our safety and welfare will be endangered by it. We are not afraid when we see Christians succeed in life, if at the same time they grow in grace; but the peril is, when there is so much sail and so little ballast.W. Jay.
3Jn. 1:3. Gaius.The sincere and generous host of Demetrius, the quiet but sturdy opponent of the intolerance and tyranny of Diotrephes. Gaius was one who walked in truth, and so walked in it that men bore witness to his truth. The Greek word means reality. Gaius was a true man, a genuine man, a real man, whose life was all of one piece, whose daily conduct was the practical outcome and inference from the truths he believed. Evidently he cared more for deeds than for words. He would not bring the spirit and methods of the world into the Church. Nor would he, as a true man, yield to that still more subtle and fatal temptation by which those are overcome in whom religion degenerates into mere ecclesiasticism or sectarianism. From all these faults and errors Gaius was free. Of an incorrigible and losing honesty, it was his distinction that he was in the truth, and that he was walking, i.e. growing and advancing, in the truth of Christ; that the truth was making him truetrue in thought, in motive, in word, in deed, insomuch that, when the eye saw him, it bore witness to him. The charity of Gaius was as conspicuous as his unworldliness. He not only received the strangers, but continued to receive and serve them, even when Diotrephes forbad him, and had persuaded the Church to excommunicate those who ventured to receive them. He could do no other; for he walked in truth. He believed that all who were in Christ were his brethren, even though they were strangers to him; and he was bound to treat them as his brethren, even though for being true to his convictions he was cut off from the body of Christ. A certain genuineness and wholeness, then, a certain staunchness and loyalty, combined with great breadth and tolerance, seems to have been characteristic of the hospitable and kindly Gaius. He was in the truth. He walked in truth. He could be true to truth, come whence it would. He could be true to men, even when they were reviled and thrust out of the Church. In fine, he was a man who stood on his own feet, used his own eyes, and was faithful to the inspirations of the Divine Comforter and Guide who had taken up His abode with him. This large, steadfast, yet gentle loyalty to truth is as essential to a genuine, a real and strong, Christian character now as it was then. The discipline of life, and the advantages and privileges of the Christian life, have been wasted on us, if, whatever our gifts or our lack of them, whatever our opportunities or our lack of them, we have not built up for ourselves, or are not building up, such a character as this; if, whether we do, or do not, strive and cry, and cause our name to be heard in the streets, there is no quiet sanctuary within our souls, from which a light is sometimes seen, and prayers and songs are sometimes heard, and a hallowed influence constantly proceeds, to prove, to all who are capable of receiving proof, that Christ has an altar and a throne within us, and is the true Lord and Ruler of our life. If we are really walking in the truth, we must in various methods, some of them very quiet and simple, but not therefore the less effective, bear witness to the truth which guides and shapes our ways.S. Cox, D.D.
3Jn. 1:4. Saving a Prodigal Child: a Tradition concerning St. John.Tradition has been more than ordinarily busy in preserving anecdotes of St. John. Eusebius relates a beautiful, and not improbable, story to this effect: John, on a visit to a city in the neighbourhood of Ephesus, commended to the care of the bishop a young man of fine stature, graceful countenance, and ardent mind, as suited to the work of the ministry. The bishop neglected his charge. The young man became idle and dissolute, and was at length prevailed on to join a band of robbers, such as commonly had their holds in the neighbourhood of ancient Greek cities. He soon became their captain, and attained to eminence in crime. Long after, John entered the city again, and inquired for the young man. He is dead, said the bishopdead to God. Having ascertained the particulars, the apostle exclaimed, I left a fine keeper of a brothers soul; then, mounting a horse, he rode into the country, and was taken prisoner. He attempted not to flee, but said, For this purpose I am come; conduct me to your captain. He entered the presence of the armed bandit, who, recognising the apostle, attempted to escape. Why dost thou fly, my son, said he, from thy fatherthy defenceless, aged father. Fear not; thou still hast hopes of life. I will pray to Christ for thee. I will suffer death for thee. I will give my life for thine. Believe that Christ hath sent me. The man was subdued, fell into the apostles arms, prayed with many tears, became perfectly reformed, and was restored to the communion of the Church.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
E.
Translation and Comments
1.
Gaius The Beloved . . . 3Jn. 1:1-8
(1) The old one to Gaius the beloved, whom I love in truth. (3Jn. 1:2) Beloved, concerning everything I pray (for) you to prosper and to be in good health, just as also your soul is prospering. (3Jn. 1:3) I rejoiced greatly when brethren came to me testifying to your truth just as you are walking in the truth. (3Jn. 1:4) Greater joy than this I do not have, that I may be hearing of my children walking in truth. (3Jn. 1:5) Beloved, you are doing faithful works in whatever you may do for the brothers, and strangers at that, (3Jn. 1:6) the ones bearing witness of your love before the assembly; you will be doing well sending them forward worthily of God. (3Jn. 1:7) For they went out for the sake of the Name, taking nothing from the Gentiles (3Jn. 1:8) Therefore we ought to welcome such (men), in order that we may keep on becoming fellow workers with truth.
There is ample reason to believe that Gaius was a dear and intimate friend of John. He is four times referred to as beloved. In addition, John expresses concern for his health as well as his stand for the truth.
Concerning Gaius stand for truth, John has heard from mutual friends, and he rejoices. We know from both the Fourth Gospel and from Johns first two letters that the chief concern of the Apostles life is for truth as it is revealed in Christ. The gnostic influence in III John is indirect, but it is present. It is the spread of this false teaching which causes John to so greatly rejoice when he hears of those who are remaining faithful.
It is not unreasonable to suppose that Gaius was an elder in the congregation in which He served. The matter which John places before him is the matter of hospitality.
Hospitality is a matter nearly forgotten in our day of easy creature comfort, but it ought not so to be. When a Christian brother who, as in III John, is also a stranger, hospitality is the obligation of the church, and especially of the elders. They are to extend him the courtesy which is due one who labors in the truth. The Hebrew writer informs us that in this many have entertained angels unawares. (Heb. 13:2)
In verse five, John comes to the real purpose of his letter. Just as there were certain false teachers going about teaching error, there were also dedicated men going out in the name of Christ. Just as he would not have believers greet nor invite false teachers into their houses (2Jn. 1:10), he is equally concerned that no opportunity to extend hospitality to faithful men be missed.
Not only is the apostle anxious that those who went out in Christs name be treated with hospitality, but he would also have Gaius send them forth worthily of God. Sending forth is frequently used in the New Testament to include financial support; the furnishing of the means of continuing the journey of service.
Visiting missionaries, since they are going out for the sake of the Name, are to be treated as one would treat Christ Himself. It is in His name, for the sake of His purpose that they are leaving the security of established homes to teach the truth. There is nothing less worthy of God than the niggardly treatment extended to such laborers by shortsighted church members, and even by those who share the eldership with Gaius.
The policy followed by Gaius visitors (as well as by Paul2Co. 12:16ff) of not taking money from those among whom they did missionary work, increases the necessity of hospitality and support. This policy is equally important on the mission field today. There is ever present danger that the missionary will be accused of doing what he does for the sake of monetary return. Therefore, it is required that Christians in established congregations furnish the missionary with his livelihood.
The responsibility of the church in the adequate direct support of those who give their full time to the preaching and teaching of the Word is a subject feared by too many modern preachers as well as their congregations. Paul, as John, makes no uncertain demands in this direction. (1Co. 9:14)
The reward of financial support to Gospel preachers by those who render the support is that they thus become fellow workers with truth. Again Paul supports Johns statement. In thanking the Philippians for their gift to himself, Paul expresses gratitude not only for the benefit their gift would bring him in his need, but that through their giving, they were permitted to share in his suffering for Christs sake. (Php. 4:10-20)
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) The elder.See the Introduction, and 2Jn. 1:1.
Gaius.The common Roman name Caius. A Caius is mentioned in Act. 19:29; Act. 20:4; Rom. 16:23; 1Co. 1:14. The difference in date between these and St. Johns correspondent would alone be sufficient reason against any attempt at identification. There is nothing to show whether he was a presbyter or not.
Whom I love in the truth.Or, in truth. (See 2Jn. 1:1.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 1
THE TEACHER’S JOY ( 3Jn 1:1-4 )
1:1-4 The Elder to Gaius, the beloved, whom I love in truth.
Beloved, I pray that everything is going well with you, and that you are in good health of body, as it goes well with your soul. It gave me great joy when certain brothers came and testified of the truth of your life, as indeed you do walk in the truth. No news brings me greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth.
No New Testament letter better shows that the Christian letters were exactly on the model which all letter-writers used in the time of the early church. There is a papyrus letter from Irenaeus, a ship’s captain, to his brother Apolinarius:
Irenaeus to Apolinarius his brother, my greetings. Continually I
pray that you may be in health, even as I myself am in health. I
wish you to know that I arrived at land on the 6th of the month
Epeiph, and I finished unloading my ship on the 18th of the same
month, and went up to Rome on the 25th of the same month, and the
place welcomed us, as God willed. Daily we are waiting for our
discharge, so that up till today no one of us in the corn service
has been allowed to go. I greet your wife much, and Serenus, and
all who love you, by name. Good bye.
The form of Irenaeus’ letter is exactly that of John’s. There is first the greeting, next the prayer for good health, after that the main body of the letter with its news, and then the final greetings. The early Christian letters were not something remote and ecclesiastical; they were the kind of letters which people wrote to each other every day.
John writes to a friend called Gaius. In the world of the New Testament Gaius was the commonest of all names. In the New Testament there are three men with that name. There is Gaius, the Macedonian who, along with Aristarchus, was with Paul at the riot in Ephesus ( Act 19:29). There is Gaius of Derbe, who was the delegate of his church to convey the collection for the poor to Jerusalem ( Act 20:4). There is the Gaius of Corinth who had been Paul’s host, and who was such a hospitable soul that he could be called the host of the whole church ( Rom 16:23), and who was one of the very few people whom Paul had personally baptized ( 1Co 1:14), and who, according to tradition, became the first Bishop of Thessalonica. Gaius was the commonest of all names; and there is no reason to identify our Gaius with any of these three. According to tradition he was made the Bishop of Pergamum by John himself. Here he stands before us as a man with an open house and an open heart.
Twice in the first two verses of this little letter John uses the word beloved. (The well-beloved and beloved of the King James Version’s first two verses translate the same Greek word, agapetos, G27.) In this group of letters John uses agapetos ( G27) no fewer than ten times. This is a very notable fact. These letters are letters of warning and rebuke; and yet their accent is the accent of love. It was the advice of a great scholar and preacher: “Never scold your congregation.” Even if he has to rebuke, John never speaks with irritation. The whole atmosphere of his writing is that of love.
3Jn 1:2 shows us the comprehensive care of the good and devoted pastor. John is interested both in the physical and the spiritual health of Gaius. John was like Jesus; he never forgot that men have bodies as well as souls and that they matter, too.
In 3Jn 1:4 John tells us of the teacher’s greatest joy. It is to see his pupils walking in the truth. The truth is not simply something to be intellectually assimilated; it is the knowledge which fills a man’s mind and the charity which clothes his life. The truth is what makes a man think and act like God.
CHRISTIAN HOSPITALITY ( 3Jn 1:5-8 ) 1:5-8 Beloved, whatever service you render to the brothers, strangers as they are, is an act of true faith and they testify to your love before the church. It will be a further kindness, if you send them on their way worthily of God. For they have gone out for the sake of the Name and they take no assistance from pagans. It is a duty to support such men, that we may show ourselves fellow-workers with the truth.
Here we come to John’s main object in writing. A group of travelling missionaries is on its way to the church of which Gaius is a member, and John urges him to receive them, to give them every support and to send them on their way in a truly Christian manner.
In the ancient world hospitality was a sacred duty. Strangers were under the protection of Zeus Xenios, Zeus the god of strangers (Xenos, G3581, is the Greek for a stranger). In the ancient world inns were notoriously unsatisfactory. The Greek had an instinctive dislike of taking money for the giving of hospitality; and, therefore, the profession of innkeeper ranked very low. Inns were notoriously dirty and flea-infested. Innkeepers were notoriously rapacious so that Plato compared them to pirates who hold their guests to ransom before they allow them to escape. The ancient world had a system of guest-friendships whereby families in different parts of the country undertook to give each other’s members hospitality when the occasion arose. This connection between families lasted throughout the generations and when it was claimed, the claimant brought with him a sumbolon, or token, which identified him to his hosts. Some cities kept an official called the Proxenos in the larger cities to whom their citizens, when travelling, might appeal for shelter and for help.
If the heathen world accepted the obligation of hospitality, it was only to be expected that the Christians would take it even more seriously. It is Peter’s injunction: “Practice hospitality ungrudgingly to one another” ( 1Pe 4:9). “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers” says the writer to the Hebrews, and adds: “for thereby some have entertained angels unawares” ( Heb 13:2). In the Pastoral Epistles a widow is to be honoured if she has “shown hospitality” ( 1Ti 5:9). Paul bids the Romans to “practice hospitality” ( Rom 12:13).
Hospitality was to be specially the characteristic of the leaders of the church. A bishop must be a man given to hospitality ( 1Ti 3:2). Titus is told to be “hospitable” ( Tit 1:8). When we come down to the time of Justin Martyr, (A.D. 170) we find that on the Lord’s Day the well-to-do contributed as they would and it was the duty of the president of the congregation “to succour the orphans and the widows, and those who through sickness or any other cause are in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning amongst us” (Justin Martyr: First Apology 1: 67).
In the early church the Christian home was the place of the open door and the loving welcome. There can be few nobler works than to give a stranger the right of entry to a Christian home. The Christian family circle should always be wide enough to have a place for the stranger, no matter where he comes from or what his colour.
THE CHRISTIAN ADVENTURERS ( 3Jn 1:5-8 continued) Further, this passage tells us about the wandering missionaries who gave up home and comfort to carry afield the word of God. In 3Jn 1:7 Paul says that they have gone forth for the sake of the Name and take no assistance from pagans. (It is just possible that 3Jn 1:7 might refer to those who had come out from the Gentiles taking nothing with them, those who for the sake of Christianity had left their work and their home and their friends and had no means of support.) In the ancient world the “begging friar,” with his wallet, was well known. There is, for instance, a record of a man calling himself “the slave of the Syrian goddess,” who went out begging and claimed that he never came back with fewer than seventy bags of money for his goddess. But these Christian wandering preachers would take nothing from the Gentiles, even if they would have given it.
John commends these adventurers of the faith to the hospitality and the generosity of Gaius. He says that it is a duty to help them so that we may show ourselves fellow-workers in the truth ( 3Jn 1:8). Moffatt translates this very vividly: “We are bound to support such men to prove ourselves allies of the truth.”
There is a great Christian thought here. A man’s circumstances may be such that he cannot become a missionary or a preacher. Life may have put him in a position where he must get on with a secular job, staying in the one place and carrying out the routine duties of life and living. But where he cannot go, his money and his prayers and his practical support can go. Not everyone can be, so to speak, in the front line; but by supporting those who are there, he can make himself an ally of the truth. When we remember that, all giving to the wider work of Christ and his church must become not an obligation but a privilege, not a duty but a delight. The church needs those who will go out with the truth, but it also needs those who will be allies of the truth at home.
LOVE’S APPEAL ( 3Jn 1:9-14 )
1:9-15 I have already written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who is ambitious for the leadership, does not accept our authority. So, then, when I come, I will bring up the matter of his actions, for he talks nonsensically about us with wicked words; he refuses to receive the brothers and attempts to stop those who wish to do so and tries to eject them from the church.
Beloved do not imitate the evil but the good. He who does good has the source of his life in God; he who does evil has not seen God.
Everybody testifies to the worth of Demetrius, and so does the truth itself; and so do we testify, and you know that our testimony is true.
I have many things to write to you; but I do not wish to write to you with ink and pen. I hope to see you soon, and we shall talk face to face.
Peace be to you. The friends send their greetings. Greet the friends by name.
Here we come to the reason why this letter was written and are introduced to two of the main characters in the story.
There is Diotrephes. In the introduction we have already seen the situation in which John and Diotrephes and Demetrius are all involved. In the early church there was a double ministry. There were the apostles and the prophets whose sphere was not confined to any one congregation and whose authority extended all over the church. There were also the elders; they were the permanent settled ministry of the local congregations and their very backbone.
In the early days this presented no problem, for the local congregations were still very much infants who had not yet learned to walk by themselves and to handle their own affairs. But as time went on there came a tension between the two kinds of ministry. As the local churches became stronger and more conscious of their identity, they inevitably became less and less willing to submit to remote control or to the invasion of itinerant strangers.
The problem is still to some extent with us. There is the itinerant evangelist who may well have a theology and work with methods and in an atmosphere very different from that of the settled local congregation. In the younger churches there is the question of how long the missionaries should remain in control and of when the time has come for them to withdraw and allow the indigenous churches to rule their own affairs.
In this letter Diotrephes is the representative of the local congregation. He will not accept the authority of John, the apostolic man and he will not receive the itinerant missionaries. He is so determined to see that the local congregation manages its own affairs that he will even eject those who are still prepared to accept the authority of John and to receive the wandering preachers. What exactly Diotrephes is we cannot tell. He certainly is not a bishop in anything like the modern sense of the word. He may be a very strong-minded elder. Or he may even be an aggressive member of the congregation who by the force of his personality is sweeping all before him. Certainly he emerges as a strong and dominant character.
Demetrius is most likely the leader of the wandering preachers and probably the actual bearer of this letter. John goes out of his way to give him a testimonial as to character and ability, and it may well be that there are certain circumstances attaching to him which give Diotrephes a handle for his opposition.
Demetrius is by no means an uncommon name. Attempts have been made to identify him with two New Testament characters. He has been identified with Demetrius, the silversmith of Ephesus and the leader of the opposition to Paul ( Act 19:21 ff.). It may be that he afterwards became a Christian and that his early opposition was still a black mark against him. He has been identified with Demas (a shortened form of Demetrius), who had once been one of Paul’s fellow-labourers but who had forsaken him because he loved this present world ( Col 4:14; Phm 1:24; 2Ti 4:10). It may be that Demas came back to the faith and that his desertion of Paul was always held against him.
Into this situation comes John, whose authority is being flouted; and Gaius, a kindly soul but probably not so strong a character as the aggressive Diotrephes, whom John is seeking to align with himself, for Gaius, left on his own, might well succumb to Diotrephes.
There is our situation. We may have a good deal of sympathy with Diotrephes; we may well think that he was taking a stand which sooner or later had to be taken. But for all his strength of character he had one fault–he was lacking in charity. As C. H. Dodd has put it: “There is no real religious experience which does not express itself in charity.” That is why, for all his powers of leadership and for all his dominance of character, Diotrephes was not a real Christian, as John saw it. The true Christian leader must always remember that strength and gentleness must go together and that leading and loving must go hand in hand. Diotrephes was like so many leaders in the church. He may well have been right, but he took the wrong way to achieve his end, for no amount of strength of mind can take the place of love of heart.
What the issue of all this was we do not know. But John comes to the end in love. Soon he will come and talk, when his presence will do what no letter can ever do; and for the present he sends his greetings and his blessing. And we may well believe that the “Peace be to you” of the aged Elder indeed brought calm to the troubled church to which he wrote.
-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)
FURTHER READING
John
J. N. S. Alexander, The Epistles of John (Tch; E)
A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; G)
C. H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles (MC; E)
Abbreviations
ICC: International Critical Commentary
MC: Moffatt Commentary
Tch: Torch Commentary
E: English Text
G: Greek Text
-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)
Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible
Notes on Third Epistle of John.
1. The elder Note on 2Jn 1:1.
Well beloved An epithet thrice used in the epistle, as elect is twice in the Second Epistle. This epithet in the Greek comes after the name, and strikingly reads, Gaius the well beloved, as if the epithet were a regular title.
Gaius Or Caius, a very common name among the Romans. There was among the followers of St. Paul a Caius of Macedonia, (Act 19:29😉 a Caius of Derbe, (Act 20:4😉 and a Caius of Corinth, at whose house St. Paul probably wrote his epistle to the Romans. This Gaius is some thirty-five or forty years later, and in Asia Minor, being in visiting distance from John, 3Jn 1:14. He cannot, therefore, be probably identified with either of the other three. Wordsworth reminds us that “a Gaius was appointed by St. John to be bishop of Pergamos.” Constitut. Apost. 7:46.
In the truth As the article is wanting in the Greek, some interpreters understand the phrase, whom I truly love. This makes good correspondence with beloved. Thou art the well beloved, and I love thee in truth. But John often omits the article where the real meaning is the gospel truth, as in 3Jn 1:3.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘The elder to Gaius the beloved, whom I love in truth.’
The writer again calls himself ‘the Elder’. As with 2 John the impression is given that all would know who was meant. He was not just one of many elders but seen as unique. There is no real reason for denying that it is the Apostle John, who as we know from John’s Gospel, preferred not to push his name forward. He was probably delighted with a term that, as used by his fellow-believers, indicated warm affection as well as respect.
Gaius, to whom the letter is addressed, is a man of the truth, and John loves him truly because he is of the truth. He is indeed ‘beloved by’ John. Gaius is ‘loved in truth’. This can mean truly loved, or loved as one who is of the truth. Or perhaps John intended it to have the double meaning. A man of true faith loved in truth. Certainly the implication of both is there.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Salutation (or Greeting) 3Jn 1:1-4 serves as a salutation to this short epistle.
3Jn 1:1 3Jn 1:1
3Jn 1:1 “unto the wellbeloved” Comments – This word appears four times in this short epistle (1, 2, 5, 11).
3Jn 1:1 “Gaius” Comments Adam Clarke says the name “Gaius” is Greek form of the Roman name “Caius.” [43] Thus, John is writing to a Gentile, and most likely a member of one of the churches in Asia Minor, of which John, the elder, was overseer.
[43] Adam Clarke, The Third Epistle of John, in Adam Clarke’s Commentary, Electronic Database (Seattle, WA: Hendrickson Publishers Inc., 1996), in P.C. Study Bible, v. 3.1 [CD-ROM] (Seattle, WA: Biblesoft Inc., 1993-2000), 3Jn 1:1:1.
The Apostolic Constitutions, a collection of ecclesiastical law that is believed to have been compiled during the latter half of the fourth century, states that there was a man by the name of “Gains” who became the bishop of the church at Pergamus. It is very possible that this was the same person mentioned in John’s third epistle. It is interesting to note that the name of Demetrius (3Jn 1:12) is mentioned next to the name of Gaius in this passage.
“Now concerning those bishops which have been ordained in our lifetime, we let you know that they are theseOf Pergamus, Gains. Of Philadelphia, Demetrius, by me.” ( Constitutions of the Holy Apostles 7.4.46)
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Address and commendation of Gaius:
v. 1. The elder unto the well-beloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.
v. 2. Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.
v. 3. For I rejoiced greatly when the brethren came and testified of the truth that is in thee, even as thou walkest in the truth.
v. 4. I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in the truth. The address, or superscription, of the letter is very brief: The elder to Gaius the beloved, whom I love in truth. The apostle here again calls himself simply the elder, although he might have stressed his apostolic authority. He is satisfied with bearing the name which was held by all pastors in those days and had no hierarchical aspirations. He addresses Gaius as a beloved brother. Both being members of Christ through faith, they were united by a most intimate fellowship of love, of which John says that it flows out of faith and out of the truth of God.
The apostle opens his letter with a prayerful wish: Beloved, concerning all things I pray that thou mayest prosper and be in good health, even as thy soul is prospering. This wish shows the genuineness of the apostle’s love. He desires that Gaius may prosper, have success in every respect, in all matters pertaining to this world, and that he may always be in good health. He had stood the test of trouble and adversity and was entitled to a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty. Of his piety St. John had been informed, and he therefore states that his soul is in a prosperous condition. His willingness to incur the hostility of Diotrephes, to risk the loss of business on account of his stand, and the untiring efforts for the brethren, which even threatened his health, were all sufficient evidence for the genuineness of Christian love that lived in his heart. From the hints here given the situation in the city where Gaius lived was probably the following: Some Christian brethren had gone forth from Ephesus on a missionary tour into the interior. John had given them letters of commendation addressed to the various congregations, in order that these missionaries might be received with due hospitality. Upon their return to Ephesus the brethren reported that Diotrephes had not only spurned their letters, spoken evilly of John, and refused them hospitality, but had also made it very unpleasant for Gaius when the latter performed his Christian duty with cheerful willingness. Hence the acknowledgment of the apostle.
St. John is not sparing with his words of praise: I rejoiced exceedingly when brethren came and bore testimony to thy truth, just as thou livest a life in truth. The apostle was very glad, overjoyed, whenever he received another message of the piety of Gaius. Whenever itinerant brethren came back to Ephesus from the provincial districts, these reports came in, hearing witness to the fact that Gaius was living in the truth, that he not only had accepted the truth of the Gospel by faith, but was also leading a life in conformity with the eternal Truth of God, His holy Word. So deeply is John affected by this evidence of true Christian love that he adds: A greater joy than this I do not have, that I should hear of my children walking in the truth. Having probably been converted through the Gospel-message which John preached, Gaius belonged to his spiritual children, Gal 4:19. Therefore it was a source of great satisfaction, of the very greatest joy and happiness, to the aged apostle to know that the Word of God had such a powerful effect in this case, that Gaius was walking in the paths of truth, in the way of sanctification. To this day it is a source of inexpressible joy and delight to a faithful pastor to see children whom he has baptized and confirmed and probably joined in holy wedlock remaining faithful to their Savior in word and deed.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
FROM very early times some have held the opinion that the Second Epistle is addressed to a community, which is spoken of allegorically as “the elect lady,” her “elect sister” being a sister community; but at no time does there seem to have been any doubt that the Third Epistle is addressed to an individual. It certainly would be an extravagant hypothesis that Gains symbolizes a Church.
3Jn 1:1-4
INTRODUCTION. Address and occasion. Respecting the address and the title of” the elder,” see note on 2Jn 1:1.
3Jn 1:1
To Gaius the beloved ( ). This is additional reason for thinking that in the Second Epistle is not a proper name; if it were we should probably have the same formula as we have here, . The name Gaius occurs elsewhere in the New Testament four times (Act 19:29; Act 20:4; Rom 16:23; 1Co 1:14); as it was as common in the Roman Empire as John Smith is among ourselves, it would be rash to infer that the Gaius addressed here is the same as any of those mentioned elsewhere. In all probability there are at least four persons of this name in the New Testament. In the opening of this Epistle also we have to remark the characteristic repetition of the word “truth,” which occurs four times in the first four verses. Deeds, in which Gaius and Demetrius were rich, not words, of which Diotrephes was so prodigal, are what win the approbation and love of the apostle. The thing which he hates is unreality; the object of his special adoration is “the truth;” “to walk in the truth” is nothing less than to follow in the footsteps of the Lord.
3Jn 1:2
Beloved, I pray that in all respects (not “above all things”St. John would surely never have said that) thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth. The apostle wishes that his earthly career may be as bright as his spiritual career is; may he have a sound body for his sound mind, and may his fortunes be sound also. The Greek for “prosper” means exactly to “have a good career.”
3Jn 1:3, 3Jn 1:4
For I rejoiced greatly. We must not lose sight of the “for,” which is full of meaning. The elder has just expressed a wish that the external well-being of Gains may equal the well-being of his soul; and he is quite sure of the latter, for brethren keep coming and bearing witness to the fact. The good report of Gains is still greater joy to the apostle than the evil report of Diotrephes is a sorrow to him. The language in condemnation of Diotrephes, severe as it is, is not so strong as this in thankful delight respecting Gaius: Greater joy have I none than (to hear of) these things. “Greater” is made doubly emphatic, first by position at the beginning of the sentence, and secondly by the double comparative .
3Jn 1:5-12
2. MAIN DIVISION. Exhortation. Having thus stated the circumstances which have led to his writing, the elder begins the main portion of the letter, which consists of three sections; the hospitality of Gaius, and its value (3Jn 1:5-8); the arrogance of Diotrephes, and its results (3Jn 1:9, 3Jn 1:10); the moral (3Jn 1:11, 3Jn 1:12). The transition to this central portion of the Epistle is marked by a repetition of the loving address. In all three cases (3Jn 1:2, 3Jn 1:5, 3Jn 1:11), the introductory “beloved” indicates the beginning of a section.
3Jn 1:5
It is by no means easy to translate this verse satisfactorily, . Here we have three difficulties:
(1) to determine the meaning of ;
(2) to bring out the meaning of ;
(3) to translate without awkwardness.
The reading (K, L) for (, A, B, C, and versions) has probably arisen from a wish to avoid this last difficulty. Thou doest a faithful act in all that thou workest towards the brethren, and that towards strangers, is a fairly literal and intelligible rendering. But “to do a faithful act” is somewhat obscure. Probably it means “to act as a faithful man would.” All his conduct towards the brethren, even when they were not previously known to him, was such as became a faithful Christian. This was his special merit; he treated brethren who were entire strangers to him, not as strangers, but as brethren. He did not pick and choose, showing hospitality to those whom he liked and neglecting the rest. Every missionary was sure of a welcome from Gains.
3Jn 1:6
Who bare witness to thy love before the Church. The thoroughly Greek word is used by St. John nowhere but in this Epistle. This witness of the brethren before the Church respecting the good deeds done to them is a type and earnest of the witness of Christ at the day of judgment: “I was a stranger, and ye took me in Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me.” Whom thou wilt do well to forward on their journey in a manner worthy of God. No higher standard could well be set. It reminds us of “perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” Gains is to treat them as remembering the Divine declaration, “He that receiveth whomsoever I send, receiveth me; and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me” (Joh 13:20). This coincidence, consciously or unconsciously made, between the Gospel and Third Epistle, is lost in the rather colourless rendering in the Authorized Version, “after a godly sort.”
3Jn 1:7
For the sake of THE NAME. Such is the exact rendering of the true text; the insertion of “his” before “Name” weakens the effect. There was no need to say more. Just as to a Jew “the Name” must mean “Jehovah,” so to a Christian “the Name” must mean “Jesus Christ” (comp. Act 5:41; Jas 2:7). St. Ignatius writes to the Ephesians, “I am in bonds for the Name’s sake” (3); and “Some are wont of malicious guile to hawk about the Name” (7); and again to the Philadelphians, “It is becoming for you, as a Church of God, to appoint a deacon to go thither as God’s ambassador, that he may congratulate them when they are assembled together, and may glorify the Name” (10.). Taking nothing of the Gentiles, lest the heathen should suspect their motives, and think, “Like all the quack priests and philosophers, you make a mere trade of your doctrine, and preach to fill your bellies.” Nothing wins men over so much as clear proofs of disinterestedness. The missionary who is suspected of self-seeking will preach in vain. That here must mean “heathen” seems clear from Mat 5:47; Mat 6:7; Mat 18:17, the only other places in the New Testament where the word is found; moreover, the context requires it. There is no need to ask whether the word may not mean “Gentile Christians.” The missionary brethren would, therefore, have been in great straits but for the courage and generosity of Gains; Diotrephes turned them out of doors and forbade others to succour them; and they themselves made it a rule not to ask for help from Gentiles.
3Jn 1:8
We, therefore, ought to support such. The pronoun is very emphatic. If no help comes from the heathen, we must give it; that we may become their fellow-workers for the truth. Just as the apostle warned the elect lady that to welcome and support preachers of false doctrine is to partake in their evils works (2Jn 1:11), so he encourages Gains and his friends with the thought that to welcome and support preachers of the truth is to partake in their good works. It is the Master’s teaching in another form, “He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet’s reward” (Mat 10:41).
3Jn 1:9
I wrote somewhat to the Church
. Just as the missionary brethren bore witness before the Church to the Christian love of Gains, so the elder will bear witness before the Church to the arrogant hostility of Diotrephes. Once more we see that words may be works. He who sanctions teachers of false doctrine shares in their “evil works” (2Jn 1:11); and the “works” of Diotrephes partly consist in “prating against us with evil words.” The same word for “evil” is used in both cases the word used to express “the evil one;” the coincidence is significant. The insolent opposition to the apostle on the part of Diotrephes, and the severe language used by St. John in condemning him, stand almost alone in the New Testament. For a parallel to the latter we must look to our Lord’s denunciation of the arrogant and hypocritical Pharisees who opposed him. The Pharisees, like Diotrephes, not merely refused to walk in the right path themselves, but hindered those who were entering upon it (Luk 11:52). They also “cast out” those who presumed to take a less narrow view than themselves (Joh 9:34, Joh 9:35).
3Jn 1:11
This is the moral to which St. John has been leading up. Diotrephes will at least serve as a warning. A Christian gentleman will note such behaviour in order to avoid it. Strengthened by his own previous walk in the truth (verse 3), and encouraged by the apostle (verses 5-8), with Diotrephes as a warning on the one hand, and Demetrius as an example on the other, he ought not to fail in proving his heavenly birth by doing good and avoiding evil (see on 1Jn 3:6).
3Jn 1:12
Respecting Demetrius we know no more than is told us here. All that we can safely infer from what is stated is that he is a person of whom Gaius has not hitherto known much; otherwise this elaborate commendation would scarcely be necessary. Conjectures about him are
(1) that he was the bearer of this Epistle to Gaius,which is not improbable;
(2) that he was a member of the same Church as Diotrephes, and had done good service in opposing him,which is possible;
(3) that he is the silversmith of Artemis (Act 19:24), now “preaching the faith of which he once made havoc,”which is not probable. The name was a common one. It is not easy to determine the meaning of the statement that Demetrius hath the witness of all men, and of the truth itself. Perhaps it means that those who bore testimony to Demetrius were something more than a large body of unanimous human witnesses, strong as such testimony would be; in giving their witness they were guided by “the Spirit of truth.” Or it may mean that the facts speak of themselves: as soon as Gaius knows Demetrius he will see that the universal commendation of him is amply justified. The true reading in what follows is, “and thou knowest that our witness is true” (comp. Joh 19:35; Joh 21:24). The calm confidence with which the writer asserts his authority, both over Diotrephes and also as a witness, confirms us in the belief that “the elder” is no less than the apostle.
3Jn 1:13, 3Jn 1:14
3. CONCLUSION (see notes on 2Jn 1:12, 2Jn 1:13). Here the pen or reed is mentioned instead of the paper, as a means of writing. The word is found nowhere else in the New Testament in this sense Note the and the , each with its right force, the former expressing a strongcr opposition than the latter: “I had many things to write to thee; nevertheless, I do not care with ink and pen to write to thee: but I hope straightway to see thee, and we shall speak mouth to mouth.” “The friends” are perhaps so called in contrast to the hostility of Diotrephes and his party. Instead of warfare, “peace be to thee;” instead of the wicked prating of enemies, the salutations of friends. The elder concludes with his own personal salutation to all the members of his flock who reside near to Gaius (comp. Joh 10:3).
HOMILETICS
3Jn 1:1-14
An apostolic pastoral to a Christian man.
We have here another price, less fragment, giving us a glimpse into the actual Church life of the first century, and of the Christian deeds and difficulties of one of its honoured members. We have no other inspired letter to a private Church member. This serves a double purpose. It enables us to picture, in outline, Gains, with his Christian work, his character, and his trials. It enables us also to picture a Church as to its fellowship, its constitution, and its work. Gains was a member of a Christian Church (3Jn 1:9, ), though we do not know of which. He was, apparently, one of St. John’s own spiritual children (verse 4, ), who gave the apostle unfeigned joy (verse 3), as, beholding his steadfast grasp of the truth (verse 3) and his upright walk, he regarded this as the greatest gift of God’s grace (verse 4) he could desire to receive. His reputation was so well maintained (verse 6) that the apostle felt sure enough of his true spiritual prosperity to warrant him in cherishing the wish that he might make as much progress and be in as good health in a worldly as he was in a religious point of view (verse 2). Gaius was not only a helper of his own Church, but a lover of the brethren, even though they might be strangers to him (verse 5, Greek); for when men had gone forth among the Gentiles, taking nothing from them, and had spread abroad the Name (verse 7), it was the delight of Gaius to help such forward on their journey (verse 6). Still, his work was not easy. Diotrephes, who loved office, was probably jealous of the influence which Gains had acquired by his unambitious service (verses 5-9); so that John takes occasion to assure Gaius that what he has done he has well done (verse 5), and that when he (the apostle) next visits the Church, he will put Diotrephes to shame (verse 10). It is interesting to note that here, as in his Second Epistle, he speaks of himself as “the elder” (verse 1). The various expressions in the letter which touch upon the Church life of those days, do, when gathered up and set in order, put before us a Church picture unique in the New Testament writings.
I. THERE IS A DISTINCT CHURCH HERE SPECIFIED OVER WHICH THE APOSTLE JOHN HAD SOME OVERSIGHT. We have before remarked (homily on 2 John) that the apostles’ range of superintendence was much wider than that of those who were only presbyters or bishops, or overseers (see Bishop Lightfoot, ‘Ep. Philippians’). Yet in reference to specific Churches, or individuals in them, it is as presbyter that he writes (verse 1). That there is a distinct Church, to which Gaius belonged, is clear from verses 9 and 10. The conception of one vast territorial Church does not belong to the New Testament books”the Churches of Galatia” (Gal 1:1); “the Church at Ephesus” (Rev 2:1), etc.
II. THE MEMBERS OF THIS CHURCH WERE UNITED IN A HOLY FELLOWSHIP, AND RECEIVED EACH OTHER IN CHRIST‘S NAME. (Verse 8; Rom 14:1.) They met together and received reports of faithful Christian service (verse 6), and were addressed as a community by the apostle (verse 9).
III. THIS CHURCH HAD A SELF–ACTING CONSTITUTION. (Verses 9, 10.) This Diotrephes, who loved to have the pre-eminence, and to exercise the power of casting men out of the Church, is one whose lordly ambition is evidently overriding all, and even defying the apostle himself. Evidently this is abnormal. It will be brought to an end. Why? Because the authority of a Church can only be exercised by the Church itself, and cannot be delegated to or usurped by another without a gross invasion of the rights of the Christian priesthood. Of this, more further on. Just now let us observe that the precepts laid down to Churches are such that they cannot be carried out if the Church allows its authority to slip from itself (1Co 5:1-13), or if out of any temporal consideration whatever it allows its movements to be regulated by an outer and alien power.
IV. THE OBJECTS SET BEFORE THIS CHURCH ARE CLEAR AND DEFINITE. (Verse 8.) “That we may be fellow-workers with the truth.” It is assumed here that the Church is composed of such as believe and know and exemplify the truth as it is in Jesus. [Though there is no allusion in this letter either to Jesus Christ or to the gospel, yet the phrase, “the truth,” bears no uncertain meaning when it comes from John’s pen.] These, and these alone, can be fellow-workers therewith. The aim of a Church in its fellowship is not only mutual sympathy, common worship, or the building up of itself from the families of its members. All these are necessary, but these necessary things are not all. The Church is for the diffusion of the truth far and wide. It is bound to send forth men who shall go out among the Gentiles for the sake of the Name, like those to whom Gaius was so conspicuous a friend; yea, and to set forward such on their journey “worthily of God.” We gather from the letter that Gains took such a task upon himself, because Diotrephes would not allow it to be done, but that properly the Church ought to have done it, and not have suffered the whole weight to rest on the shoulders of one man (cf. verses 5-10). They should have been sustained by the Church from which they went out .
V. THIS CHURCH HAD TO BEAR A SORE TRIAL THROUGH UNSANCTIFIED HUMAN AMBITION. In the preceding Epistle the “advance” man is the bane of the Church. Here the ambitious man is such. This spirit showed itself very early among the disciples, and was severely rebuked by the Lord Jesus (Mat 18:1-4). From no other external cause, perhaps, has the Church had to suffer so much as from this. Let the sad and sorry story of Church history be unfolded, and it will tell us a thousand times over that unholy ambition is the bane of the Church. The latest form of it is “papal infallibility.” Priestly assumptions are crippling Churches and ruining souls. Lord-deacons and lordly pastors are a Church’s bane. A true and healthy Church life is the analogue of a true and healthy bodily life, where every member fulfils its own functions, and no one interferes with that of another.
VI. THOUGH SOME MEMBERS MAY HINDER AND DISCREDIT A CHURCH, YET THERE ARE OTHERS WHO TRULY HELP AND HONOUR IT. Men like Caius and Demetrius abound. They are a Church’s honour and joy. It is very likely that, owing to their unambitious and unpretending worth, they seldom come to the front, unless compelled by circumstances so to do; but their loyalty to the truth, their holy lives, their kindliness and steadfastness, are the honour of the Churches, and the glory of Christ. Doubtless, the “world” will talk more about one Diotrephes than about twelve men like Caius, and be well pleased to do so. But “the Lord knoweth them that are his.”
VII. WHATEVER AND WHEREVER A CHURCH MAY BE, IT IS FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL TO BEAR IN MIND HIS OWN PERSONAL RELATIONS WITH GOD, AND TO ACT ACCORDINGLY. (Verses 11, 12.) Connection with the holiest Church in the world cannot save us.
Association with the most imperfect Church in Christendom cannot hinder our salvation, unless we allow it to do so; in which case, the fault will be our own. Religion is a matter between the soul and God. Strictly so. The question isAre we born of God? Are we in Christ? Is Christ in us, the Hope of glory? And the proof of this lies, not in Church membership, but in the life, and in the life alone. Church membership may be of great service. The fact that it may be made too much of is no argument against it. But ever, ever let us remember that we may be in a Church yet not in the Church. If we are not in Christ, we are not in the Church. If we are in Christ by a living faith, we are in his true Church, by a right which none can disprove, and which no one ought ever to dispute.
HOMILIES BY W. JONES
3Jn 1:2
Ideal prosperity.
“Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper,” etc. The Authorized Version of this verse seems to carry the meaning that St. John valued physical health and secular prosperity above everything else. The original does not convey such a meaning. Revised Version, “Beloved, I pray that in all things thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.”
I. THE APOSTLE PRAYS THAT HIS FRIEND GAIUS MAY HAVE TEMPORAL PROSPERITY AND PHYSICAL HEALTH. From the expression of this desire in so brief a letter, we may infer that St. John regarded these things as of great importance.
1. Secular prosperity is desirable. Non-success in business is to be deprecated. For our own sake, for the sake of our families, and for the sake of our usefulness, prosperity in temporal things is desirable. Wealth is a wonderful power; and in the hands of a wise man it is a great boon both to himself and to others.
2. Physical health is desirable. Health of body, for many obvious reasons, is one of God’s best gifts to man. It is important also for other reasons which are not obvious to all. The state of the body exercises a great influence upon the mind and soul. It is the organ and agent of both; and, if it be unhealthy, our impressions of the outward will be untrue, and our influence upon the outward will be limited and feeble. Our spiritual feelings and expressions are considerably toned and coloured by our physical condition.
II. THE APOSTLE INDICATES THE REMARKABLE SPIRITUAL PROSPERITY OF HIS FRIEND CAIUS. This is clear from his making his spiritual prosperity the measure of the desired bodily health and temporal prosperity. The next verse also contributes evidence of this prosperity of soul. It was seen in his growing acquaintance with the truth and his growing conformity to the truth. “Brethren bare witness unto thy truth, even as thou walkest in truth.” Perhaps Gaius himself needed this assurance of his spiritual prosperity. “The words of the apostle seem to imply,” says Dr. Binney,” that the health of Gains was somewhat enfeebled. This might affect his feelings, and render the actual prosperity of his soul, while visible to others, unperceived by himself; his excellence was obvious to all who knew him, though bodily infirmity or mental depression concealed the truth from his own consciousness. On this account he was addressed by John in the words of encouragementwords delicately but strongly conveying the apostle’s confidence in his spiritual state, and assuring him, at the same time, of his constantly sharing in his supplications and prayers.” This spiritual prosperity is more important than material progress and success.
III. THE APOSTLE MAKES THE PROSPERITY OF HIS SOUL THE MEASURE OF THE PHYSICAL HEALTH AND SECULAR PROSPERITY DESIRED FOR GAIUS. This is profoundly significant. Unless our spiritual prosperity be at least commensurate with our temporal prosperity, the latter ceases to be a blessing. All the worldly wealth which a man possesses which is more than proportionate to the wealth of his soul, he will do well to get rid of at once, or by Divine grace bring the wealth of his soul into proportion with it. Without this correspondence we cannot use wealth aright, riches will injure us, the material will crush the spiritual in us. When outward riches are more than proportionate to his godliness and grace, they are a curse to their possessor. But when there is a proportion between the two, wealth is a blessing worthy an apostle’s prayer. What astounding revolutions would take place if this prayer were universally realized! What transformations in health! Many now hale and strong would become weak and sickly. Many now diseased and feeble would become sound and vigorous. What transformations in circumstances! Many pampered sons and daughters of riches and luxury would come to poverty and want. Many of the indigent would pass from the abode of penury to the palace of ease and plenty. “A terrible wish this,” says Binney, “if it were offered for and were to take effect upon many a professor: it would blast them in body and ruin them in circumstances; it would render them, like the Church that thought itself rich and increased in goods, ‘ poor, and miserable, and blind, and naked.'” Shah I offer this prayer for you? If this prayer were realized, the physical would bear the true proportion to the spiritual, and the temporal to the eternal. Learn how far secular wealth is desirable.W.J.
3Jn 1:3, 3Jn 1:4
Spiritual prosperity.
“For I rejoiced greatly when the brethren came and testified of the truth that is in thee,” etc. In these and some subsequent verses we have some aspects and evidences of the spiritual prosperity of Gaius.
I. ASPECTS OF SPIRITUAL PROSPERITY. “Brethren came and bare witness unto thy truth, even as thou walkest in truth.”
1. Truth appropriated in mind and heart. Our interpretation of the words, “thy truth,” would be superficial and inadequate if we simply said that they express the sincerity of Gaius. The expression involves this, that he was true in religion and in life; but it means that his religious beliefs were correctthat he held the truth concerning the Person and work of Jesus Christ. On these subjects pernicious errors had arisen in the Church. Some denied the Godhead of our Saviour; others denied the reality of his manhood. “The first stumbled at his pre-existence and incarnation, because he suffered indignity and anguish; the other, admitting his Divine nature, thought it beneath him actually to suffer, and therefore denied that his body or his sufferings were anything else but illusory appearances” (Binney). Against each of these errors St. John wrote. And by the expression, “the truth,” he generally means the apostolic doctrine concerning the Person and work of Jesus Christ. “This truth Gaius held; held it as his life; it was ‘in him,’ as filling his intellect and affections; in his understanding as a source of light, in his heart as the object of love.” The apostle, as we have learned from his former Epistles, attached the utmost importance to correct religious belief.
2. Truth manifested in life and conduct. “Thou walkest in truth.” His practical life was in harmony with his professed creed. The truth he held was not merely a form of sound words, but a living force in his character and conduct. His faith was not a mere speculation or opinion, but a thing of deep feeling and firm conviction. The faith that does not influence the life towards harmony with itself is not faith in the scriptural sense; it is assent, or opinion; but it is not Christian faith, or saving faith. Our real faith moulds the life into conformity with the truth believed. St. John quite as earnestly insisted upon practicing the truth as upon holding it. “He that doeth good is of God; he that doeth evil hath not seen God” (verse 11; and 1Jn 3:7, 1Jn 3:10). Let us, like Gaius, hold the truth, make it our own; and also live the truth, walk in it day by day. Cultivate a true faith and a holy life.
II. TESTIMONY TO SPIRITUAL PROSPERITY. ” Brethren came and bare witness unto thy truth,” etc. These brethren were probably those who had been commended to the Church by the apostle, rejected through the influence of Diotrephes (verse 9), and then entertained by Gains. They probably presented this report on their return to the Church of which St. John was pastor, and from which they had been sent forth (verses 5, 6).
1. It is a pleasure to good men to testify to the excellence of others.
2. It is gratifying to a good man to ,receive the commendation of good men. “A good name is better than precious ointment.” “A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches.”
III. THE INFLUENCE OF SPIRITUAL PROSPERITY UPON THE GOOD. “Greater joy have I none than this, to hear of my children,” etc.
1. The tender relation here mentioned. “My children.” It seems that Gains had been converted through the ministry of St. John. He was the spiritual child of the apostle; his “true child in faith;” his “beloved child,” as St. Paul says of Timothy. This relationship is very close, tender, and sacred (cf. 1Co 4:14, 1Co 4:15).
2. The great joy here spoken of. “Greater joy have I none than this,” etc. Every genuine Christian rejoices to find men walking in the truth; but the apostle had the additional joy which arose from the dear and holy tie by which he and Gains were united. The success of a young man in temporal things is a great joy to his parents. To Christian parents it is a far greater joy when their children give their hearts to God, and walk in truth. And to the Christian minister, and the Sunday school teacher, the spiritual prosperity of those whom they have led to the Saviour is a source of deep and pure rejoicing. Such prosperity is a proof that we have not laboured in vain; it is a distinguished honour conferred upon us by God; and it gives a foretaste of the grand final reward, “Well done, good and faithful servant,” etc. To hear of or to behold such fruits of our Christian work both humbles and rejoices us.
Christian brethren, let us aim both to appropriate and to exemplify Christian truth.W.J.
3Jn 1:5, 3Jn 1:6
Hospitality.
“Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren,” etc. We have here
I. HOSPITALITY EXERCISED. “Beloved, thou doest a faithful work in whatsoever thou doest toward them that are brethren and strangers withal.”
1. The persons towards whom it had been exercised.
(1) “Strangers.” We mention this first because it is involved in the Greek word for “hospitality,” , i.e., kindness to strangers. Entertaining our friends is not properly hospitality. This virtue, says Barnes, “springs up naturally in countries thinly settled, where the sight of a stranger would be therefore peculiarly pleasant; and where the population was too sparse, and the travelers too infrequent, to justify inn-keeping as a business. From these causes it has happened that there are, properly speaking, no inns or taverns in the region around Palestine. It was customary, indeed, to erect places for lodging and shelter at suitable distances, or by the side of springs or watering-places, for travelers to lodge in. But they are built at the public expense, and are unfurnished. Each traveler carries his own bed and clothes and cooking utensils, and such places are merely designed as a shelter for caravans. It is still so; and hence it becomes, in their view, a virtue of high order to entertain, at their own tables and in their families, such strangers as may be traveling.” But these strangers were also:
(2) “Brethren.” They were fellow-Christians. Hospitality should not be limited to them, but it should be shown to them first and chiefly. The New Testament teaches that kindness should begin at home (1Ti 5:8; Gal 6:10). The apostles were to “begin at Jerusalem.” Christian people have sometimes supplied the wants of the drunken, the indolent, and the wasteful, and neglected their own sober, industrious, and thrifty poor in their need. It seems to us that in such ministries the rule should beour own home first, our own Church and congregation next, other Christian brethren next, and then the irreligious.
2. The person by whom it had been exercised. Gains. But St. John in the text sets forth the exercise of hospitality as specially becoming in Christians. He speaks of it as “a faithful work,” i.e., a work worthy of a faithful man or a Christian. Hospitality is frequently in the sacred Scriptures enjoined upon Christians as a duty (Rom 12:13; Heb 13:2; 1Pe 4:9). St. Paul mentions it as one of the duties of a Christian bishop (1Ti 3:2; Tit 1:8). At the last judgment, one reason for the reward of the good is that they exercised hospitality, and one of the charges upon which the wicked will be condemned is the neglect of hospitality (Mat 25:34-46). Accordingly, we find that the “primitive Christians considered one principal part of their duty to consist in showing hospitality to strangers. They were, in fact, so ready in discharging this duty, that the very heathen admired them for it. They were hospitable to all strangers, but especially to those who were of the household of faith. Believers scarcely ever traveled without letters of communion, which testified the purity of their faith, and procured for them a favourable reception wherever the name of Jesus Christ was known” (Calmer). We also find that the hospitality of Gains was hearty; for the brethren whom he had entertained testified to his love (verse 6). “There is,” says Washington Irving, “an emanation from the heart in genuine hospitality which cannot be described, but is immediately felt, and puts the stranger at once at his ease.” As occasion requires it, hospitality is still a Christian duty.
II. HOSPITALITY ACKNOWLEDGED. “Who bare witness to thy love before the Church.” The evangelists, when they returned to the Church from which they had been sent forth on their work, gave an account of their mission, and in so doing testified to the hearty hospitality of Gains. This report of Gains differed from that of a minister of whom I have read. This minister “had traveled far to preach for a congregation at. After the sermon, he waited, expecting some one would ask him to dinner. At length, the place becoming almost empty, he mustered courage, and walked up to an old gentleman, and said, ‘Will you go home and dine with me today, brother?’ ‘Where do you live?’ ‘About twenty miles from here, sir.’ ‘No;’ said the man, colouring, ‘but you must go with me.’ ‘Thank you; I will, cheerfully.’ After this the minister was never troubled about his dinner.” Gratefully to testify to kindness like that of Gaius must be a delight to those who are worthy recipients of it.
III. HOSPITALITY ENCOURAGED “Whom thou wilt do well to set forward on their journey worthily of God.” This refers to a second visit to Gains, in which they probably brought this letter with them. To set them forward was to enable them to proceed onward by furnishing them with necessaries for the journey. Here is an admirable rule for regulating the exercise of our hospitality”worthily of God;” Alford, “In a manner worthy of him whose messengers they are and whose servant thou art.” We should show kindness as becometh the followers of him “who giveth to all liberally and upbraideth not.” “It would,” says Barnes, “be particularly expected of Christians that they should show hospitality to the ministers of religion. They were commonly poor; they received no fixed salary; they traveled from place to place; and they would be dependent for support on the kindness of those who loved the Lord Jesus Christ” (cf. Mat 10:9-15). The exercise of this duty is often richly rewarded in the present. Certain and splendid is its reward in the future (Mat 10:40-42; Mat 25:34-36).W.J.
3Jn 1:7, 3Jn 1:8
Missionary workers and helpers.
“Because that for his Name’s sake they went forth,” etc. The Bible is remarkable for its universality. Either directly or inferentially, it has something of importance and value to say on almost everything which affects human life and interests. It throws light on many modern questions; and in studying it we are often agreeably surprised to find directions and hints touching many things which we regard as quite modern, and concerning which we had not expected to find much suggestion or light in its pages. Thus in this short letter we have some apostolic notes on Christian missions, which are as applicable to missionary enterprise now as they were to the mission work of the Church eighteen hundred years ago. Here are notes on
I. MISSIONARY WORKERS. “For the sake of the Name they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles.” Notice:
1. The motive of these Christian missionaries. “For the sake of the Name they went forth.” In all that we do we are actuated by some motive or motives. Christian work is no exception to this rule. In Christian propagandism there may be various motives; e.g., zeal for a cause or society, or for the spread of certain doctrines or forms of Church government, etc. Each of these is allowable in its place; but neither of them is the highest and best motive of Christian service. The most devoted workers in Christianity have a nobler motive than any one or all of these. “Go into a large manufacturing establishment. If you will notice carefully, you will perceive a large shaft running the whole length of the building. To this are attached wheels, and bands go from these wheels to other wheels, and in these is inserted short shafting, and to it are attached augers, saws, knives, and chisels; and by these an immense amount of mechanical work is done. But what is the cause of all this motion? Where is the secret power which makes all this machinery do the work of five hundred men? The answer is easily given. It is steam. Let the steam go down, and this whole machinery would become as still and silent as the grave” (C.M. Temple). And the grand motive power for working the machinery of Christianity is love to the Lord Jesus Christ; not zeal for doctrines, however sound, but love to a Person; not the desire to build up the Church, still less to extend a denomination or sect; but a passionate attachment to the living Lord of the Church. Christ himself is the life of Christianity. The great motive of the noblest Christian work is supreme love to him. “The love of Christ constraineth us” is the explanation of the best and bravest work which is done for men. There is no motive like love; and love to a person will always prove a stronger motive than love to a cause or a creed. When Christ is received into the heart he awakens its highest, holiest, intensest love. This love is the mightiest inspiration in Christian service. It can dare most, do most, endure most. The bravest workers go forth “for the sake of the Name” of Jesus Christ.
2. The policy of these Christian missionaries. “Taking nothing of the Gentiles.” The apostles held and repeatedly asserted the principle “that they which proclaim the gospel should live of the gospel” (1Co 9:14). Our Lord taught the same truth: “The labourer is worthy of his food” (Mat 10:10). But there were cases in which it was not expedient to enforce this principle. The gospel should be proclaimed without charge to those who know it not; for they cannot be expected to prize it before they are acquainted with it. Therefore these early missionaries, by “their own deliberate purpose,” took nothing of the Gentiles to whom they went. If they had done otherwise, they might have been suspected of mercenary motives. We should always be able to say to the heathen, both at home and abroad, “I seek not yours, but you.” “I coveted no man’s silver, or gold, or apparel.” But when the heathen are heathen no longer, but have learned to appreciate the gospel, we may say unto them, “If we sowed unto you spiritual things,” etc. (1Co 9:11, 1Co 9:13, 1Co 9:14). In these respects the apostles and the early missionaries are an example for succeeding ages.
II. MISSIONARY HELPERS. “We therefore ought to welcome such, that we may be fellow-workers with the truth.” This brings out the duty of the Church to missionary workers.
1. To support the missionaries. “We ought to receive such;” Revised Version, “to welcome;” Alford, “to support.” The word signifies not only “to welcome,” but “to aid and strengthen.” And this should be done in a worthy manner”worthily of God.” Workers for Jesus Christ should be treated with kindness, generously entertained, and encouraged in their work. They need this from the Church. Without it they may “wax weary, fainting in their souls;” and in that case the work will suffer.
2. To cooperate with the missionaries. “That we might be fellow-helpers to the truth;” Revised Version, “that we may be fellow-workers with the truth;” Alford, “that we may become fellow-workers for the truth.” The idea is that, by supporting the missionaries, Gains would become a fellow-worker with them in promoting the cause of the truth. This is stated as a reason why he should show kindness to them and help them. It is also clearly implied that it is the duty of the Christian to be a fellow-worker in the cause of the truth. Knowing the truth ourselves, we are morally bound to make it known to others. But there are many who cannot do this themselves by preaching or teaching. Then, according to St. John in our text, they should do it by encouraging and supporting those who can preach or teach. “In this way,” says Binney, “Gains was enabled to do much; far more, in fact, in the way of preaching, than if he himself had been the most eloquent of preachers; for by aiding many, and helping them on their way and in their work, he was virtually speaking, at the same moment, by many mouths, and in the eye of God might be regarded as converting many souls in several places and at the same time, and when otherwise occupied himselfwhen he was engaged in his worldly business, at home in his family, asleep in his bed, at rest or on a journey, in sickness or in health, living or dead.” Christians, behold your duty and privilege, to be either missionary workers or missionary helpers,W.J.
3Jn 1:9, 3Jn 1:10
Diotrephes: a beacon.
“I wrote unto the Church: but Diotrephes,” etc.
I. THE CHARACTER OF DIOTREPHES BRIEFLY STATED. “Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence among them.” We do not know who or what this man was beyond what is stated in our text. Whether he was pastor, elder, deacon, or other office-bearer in the Church, we cannot tell. Whatever he was in other respects, we know that he was ambitious of the highest place and of the greatest power in the Church: he would be first and chief of all, or he would be nothing. An evil and dangerous character in any one. “Before honour is humility.” “A man’s pride shall bring him low; but honour shall uphold the humble in spirit.” “Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the Lord.” “Pride goeth before destruction,” etc. “Whosoever would become great among you shall be your minister [or, ‘servant’]; and whosoever would be first among you shall be your servant [or, ‘bondservant’]; even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto,” etc. The chiefship is to be given, not to him who loveth to be first, but to him who most humbly and faithfully serves others. “For every one that exalteth himself shall be humbled; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.” “Humility is the surest path to exaltation.” “The highest honour is won by the deepest humility.” He who will be first of all, or nothing, will in the end be last and lowest of all.
II. THE CHARACTER OF DIOTREPHES ILLUSTRATED IN HIS CONDUCT,
1. He rejected the highest commendation. “I wrote somewhat unto the Church: but Diotrephes receiveth us not.” He would not recognize the authority of St. John, and rejected the letter of commendation which the apostle had sent to the Church. Neither would he receive the missionaries, and that probably because St. John commended them, and he would acknowledge no one to be greater than himself in the Church to which he belonged. He was determined “that not the apostle, but himself, should rule the Church.”
2. He defamed the fairest reputation. “Prating against us with wicked words.” Here are two evils, and one worse than the other.
(1) Loquacity. “Prating”running on with speech. “The reproaches were mere tattle, worth nothing, irrelevant.” “In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin.” “Be slow to speak.” “If any man bridleth not his tongue, this man’s religion is vain.” Beware of the slavery of the tongue, and the sin of gab.
(2) Slander. “With wicked words.” The holiest man is exposed to the venom of the tongue of the slanderer. Arrogance leads to terrible extremes; it dares to calumniate the most beautiful-spirited apostle. When a man has done wrong to another, he finds it necessary either to confess the wrong or to say false and wicked things against him he has wronged, hoping thereby to justify himself. So Diotrephes prated against St. John with wicked words. Therefore beware of the first wrong step. The slanderer frequently assails the best of men. Our Lord was thus attacked. “A gluttonous man and a wine-bibber.” “He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the demons casteth he out the demons.”
“No might nor greatness in mortality
Can censure ‘scape; back-wounding calumny
The whitest virtue strikes: what king so strong
Can tie the gall up in the slanderous tongue?”
(Shakespeare.)
“Be thou as chaste as ice, as pure as snow,
Thou shalt not escape calumny.”
(Ibid.)
Be not dismayed if you are thus assailed. Loathe this sin.
3. He prohibited the exercise of a sacred privilege and duty. “Neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and them that would he forbiddeth,” etc. He would neither receive the missionaries himself nor allow others to do so. “The dog in the manger” is the best exponent of his spirit and conduct. He prevented some from doing two things which are at once duties and privileges:
(1) exercising hospitality to the “brethren and strangers;”
(2) aiding them in their work of evangelization.
How terribly evil was the course he pursued! He injured the apostle, the missionaries, those who would have received them, those to whom they were sent, the whole Church, and the Church’s Lord; and yet he was a member of the Church, and the chief man in it! He went so far as to expel from the Church those who would have entertained the evangelists. “And casteth them out of the Church.”
III. THE CHARACTER AND CONDUCT OF DIOTREPHES CONDEMNED. In this letter they are justly censured. And further rebuke is referred to: “If I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth,” etc. There is nothing vindictive in this. The apostle would vindicate his own authority and the commission of the missionaries, enlighten the Church, and rebuke Diotrephes. “There are awkward men in the Church; men who, if they have any grace at all, have so much of the devil in them still that their grace has but little control over them. Good men should resist such persons. It may be very pleasant to talk of dealing with them in a spirit of charity, and being gentle with them, and forbearing and kind. Up to a certain point this is perfectly right. There is a work which compassion has to do; there is a sphere in which pity may be called into active exercise; at the same time, we are to mark those who cause divisions and offences, and to avoid them; and there is a certain class of men on whom pity has no effect, and compassion is lost; and the only thing which can be done is to ‘deliver them over unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme'” (Dr. Joseph Parker).
One masterful, power-loving man in a Church may work incalculable mischief and injury; therefore
(1) let us guard against the presence or growth of such a spirit in ourselves;
(2) let us take heed that we afford no encouragement or countenance to such a spirit in others.W.J.
3Jn 1:11, 3Jn 1:12
Imitating the good.
“Beloved, follow not that which is evil,” etc. This exhortation occurs here very naturally after the mention of Diotrephes. “Beloved, imitate not that which is evil;” do not copy Diotrephes; regard him not as an example, but as a beacon. But imitate the good; take Demetrius as a pattern; copy his conduct.
I. MAN IMITATES. It is implied here that Gaius would imitate either the good or the evileither Demetrius or Diotrephes. The propensity to imitation is one of the strongest in human nature. It is this which makes example so much mightier than precept. This propensity is one of the earliest to be called into exercise in human life. The tender infant is stirred by it almost before it knows anything. Very frequently we imitate others unconsciously. The extent of our conscious and intentional imitation is very small as compared with our unconscious and unintentional imitation. This tendency plays a most important part in human education. Without intentional imitation instruction would be impossible, as in reading, writing, etc. And unintentional imitation has great influence in the growth of habit and the formation of character. A very important thing is this tendency to imitation.
II. MAN SHOULD IMITATE ONLY THE GOOD. “Beloved, imitate not that which is evil, but that which is good,” etc. Many and forcible reasons may be assigned for this; e.g., that the opposite course must inevitably lead to ruin; that this course ennobles and blesses him who pursues it. But let us confine ourselves to the reasons assigned in the text.
1. Because the good-doer is of God. “He that doeth good is of God;” i.e., he that doeth good truly and naturally, in whom well-doing is not the exception, but the rule of life, is of God. He is “begotten of God” (1Jn 3:9). He proves that he is a child of God by his likeness to his Father in character and conduct. He is inspired by God both as to his inner life and as to his outward practice. Notice how practical is the apostle’s idea of true personal religion. The godly man is the man who does good; his good works are the evidence of his godliness. We should imitate the good because of their intimate and blessed relation to God.
2. Because the evil-doer has no true knowledge of God. “He that doeth evil hath not seen God,” By doing evil we must understand not an occasional and exceptional action, but the general tenor of life and conduct. He that doeth evil is one the general characteristic of whose works is evil. Such a one has not seen God. The beholding of God is spiritual. And the vision of God and the doing of evil are incompatible; because:
(1) Purity of heart is essential to the seeing of God, and, where purity of heart is, sin cannot be the general characteristic of the conduct. “Holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.” “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.”
(2) When a man has seen the Lord, he cannot live in the practice of sin. He who has seen and appreciated the highest beauty cannot live in constant and willing fellowship with extreme deformity. And he whose soul has seen anything of the supremely Perfect and the infinitely Beautiful cannot look upon sin with approval; it must appear loathsome unto him. This consideration tends to strengthen faith in the full and final salvation of every regenerate man. He who has tasted the high joys of Divine vision and communion can never be content with the pleasures of sin or satisfied with the things of this world. Do not imitate the evil; for the practice of it darkens and destroys the vision of the soul; it excludes from the highest and divinest knowledge, even the knowledge which is the soul’s life. “This is life eternal, that they should know thee, the only true God,” etc.
III. GOOD EXAMPLES ARE GENERALLY AVAILABLE. It is very seldom that we are unable to point to some known example well worthy of imitation. To such a one St. John calls attention. “Demetrius hath the witness of all, and of the truth itself; yea, we also bear witness; and thou knowest that our witness is true.” Diotrephes was a beacon to be shunned; Demetrius, an example to be imitated. He was probably a member of the same Church as Gains, and well known to him; and therefore the apostle does not state what his chief excellences were, but from his being named here we infer that they were those which Diotrephes had not. Where the latter was wanting, Demetrius excelled. Good character is not always accompanied by good reputation, but in the case of Demetrius it was. He had a good reputation of:
(1) St. John: “We also bear witness.”
(2) Gains: “Thou knowest that our witness is true.”
(3) All who knew him; or, perhaps, of all the brethren mentioned in verses 3, 5, 10: “Demetrius hath the witness of all.”
(4) “And of the truth itself.” Alford says, “The objective truth of God, which is the Divine rule of the walk of all believers, gives a good testimony to him who really walks in the truth. This witness lies in the accordance of his walk with the requirement of God’s truth.” That truth, like a “mirror, seemed to place in a clear light his Christian virtue and uprightness, and thus to bear witness to him.” The most precious testimony is that of the truth itself. When that is in our favour, we may thankfully rejoice. So manifold and excellent was the testimony borne of Demetrius. In most places and societies there are some who are worth imitating. Let us imitate them in so far as they embody the truth. There are seasons in our experience when good human examples are specially valuable. Sometimes the Perfect Example seems to tower far above our imitation, and we despair of ever copying that with success. In such moods the excellent human example is peculiarly precious. It is not so very much higher than our own level of attainment; it encourages us; and, when our despondency has passed away, we are able to aspire once more for conformity to the Supreme Exemplar.W. J.
3Jn 1:13, 3Jn 1:14
Valediction.
“I had many things to write,” etc. What a precious boon communication by writing is when communication by speech is unattainable! How valuable is writing also when accuracy and permanence are desired! Yet writing has its disadvantages as compared with speech, as St. John found at this time.
I. THE APOSTLE‘S HOPE. “I hope shortly to see thee, and we shall speak face to face.” He hoped for communication by speech, which, as compared with writing, is:
1. More easy and rapid.
2. More expressive.
3. More pleasurable.
The sainted apostle mentions this in closing his former private Epistle. “That your joy may be fulfilled.”
II. THE APOSTLE‘S BENEDICTION. “Peace be unto thee.” A very comprehensive benediction. It comprises:
1. Peace in our relation to God. This peace is a consequence of the forgiveness of our sins and our reconciliation unto God. “Thy sins are forgiven go in peace.” “Being justified by faith, let us have peace with God,” etc. The peace also which flows from confidence in God as regards the possibilities of the future (see Mat 6:25-34). “Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee, because he trusteth in thee.”
2. Peace in our relation to men. The absence of jealousy, revenge, bitterness of spirit, etc. The practical recognition of the claims of others upon us. And the exercise of good will, kindness, etc.
3. Peace in our own being. The accusations of conscience silenced by the removal of our guilt through the mercy of God.
“I feel within me
A peace above all earthly dignities,
A still and quiet conscience.”
(Shakespeare.)
The conflict between the flesh and the spirit ended in the victory of the spirit. The rebellion of passion against principle, and of appetites against aspirations, quelled by the power of the Divine life in the soul. By his grace God establishes order in a man’s own being, brings the faculties and propensities of his nature into harmony, and so gives to him inward peace. In this way the peace of the Christian soul is complete. Our Lord bequeathed this peace unto his disciples. “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you,” etc. (Joh 14:27; Joh 20:19, Joh 20:26).
4. Perfect peace in heaven. Here our realization of this peace is variable. Doubts assail us; fears depress us; sickness and sorrow darken and disturb, if they do not distress us. Serenity of spirit is not always ours. But hereafter “God shall wipe away every tear from our eyes,” etc. (Rev 21:4).
III. THE APOSTLE‘S GREETING. “The friends salute thee. Salute the friends by name.”W.J.
HOMILIES BY R. FINLAYSON
3Jn 1:1-14
The aged presbyter’s letter to a private Church-member.
“The eider unto Gaius the beloved, whom I love in truth.” As in the Second Epistle, John takes the familiar official designation of “the elder.” The receiver of the Epistle was regarded by John with more than ordinary affection; for he at once designates Gaius “the beloved,” and three times in the course of the short Epistle be addresses him by this designation. He was widely beloved; for the addition here, while emphasizing the apostle’s own affection for Gains, widens the range of affection for him. “Whom I (for my part) love,” he says; i.e., he along with many others, not he in opposition to some who withheld love or entertained hate. He loved Gaius as he loved “the elect lady and her children”in truth. This Epistle contains no statement of the Incarnation; but we know that by the apostle the Incarnation was regarded as the vital part of the truth (1Jn 4:1, 1Jn 4:2). It was the highest revelation of Godhead, which bound hearts to God, and hearts to hearts in the Christian circle. Attached to the truth himself, he could not love every one alike; but he loved Gains as a friend of the truth.
I. GAIUS.
1. His well-being desired. “Beloved, I pray that in all things thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.” This is the salutation thrown into an unusual form. As the foundation of the good wish, Gaius is congratulated on his soul-prosperity. This soul-prosperity is brought out, in what follows, in connection with a satisfactory relation to the truth, and specially the practice of hospitality. In the form given to the good wish, it is implied that there is a relation between soul-prosperity and other prosperity. To wish a man success in business and good bodily health is to wish him well so far; only the wish does not go far enough. For every man has an eternal interest as well as a temporal interest, has a soul as well as a body; and, if we are his true well-wishers, we shall wish him well in the whole, and not merely in part, of his well-being. To wish him success in business and good bodily health alone is as though a friend were traveling from Edinburgh to London, and we wished him well as far as Yorknot saying anything about the rest of the journey. The lower prosperity is not to be sought for a man apart from soul-prosperity. It might seem from the old translation that it is to be sought above all things; but there is a mistranslation, which has properly been corrected in the Revised translation. John expresses for Gains the wish that in all things relating to business and health it may be well with him; not, however, without regard to his spiritual condition. His soul was prospering; he was therefore a man for whom this might be safely sought. He was making a good use of his means in the interest of the truth, and so his health was precious. What, then, John wishes for Gains is in effect thismore means and better health, that he might have more to serve God with. The more that such a man as Gains had, the more good he would do. But we cannot safely wish for every man more means and better health. That might only mean more to serve the devil with. What some need is forget a severe check in business, to be laid down on a bed of sickness; and our wish for them may justly be that this should happen to them, rather than that they should lose their souls. From this it will be seen that a Christian may be justified in seeking the utmost success in business and the largest measure of health, provided his motive is to have more means and better health with which to serve God. This may be a greater spur to diligence than even the desire to amass wealth, being attended with the advantage that it leaves the mind free and buoyant. Let us learn the benefit of well-wishing. It was no small thing to have John as a well-wisher, both from the office which he held and his great spiritual experience; and the likelihood was that Caius would get more means and better health because of the aged apostle’s wish. Let us, in our letters or otherwise, wish our friends well in their worldly affairs and in their health, not without regard to the degree in which their souls prosper, and God will see to our wishes taking effect.
2. His relation to the truth rejoiced in.
(1) Truth appropriated. “For I rejoiced greatly, when brethren came and bare witness unto thy truth.” The joy of John was great because of brethren arriving and testifying to the reception of the truth by Gains. It is mentioned here as that on which his soul-prosperity depended. One of the lessons taught by the open flower in the ornamentation of the temple was receptivity. “It lies open to catch the sunshine, and to drink the rain and the dew, shuts up when the sun departs, but expands itself again when the sun’s rays touch it. By reception the plant and the flower live; and by reception the soul of man lives and grows.” We are to be careful to give the soul its proper nourishment, which is the truth: thoughts of God’s love, thoughts of his ends in our life. If we entertain false views of God and of life, we are really taking poison into our souls. Caius felt the need of the truth to nourish anti beautify him. “Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts.” This Caius had; by assimilation, it had become part of his being.
(2) Truth carried out into conduct. “Even as thou walkest in truth.” This was more than receiving the truth, being its proper consequent. The reception of the truth appeared (so that brethren could testify to it) in a higher style of conduct. It is under sunny skies that the finest colouring in nature is to be found. It is in good society that the finest accent is to be found. So it is those who move within the circle of the Divine thoughts, lie open to the Divine influences, that attain to the most attractive style of life. Brethren carry away a good report of them, which is cheering to the souls of veterans. Appended comment emphasizing the apostle’s joy. “Greater joy have I none than this, to hear of my children walking in the truth.” The reception of the truth was implied in walking in the truth; therefore it was enough to note the latter. There were many to whom John stood in the relation of spiritual father (more than those who owed to him their spiritual birth); he was no stranger to fatherly joy. And what gave him joy? To hear of his children, that they were prospering in their worldly affairs, that they were enjoying good health, that they were exempted from persecution. It did cheer him to hear of their lower prosperity; but what cheered him, with more refreshing influence, was to hear of their soul-prosperity, as evidence in their walking in the truth.
3. Practice of hospitality.
(1) Commended. “Beloved, thou doest a faithful work in whatsoever thou doest toward them that are brethren and strangers withal.” The truth binds the whole walk; it specially bound Gains in the practice of hospitality. While just, he made a free use of his means. The objects of his hospitality were brethren, as it appears, missionary brethren, and missionary brethren who were strangers to him, and therefore had no claim on him beyond their Christian position and calling. He had opportunity of rendering them service beyond simply entertaining them; and, whatever service he rendered, he did it as the truth required, i.e., handsomely.
(2) Witnessed to. “Who bare witness to thy love before the Church.” It was love that moved Caius to serve the missionary brethren; and they were mindful of services rendered. On their return to the Church over which John presided, in giving an account of their missionary labours, they told, in presence of the Church, how well they had been treated by Gains. Thus the things which were lovely became also the things of good report.
(3) Encouraged. “Whom thou wilt do well to set forward on their journey worthily of God.” The missionary brethren were returning to their labours his way; the apostle, therefore, bespeaks for them a good reception. Let him follow up his former kindnesses, and set them forward on their journey, by providing the necessary rest, and also, as is suggested by what follows, by making some provision against their future needs, lie was to do this worthily of God, i.e., as representing to them the Divine solicitude. They were deserving. “Because that for the sake of the Name they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles.” The Jews “besought Jesus earnestly for the centurion, saying, tie is worthy that thou shouldest do this for him: for he loveth our nation, and himself built us our synagogue.” The missionary brethren were worthy that Gaius should assist them by setting them forward on their journey. It was for the sake of the Name that they went forth, i.e., “not for their own occasions and earthly interests,” but that the Name of Christ might be magnified. They went forth from the home Church (which was limited in its resources) to convert the Gentiles. That they might not hinder their aim by the appearance of being mercenary, they chose (so far as it was necessary) to labour with their own hands, rather than take from the Gentiles. The accomplishment of their aim, in the formation of a Gentile Christian Church (to be cared for by others while they went further on), was work to which the building of a sacred house was secondary. It was work fitted to exalt the Name, showing the power of Divine love over the hardness of men’s hearts and the evils of Gentilism. They, then, whose missionary zeal was kindled by the Name must not be overlooked. They were representatives of the truth. “We therefore ought to welcome such, that we may be fellow-helpers with the truth.” We are to think of Gains, in accordance with his known character, taking the burden for these menmaking them happy while in his house, and contributing not only for the journey, but for the end of the journey, so that with disengaged hands they might begin their mission; and thus, while not proclaiming the truth himself, earning the praise of being a “fellow-helper with the truth.” There is an obligation lying on us to take the burden for the missionaries. While, in the interest of the truth, they go forth as bearers of the truth to the heathen, we are, by our contributions, to leave their hands and minds free for their proper work; thus, while not bearers of the truth ourselves (from want of opportunity and qualifications), having an interest in the truth, and having the satisfaction and honour of being” fellow-helpers with the truth.”
II. DIOTREPHES.
1. His resistance of John’s authority. “I wrote somewhat unto the Church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence among them, receiveth us not.” The particular Church is not named; but we must understand it to be that to which Gaius belonged, so that we have a new element introduced. Gaius entertained the stranger missionaries in the face of opposition The opposition came from Diotrephes. The occasion was a letter from John. This letter has not been preserved; we must think of it as containing a request to the Church to give a favourable reception to the missionaries. The request was only reasonable; but Diotrephes opposed it, not because he disliked John’s teaching, or the teaching of the missionaries, but simply because he wished to assert his personal authority. He belonged to the class of these who love to have the pre-eminence; who are bent, not on the peace and prosperity of the Church, but on their being first in the Church, even at the expense of its peace and prosperity. And this ambitious member or office-bearer of the Church succeeded for a time; he tasted the sweets of ecclesiastical power, in getting a majority to agree with him against the apostle. We come here upon the design of this letter to Gaius.
2. His coming defeat, “Therefore, if I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth, prating against us with wicked words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and them that would he forbiddeth, and casteth them out of the Church.” Diotrephes did not gain his victory without working for it. His works, however, were not such as could bear to be remembered. His punishment would be, on the coming of John, to have his works brought to remembrance. Their true valuation would be his dethronement from power. What he did was to speak against John and his friends. While his words were null, they were mischievous. Not content with speaking, he had recourse to action. He set the example of shutting his door against the missionaries; and when some (one being Gaius) chose to be guided rather by the apostle’s letter, he at once vetoed them, and, on their non-submission to his authority, excommunicated them. But this working, meantime triumphant, would soon, and very simply, be put a stop to. “Knowest thou not this of old, since man was placed upon earth, that the triumphing of the wicked is short?”
III. DEMETRIUS.
1. His unlikeness to Diotrephes. “Beloved, imitate not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: he that doeth evil hath not seen God.” While there is evil working in Churches, there is also good working. The evil is there for us to avoid; the good is there for us to imitate. We need to learn to “discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not.” The Johannine principle of discrimination is simple. He that is associated with the working of good has his life derived from God; he that is associated with the working of evil (whatever his profession) is not in the way of receiving first impressions of God in his true nature, or is not placed so as to make a commencement in the Divine life.
2. Threefold testimony to his excellence. “Demetrius hath the witness of all men, and of the truth itself: yea, we also bear witness; and thou knowest that our witness is true.” Demetrius had the witness of all men. We are to regard the language as hyperbolical, not limiting the “all” to the Christian circle, nor to the few who in the strictest sense could be witnesses, but the many who spoke well of Demetrius are made” all,” the more to impress us with their number. Demetrius had a witness greater than of numbers: he had the witness of the truth itself. Though there had been not a man to he a witness to him, the truth (to personify it) could have been produced as a witness. Though no man had owned him, the truth would have owned him. Apart from the personification, the idea is that there was a close correspondence between what Demetrius was and what the truth demanded. But to judge of this correspondence requires a competent witness, with opportunity and also with correct intuitions of the truth; and so, in the third place, John comes forward to vouch for Demetriusa witness than whom none could be more satisfactory to Gaius. We are not told who this Demetrius was; but it is not an improbable conjecture that he was the bearer of the Epistle. If so, then it is to be noted how, by a happy turn, he supplies him with the necessary recommendation.
Conclusion.
1. Reason for not writing more. “I had many things to write unto thee, but I am unwilling to write them to thee with ink and pen: but I hope shortly to see thee, and we shall speak face to face.” It is interesting to note how the writing materials are here, not “paper and ink” (2Jn 1:12), but “ink and pen.” He could have put his pen to the writing of many things; for Gaius and he had much in common in their sympathies. He had written meantime to counteract, so far as he could by writing, the dangerous influence of Diotrephes. He hoped soon to see Gaius. When he saw him, and they spoke face to face, he would have more opportunity and freedom to disburden himself.
2. Salutations. “Peace be unto thee. The friends salute thee. Salute the friends by name.” John was at peace with Gaius; he wished the whole world to be at peace with him. They had common friends. Friends with John (whom the bearer would name)saluted Gaius. Friends with Gaius, he (the receiver of the letter) was first to name singly, and then to salute in this form, “John sends his salutation to thee.”R.F.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
3Jn 1:1. The well-beloved Gaius, We read of one Gaius, of Corinth, Rom 16:23 who hospitably received St. Paul, when he went out to preach the gospel gratis; and if this were, as he seems to have been, the same, he was St. Paul’s convert: nor is St. John’s calling him his child, an argument to the contrary; since in the general he addresses all Christians in the same tender and affectionate style, agreeably to the sweetness of his temper, and suitably to his advanced years.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
3Jn 1:1 . Superscription. On , see the Introd. sec. 1. With regard to the person of Caius nothing particular is known; that he is identical with one of two (or three) Caiuses who are mentioned as friends and helpers of the Apostle Paul (comp. Act 19:29 ; Act 20:4 ; 1Co 1:14 ; and Rom 16:23 ), is at least improbable. [16] It is also uncertain whether he is the same person as the Caius who, according to the Constitt. Apostol. vii. 46, is said to have been appointed by John as bishop in Pergamos (Mill., Whiston). That he was presbyter of the Church (Kstlin) does not follow from 3Jn 1:8 . The apostle expresses his love to Caius in the epithet ; how sincere it was is shown by the fact that he not only adds: (comp. with this 2Jn 1:1 ), but also addresses him three times in the Epistle by . On . Oecumenius here well observes: .
[16] Lcke thinks that if he was one of these, he would only be the Caius of Derbe (Act 20:4 ); yet he states no reason for this opinion, but merely refers to Wolf’s Curae; Wolf, however, regards it as probable that he was the same as the Caius mentioned in 1Co 1:14 , whom he distinguishes as the Corinthian Caius from the Caius of Derbe.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
( in B. and Cod. Sinait. C. adds , G. .)
I. The Address
3Jn 1:1
The elder unto the well beloved Gains, whom I love in the truth1.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
3Jn 1:1. On see Introduction 1. It can hardly be determined whether this Gaius is one of the two or three persons of that name, who are mentioned as friends and companions of Paul in Act 19:29; Act 20:4; Rom 16:23; 1Co 1:14. Lcke thinks that our Gaius is identical with Gaius of Derbe mentioned Act 20:4, Wolf, in his Curis ad. h. l., that the Gaius mentioned 1Co 1:14 is meant here. Others suppose that the Gaius, mentioned Constit. Ap. 7, 46, and appointed by John Bishop of Pergamus, is the one referred to here (Whiston); but this is also purely hypothetical. Nor can it be inferred from 3Jn 1:8 of this Epistle that Gaius was a presbyter. As John adds to the address the term , so he also addresses him as in 3Jn 1:3; 3Jn 1:5; 3Jn 1:11, and superadds as in 2Jn 1:1, the words: (Oecumenius: ).
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Starke: Those who wish to be loved of men, must be lovable and worthy of love; this is done, if they give up the love of the world, and love God only.Truth and love are precious jewels of Christians, which must be linked together and are more ornamental than golden chains. The one cannot exist without the other; truth without love is dead, and love without truth is blind.
Footnotes:
[1]3Jn 1:1. [German: The presbyter to the beloved Gaius, whom I love in truth.M.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
Contents
After his usual salutation, the Apostle tells his beloved Gaius of his desires, both for his temporal and spiritual prosperity. He commends him for his kindness to the brethren. He remarks of the opposition made to the Church, by a man called Diotrephes. He commends another man of the name of Demetrius. And concludes his Epistle with greetings from friends.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
We therefore ought to receive such, that we might be fellowhelpers to the truth.
Next to the health of the soul, the health of the body is the greatest blessing. And, among the promises of God in Christ, there are many sweet ones in the Word of God, which are in the covenant, as they relate to the body. See a string of them in Deu 28:1-14 . And when a child of God, regenerated by the Holy Ghost, is brought, by divine teaching, to build everything upon Christ, for time and for eternity, everything must prosper, for everything must be a blessing. (Rom 8:28 ) In temporal things, the child of God hath the sanctified use of all. If the goods of this world abound, there is the covenant-love, and the covenant-grace to accompany them; that, like Gaius, the man of God is enabled by the Lord to do faithfully whatsoever he doeth, to the brethren of the Church with him, or to the strangers which belong to the other churches of the saints from abroad. And, while he doth good to all men, he doth it especially to them that are of the household of faith. And, if the Lord exerciseth him with adversity, still grace gives a sanctifying quality to take out all the bitterness of it. So that, “though the fig-tree do not blossom, neither fruit be found in the vine; though the labor of the olive fail, and the fields yield no meat; though the flock be cut off from the fold, and there be no herds in the stall; yet, the child of God can, and will say, I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation”. (Hab 3:17-18 )
And in respect to spiritual things, everything here is blessed. The child of God is blessed with the Father’s love, the Savior’s grace, and the Holy Ghost’s fellowship. He hath pardon, mercy, peace, in the blood of the cross. He hath continual manifestations of divine love. Jesus comes to bless him, to comfort him, to encourage him, and to make himself known to him otherwise than he doth to the world. Yea, who shall describe the out-pourings of divine love, or the incomings of divine grace, the child of God is continually receiving from the Lord, who is blessing him with all spiritual blessings in Christ Jesus?
And in relation to eternal blessings, he hath not only the promise of the life that now is, but of that which is to come. Indeed, eternal life is begun in his soul. For he that hath the Son of God hath life. He enjoys it now by faith. “For faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen”. (Heb 11:1 ) And faith is the earnest given by the Spirit of glory. So that, as John tells the beloved Gaius, where the soul prospereth, the body must have the sanctified enjoyment of all things, which grace sanctifies to prosper also.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Wishing
3Jn 1:2
‘I wish above all things that….’ I purposely leave the sentence unfinished, in the guise of a dim interrogation, in order that each of us may supply the missing piece. How do I finish the imperfect pile? The nature of the insertion will determine the quality of the contribution which I make to the common life. Let me give one or two suggestions of worthy ways in which perhaps we may complete the sentence, wishes that will be fruitful in moral and spiritual progress.
I. Let us wish for a renewal of the secret intimacies of family worship.
II. Let us wish for an enrichment of the fellowship of the Christian Church.
III. And let us wish for the creation of a more fervent evangelisation.
J. H. Jowett, British Congregationalist, 11th July, 1907, p. 32.
The Third Epistle of John
3Jn 1:2
‘I believe,’ wrote Edward Thring to R. L. Nettle-ship, ‘that one of the most obvious tests to a truth lover that he is really loving truth and not a sham, not a Duessa, is the perpetual growth of capacity. Every year has been to me a softening of the impressible nature, and a clearing of the eye in all fields of Divine goodness, quite irrespective of the hard, hot, choking work of the external world and its attacks. I feel more and more how all right spirit life is a gladness and glory increasing; how Divine goodness is speaking in all tones that reach the heart with joy or sorrow, awe or ecstasy, everywhere and in all things, if we can but hear it; how completely the spirit within can be in communion with light independent of external circumstances, and yet how external circumstances and creation are the medium through which God speaks.’
3Jn 1:4
All joy worth the name is in equal love between unequals.
Coventry Patmore.
References. I. 2. J. Caird, Sermons, p. 218. C. Perren, Revival Sermons in Outline, p. 189. J. G. Greaves, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlv. p. 394. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Epistles of John, p. 54. I. 4. A. P. Stanley, Sermons for Children, pp. 10, 76. T. H. Bell, Persuasions, p. 119. C. Bradley, The Christian Life, p. 269. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xix. No. 1148. Expositor (6th Series), vol. viii. p. 323.
3Jn 1:5-6
There can be no true love without devotion; devotion is the exercise of love, by which it grows.
R. L.
Stevenson.
References. I. 5-8. Expository Sermons on the New Testament, p. 276. J. Bunting, Sermons, vol. ii. p. 170.
3Jn 1:6
I had expected to find in the Church the inexpugnable citadel of Faith; but I have found in it no less the home of Love.
Manning.
References. I. 6-8. H. Elvet Lewis, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lix. p. 400. 7. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture 3 John, p. 61.
3Jn 1:9
‘He expects,’ said Bentham of James Mill, ‘to subdue everybody by his domineering tone, to convince everybody by his positiveness. His manner of speaking is offensive and overbearing.’
References. I. 11. Expositor (6th Series), vol. xii. p. 50. I. 12. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture 3 John, p. 79.
3Jn 1:14
No one would care to live without friends, though he had all other good things…. We need friends, when we are young, to keep us from error; we need them, when we are old, to tend to us and carry out the plans we are unable to execute ourselves; and we need them in the prime of life to keep us in noble deeds ‘two together’ for thus are we more effective both in thought and in act.
Aristotle.
3Jn 1:14
‘I find all things on earth, even truth and joy, sooner than friendship.’
Jean Paul.
This for the motto to examine and attest the fact, and then to explain the reason. First, then, there are the extraordinary qualifications demanded for true friendship, arising from the multitude of causes which make men delude themselves and attribute to friendship what is only a similarity of pursuit, or even a dislike of feeling oneself alone in anything. But, secondly, supposing the friendship to be as real as human nature ordinarily permits, yet how many causes are at constant war against it, whether in the shape of violent irruptions or unobserved yet constant wearing away by dyspathy, etc.
Coleridge.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
[Note. “This Epistle is addressed to Gaius or Caius. We have no reason for identifying him with Caius of Macedonia ( Act 19:29 ), or with Caius of Derbe ( Act 20:4 ), or with Caius of Corinth (Rom 16:23 ; 1Co 1:14 ), or with Caius Bishop of Ephesus, or with Caius Bishop of Thessalonica, or with Caius Bishop of Pergamos. He was probably a convert of St. John ( 3Jn 1:4 ), and a layman of wealth and distinction ( 3Jn 1:5 ) in some city near Ephesus.
“The Third Epistle was written for the purpose of commending to the kindness and hospitality of Caius some Christians who were strangers in the place where he lived. It is probable that these Christians carried this letter with them to Caius as their introduction. It would appear that the object of the travellers was to preach the gospel to the Gentiles without money and without price ( 3Jn 1:7 ). St. John had already written to the ecclesiastical authorities of the place ( , 3Jn 1:9 , not ‘scripsissem,’ Vulg. ); but they, at the instigation of Diotrephes, had refused to receive the missionary brethren, and therefore the Apostle now commends them to the care of a layman. It is probable that Diotrephes was a leading presbyter who held Judaising views, and would not give assistance to men who were going about with the purpose of preaching solely to the Gentiles. Whether Demetrius ( 3Jn 1:12 ) was a tolerant presbyter of the same community, whose example St. John holds up as worthy of commendation in contradistinction to that of Diotrephes, or whether he was one of the strangers who bore the letter, we are now unable to determine. The latter supposition is the more probable.” Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible.]
2. Beloved, I wish [ or pray] above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.
3. For I rejoiced greatly, when the brethren came and testified of the truth that; is in thee, even as thou walkest in the truth.
4. I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth. [“Greater joy than these (joys) I have [not], viz., that I should hear of my children walking truly,” i.e., sincerely, as at the close of the last verse each child so walking is a separate joy.]
5. Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers;
6. Which have borne witness of thy charity before the Church [ i.e., the Church from which they had been sent forth the Ephesian Church to which they had now returned]: whom if thou bring forward on their journey after a godly sort, thou shalt do well:
7. Because that for his name’s sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles.
8. We [the pronoun here standing markedly at the beginning of the sentence is full of significance. It is beautifully like St. John’s humility to include himself in a confession of sinfulness] therefore ought to receive such, that we might be fellow-helpers [may become fellow-workers] to [for] the truth.
9. I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not.
10. Wherefore, if I come, I will remember [bring to remembrance. The same word in Joh 14:26 . To bring “evil deeds to remembrance” is practically to reproach, bring to shame] his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious [wicked] words: and not content therewith [contented hereupon], neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.
11. Beloved, follow [imitate] not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.
12. Demetrius hath good report of all men, and of the truth itself: yea, and we also bear record [are bearing witness]; and ye know that our record [witness] is true.
13. I had many things to write, but I will not with ink and pen write unto thee:
14. But I trust I shall shortly see thee [I am hoping straightway to see thee], and we shall speak face to face. Peace be to thee. Our friends salute thee. Greet the friends by name. [May we not see a beautiful allusion to the Good Shepherd “calling his own Sheep by name?” (Joh 10:8 .) These simple words are the last which we can trace up to the heart and pen of St John. Their quiet tender individualism form a fitting transition from the superhuman dignity of the Apostolate, to the more ordinary pastoral office…. A hush as of evening rests upon the close of the note].
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
1 The elder unto the wellbeloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.
Ver. 1. Unto the wellbeloved Gaius ] A rich Corinthian, rich in this world and rich in good works; a rare bird, at Corinth especially, where St Paul found them the richer the harder, and far behind the poor Macedonians in works of charity, Rom 16:23 ; 1Co 1:14 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1 .] ADDRESS. The elder (see prolegg. to the two Epistles) to Caius the beloved (on Caius, see prolegg. The epithet seems to be used this first time in a general sense: cf. below), whom I (for my own part: Caius was generally beloved, and the Apostle declares that he personally joins in the affection for him) love in ( the ) truth (see 2Jn 1:1 , note. , c.).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
3Jn 1:1-4 . Address and Commendation. “The Elder to Gaius the beloved, whom I love in Truth. Beloved, in all respects I pray that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth. For I was exceedingly glad when brethren would come and testify to thy Truth, even as thou walkest in Truth. A greater gladness than this I have not that I should hear of my children walking in the Truth.”
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
3Jn 1:1 . , see Introd. pp. 159 ff. , see note on 2Jn 1:1 , see note on 2Jn 1:1 .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
3 John Chapter 1
ADDRESS 20
3 JOHN 1-14.
“The elder to the beloved Gaius [or, Caius] whom I love in truth. Beloved, I desire that in all things thou shouldest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth. For I rejoiced exceedingly when brethren came and bore witness to thy truth, even as thou walkest in truth. I have no greater joy than these things, that I hear of my children walking in the truth. Beloved, thou doest a faithful thing whatsoever thou mayest do unto the brethren and this strangers who bore witness to thy love before the church [or, assembly] in setting forward whom on their journey worthily of God thou wilt do well for they went forth for the name’s sake, taking nothing of the Gentiles. We therefore ought to receive [or, welcome] such, that we may be fellow-workers with the truth. I wrote something to the church; but Diotrephes that loveth pre-eminence among them receiveth us not. For this reason if I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth, babbling against us with wicked words; and not content with these things, neither himself receiveth the brethren, and those who would he hindereth and casteth out of the church. Beloved, imitate not the evil but the good. The good-doer is of God; the evil-doer hath not seen God. Demetrius hath been witnessed to by all, and by the truth itself; and we also bear witness, and thou knowest that our witness is true.
“Many things I had to write to thee, but with ink and pen I will not write to thee; but I hope soon to see thee, and we will speak mouth unto mouth. Peace [be] to thee. The friends greet thee. Greet the friends by name.”
It is difficult to conceive an epistle which has stronger points of contrast with John’s Second one than that which now comes before us. Nevertheless they have one common root, and that fruit which it produces only takes so different a colour because of the different wants of Christians. In Christ is no real discordance but infinite adaptability to all our needs. Nevertheless their objects strikingly differ. The Second Epistle conveys the most solemn warning, and what gives it both special point and general application is the fact of being addressed not even to a bishop or overseer, nor to men like Timothy and Titus, who in a limited space and for a particular reason represented the apostle to an extent beyond those local charges, but to an unnamed Christian woman. An elect lady, and even her children, are all embraced and summoned to discharge the duty laid upon them. Nor was it of course a public or ecclesiastical act, but individual loyalty to Christ so stringent that they were forbidden to receive the false teacher into the house, or even to salute him in the ordinary way, being an antichrist.
The Third Epistle is the outgoing of the strongest Christian affection, being addressed to a Christian man already well known for his love, especially in caring for those engaged in the Lord’s work. His heart received and went with them in their service to further the work and themselves according to all that lay in his power. Therefore the keyword of the Third Epistle is “receive,” as the keyword of the Second is “receive not.” This may seem to the natural man arbitrary and inconsistent. But what of him? Natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him (1Co 11:14 ). Here on the contrary the direction is wholly opposite: there is really, perfect harmony; and what makes harmony is Christ. Souls there were and are who identify themselves with the truth of Christ here below; and the word in the Third Epistle is “Receive them.” It is enough that they bring the doctrine of the Christ, always taking for granted that their ways are according to Christ. No question is raised of ministerial position. The church in those days had not yet assumed the title to interfere with the rights of its Head. The free action of the Holy Spirit which the apostles upheld in the earliest days was honoured still. The measure and character of gift in those days, when parochial limits had not yet been invented, might differ much. One preacher might be dull to see the bearing of Christ in every part of the Bible, another might be ready and bright. Others again might be disposed to sentimentality and feeling though not really Christian, any more than addiction to dialectics or erudition. Faith and love are very different things, and it was these that wrought in their self-denying and laborious service, which Gaius prized for the Lord’s sake.
The First Epistle rises by the Holy Spirit above personality, and binds together in faith and love all the saints in view of Christ’s person, and in fellowship with the Father and His Son, the Lord Jesus. No Epistle more thoroughly and comprehensively takes in the whole family of God; none has less to do with a particular time or place. But the Second is addressed to an elect lady and her children, as the Third is to the beloved Gaius: so far in pointed contrast with the First, yet both the Second and the Third are but special applications of the selfsame truth and love in Christ made known in the First.
In the Third it is divinely formed largeness of heart. “Love in truth” is the governing note here as in all. Gaius refuses either to be cajoled or to be frightened out of what is due to Christ. Authority, actual or assumed, was at work to criticise truth and love. One of narrow heart lifted himself up, it would appear in the assembly where Gaius was, who sought rule not according to Scripture but in his own way. Many have followed; no lack of succession in this line. The apostles and prophets did their work and departed, leaving their incontestably inspired testimony. But self-willed men are never wanting in any age.
We are given therefore invaluable instruction, what we should think of such men, and how to bear ourselves toward them. It is one of the needed lessons of this Epistle not to mind them but pursue the path of Christ ourselves. The Lord does not fail in His own way to bring to remembrance unloving work and babbling words, and to make manifest in due censure the selfish emptiness which slights apostolic authority, opposes active testimony of the gospel, and casts out of the assembly on false pretences those who withstand such ways. We do well not to be overmuch occupied with impropriety, nor to be diverted from the true path of devotedness to Christ; nor ought we to fear the big words habitual with men who, instead of following Christ, seek to exalt themselves and their party. Cleaving to Christ is the only true way of deliverance from self. There is the proud way of despising a Diotrephes, without even pity for his soul; yet Christ is not with such a feeling, but warns him.
The great principle, whether for the church or the Christian, is obedience, especially when we can say little of power. Subjection to the word is of the Lord; and is there anything humbler and also firmer than that? It gives alike courage and lowliness, with entire dependence on Him in whom we believe, whose ears are attentive, and who will vindicate His own word. Principle is indispensable, but it is not all. Principle alone never made a believer lowly or loving. It is often taken up in a dry, hard, and legal may. But we can never dispense with a living Christ; and He is accessible and active to all who wait on Him, however valuable truth may be, and God entitles us to have all the resources of Christ in His love, as being in His hand and the Father’s.
“The elder to the beloved Gaius.” Here he lets out his heart as he does not to the lady. There is divine wisdom in the language of Scripture. Too often unctuous expressions have led to folly if not to sin. “An elect lady” reminds us of God, if to Gaius affection could safely flow out in the simplest way. He was thus led to the right word, “elect.” If God had chosen the lady, He chose her not to yield but to resist the devil, who would then flee. The way in which this lady was tried was very difficult for her. A lady instinctively shrinks from doing anything that seems unladylike. How shocking to refuse to receive, under her roof, a gentleman perhaps, and probably an old acquaintance. Not even to give him a common greeting! This to all who love not our Lord seems harsh indeed; yet it is exactly what the Spirit of God enjoins. How could it be otherwise when Christ, is fundamentally assailed, and we are called to be His good soldiers?
“An elect lady” is bound to Christ’s honour like all for whom He died and rose. No Christian can be absolved from this duty. At any rate, it is what seemed good to the Spirit of God in former days. The question is what is one doing and teaching now? He might have been the instrument of her conversion or that of her children, and it would go hard against her – a lady – not to notice this man. But circumstances were altered, now that he was an enemy of Christ instead of a true preacher of Christ. Perhaps the man secretly opposed. For we have to bear in mind that these deceivers are self-deceived, led too by Satan to think themselves better friends of Christ than real Christians, and their doctrine the right line of truth, supremely beautiful as well as new.
But in the Third it is quite another duty. Had we only the Second we might be in danger of becoming rigid, hard and suspicious. But the Third Epistle exhorts us whom we are to receive, and this with all our heart. If dangerous men go about and seek to enter, we must not forget true men earnest to spread the truth of Christ. The elect lady had to beware of wicked men however plausible; the brother is called to persevere in hearty love for the good and true. Sometimes such a brother is ruffled because of disappointment once or twice. He hates to be taken in; and such a case stumbles him, so that he is determined that it shall not occur again.
At any rate the apostle writes to encourage Gains in the path of love. It is not enough to begin well: the still greater aim is to grow in love, never weary in well-doing. Accordingly the apostle says of Gaius, “whom I love in truth.” This is the common ground of both Epistles; whatever be the difference in application and aim, loving in truth is an equally marked feature in each of them. “Beloved, I desire that in all things thou shouldest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth” (ver. 2). How simple, large, and cordial!
There is no haste in broaching the matter; as indeed this is a beautiful feature in Scripture. There is gracious consideration of one another in general, unless grave danger claimed an immediate appeal, as we see in the Epistle to the Galatian saints. But as no such peril here existed, Gaius is assured of the personal interest that the apostle took in him. He wishes that in all things he may prosper. “Above all things” goes too far. Perhaps some have adopted the extravagant idea that no matter how ill our affairs go, or how bad the health, the only concern is that the soul should prosper. The inspired apostle does not favour such fanaticism. A brother may prosper or not in what he undertakes. His was true brotherly feeling; but he carefully gives the first place as a matter of course to the soul’s welfare. If this be safeguarded and real, we can as a general rule count on the Lord’s interest both in our undertakings or business, and in our bodily health. Our gracious God, if the soul prosper, has pleasure both in ourselves and in all our matters. The very hairs of our head are all numbered. If a sparrow does not fall to the ground without Him, if He thinks of the ravens and the lilies of the field, what a Father we have to do with for every day and in all things!
We know that if our earthly house be destroyed, we have a more glorious building from God, and if our outer man is consumed, yet the inward is renewed day by day. This is the highest and should be the nearest consideration. Still here was this good brother who had proved his kindness in caring for others, and especially those who gave up all to serve the Lord Jesus; and the apostle wished him, prospering in soul, to prosper in all things, and to be in health, so as to be cheered and free and unimpeded.
Sometimes, that the soul may prosper, God withers up what we are too engrossed with; and if this suffice not, He disciplines with bodily sickness. And the Lord takes away the idol and smashes it to pieces. This is gracious of Him. Of course it may be painful, but our hearts go with what the Lord does to remove a snare and win back the soul to honour and enjoy Himself. Sometimes a zealous man is set aside in order that he may learn that God can carry on His work without him. He has been absorbed in reaching and preaching to others, and slipped into less vigilance as to his own soul’s communion. The Lord in His goodness and love corrects, and a little sickness is turned to much good. But here, as Gaius was prospering in soul, the apostle wishes his prosperity in all things else and in his body too.
“For I rejoiced exceedingly when brethren came and bore witness to thy truth, even as thou walkest in truth” (ver. 3). Truth delighted the apostle’s heart. Gaius was walking in truth. This indicated his soul’s prospering. Kindness to the brethren, thoughtfulness about others, prospering in his affairs and in bodily health: what were they all to holding fast the truth – “thy truth,” and his own walking in truth? And such was the witness that brethren bore to him; so that it was exceeding joy to the apostle. Gaius sought first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all else was added. His heart was not. set on his own things. There was no compromise of Christ, no making truth a secondary consideration, but he kept walking truthfully. It was a matter of plain testimony on the part of others. “Brethren came and bore witness to thy truth [or, that is in thee].” Had it been Gaius talking about it, it might have been questionable; for who has ever found men whose love for the truth was unwavering and unstinted loud about their own fidelity or service? The more a man loves and values truth, the more he judges his own shortcoming in his service and his daily life.
“I have no greater joy than these things that I hear of my children walking in the truth” (ver. 4).
It is no longer the lady’s children or “the children of the elect sister.” Of “my children” we read here, those who were spiritually related to the apostle of whom Gaius was one, and on this account dear to the apostle. Gaius had not only begun well, but was going on well in face of evil. Still there was the need of cheering him on; and this comes out in a delicate form. “Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatever work thou mayest do toward the brethren and this strangers who witnessed to thy love before the church, in setting forward whom on their journey worthily of God thou wilt do well” (vers. 5, 6).
Benevolently or thoughtfully, generously or lovingly, would have been the words most Christian men might have used. With Gaius it was primarily a matter of faith before God. Faith always brings in God in one way, as love does in another. Faith bringing in the word of truth, as love is the energy of the divine nature in gracious affection.
In the last clause of ver. 5 the common text as presented by the A.V. is not only defective but contrary to sense. For it conveys the notion of two objects given, “to the brethren and to strangers.” The true text, as attested by the best MSS., is “and this strangers.” Hence the point is that the love was shown in faith to the brethren, not as old friends but where they were strangers. And Scripture is express on the value that God attaches to love toward strangers, though here with the added tie of being brethren. God’s children are nearer to God than angels could be; and we may thus say that it ought to be more to us to entertain our brethren, and this strangers, than to entertain angels. Oh how far has superstition reversed the truth, and nature darkened the sense of our relationship to God!
Many saints are drawn out in love for labourers whom they know and admire, but they are reserved as to stranger brethren of whom they have not heard. The love of Gaius for the stranger brethren had the marked approval of the apostle. Before the church they “bore witness of thy love.” “Charity” has another meaning quite unknown to Scripture, wholly alien from the case before us, and beneath the divine affection here contemplated. No doubt its use in the English Version of 1Co 13 elevates it not a little above conventionalism, but “love” is unequivocal save to the base. It is a good word of our mother tongue, whereas “charity” came in through the Latin. The Spirit of God uses a word which in a heathen’s mouth had a sensual force, gave it a blessed and holy direction, christened it and thus hallowed it for ever.
But the apostle would add rather than diminish the draught on love when he writes, “Whom if thou set forward on their journey worthily of God thou wilt do well.” Even if the love of Gaius had been abused, the apostle would not anticipate any halt. These brethren were going elsewhere, and the word is, “Whom if thou set forward on their journey worthily of God.” Its force is melted down by the enfeebled expression, “after a godly sort.” Undeniably “after a godly sort” is much and excellent in itself; but it is always safer and more reverent to cleave to the actual words used by the Spirit of God. And nothing can be more intelligible than setting them forward, not after a man’s thought of godliness, but “worthily of God.” For God is love, and love is of God. It may be about a little thing here below; but it connects one’s soul in faith and love with what is unseen and external, with God who blesses for all eternity.
Yet the apostle in suggesting it says no more than “thou wilt do well.” It is simplicity as to Christ, this guarded language of the Holy Spirit, which avoids all approach to pressure or exaggeration, though the thing was near the heart of the apostle. One is reminded of something like it in Heb 13 , where the apostle speaks of two sorts of sacrifices: “sacrifice of praise continually to God, that is, fruit of lips confessing His name”; “but to do good and communicate forget not, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.” The first is of incomparable moment and value; but the lower form is of doing good and communicating here below, yet flowing from the same faith and love, “for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.” The spiritual ones are the delight of God; those on the human side are well-pleasing to Him.
“For they went forth for the Name’s sake, taking nothing of the Gentiles.” Here is what especially endeared these labourers to the apostle. They kept themselves totally free from profiting by the resources of the world. Needy as they might be, they maintained the heavenly dignity of the gospel, and proved that they sought the best good of the Gentiles, not their own things. What more degrades the gospel than to let its ministers or the church become beggars from the world? What so openly denies faith in the Lord’s care for His work? And how refreshing to see a man above anxiety for himself in devotedness to the Lord! What knit the heart of Gaius to them was “that for the Name they went forth.” They were not sent by man. The church has no authority for choosing, ordaining, or sending out the servants of the Lord. It is an unworthy and presumptuous mistake for the church, or for the servants, thus to usurp the place of Christ. Christ is the Head and the source and the sender of His gifts for ministry, and He only. Local charges were quite distinct.
The church however ought to take delight in acknowledging those whom the Lord sends. We find it so at Antioch (Act 14:27 ), when Paul and Barnabas came back from an errand on which the Spirit of God had sent them. Thus, brethren “let them go” (); but they were “sent forth” () by the Holy Ghost (Act 13:3 ,Act 13:4 ). The Lord Himself “sent” the Twelve and the Seventy (Luk 9:2 , Luk 10:1 ) when He was here: and now that He is above He, by the Spirit of God, gives and sends forth those alive again for evermore whom He has qualified for His work whatever it be. He has not abnegated His rights or bequeathed them to the church, or to any individuals in it. Nevertheless we read in Act 13:3 , that their fellow-servants had communion with the envoys of the Holy Spirit, and marked it by laying their hands on them as its sign, as they appear to have repeated it later, not for Barnabas, but for Paul when he went forth another time (Act 15:40 ). It has nothing whatever to do with what they call ordination. It was simply a solemn sign of commendation to the grace of God, which has been done of late on befitting occasions, and without the least pretension. But there is no such thought as the authority of the church in these matters. Mission like gift belongs to the Lord; and He is the same still, which Christendom has forgotten; and the Spirit of God is down here to give effect to it in us as then. There may not be the same manifested power as we find over and over again in the Acts of the Apostles. Yet God knows how to make good the same divine principle by ways suited to the present state of the church, which calls for humiliation on our part. But it is faithless to give up God’s way for an unauthorised invention of man.
“We therefore ought to receive such.” How gracious and how wise! It not merely calls on Gaius and other saints to receive or welcome such. We, says the apostle, ought to receive such. What more than moral beauty is this! It might have seemed enough to urge, “Ye receive such”; how much more to include all in the “we!” The apostle was not above joining himself to the rest. He thus sanctions and encourages those humbly going forth on the work, even though none else had a position comparable to his own in the church, which so impressively bespoke the grace of Christ, and reproved the nascent clericalism which despised these zealous labourers, and demonstrated to all how thoroughly they enjoyed the apostle’s countenance and love.
Not content with so much, he goes so far is to say That we may be fellow-workers with the truth.” May I warmly commend these words to all of you, my dear brethren What an honour! The truth is here personified as hated by the devil and the world, through which he works in a thousand ways to thwart Christ and all identified with witnessing Him. Diotrephes was doing this, though we are not told that he sympathised with the antichrist or the heterodox in any respect. It is quite a different form of evil. His state was wretchedly bad, so that we do not well to say more. But it is open and right for all Christians to be fellow-workers with the truth. Some cannot preach; but we may and ought truly and practically to sympathise with those that do the work. Do we pray for them habitually? Do we watch to serve them in any way we can? If so, “we are fellow-helpers,” not merely to them but “with the truth.” One cannot suppose it a real difficulty for any saint to be a fellow-helper with the truth. The love of Gaius was marked; but for any in earnest before God it is the same call of love. “If the readiness be there, one is accepted according to what he may have, not according to what he hath not.” All can help acceptably to the Lord in some way, which makes them in His grace fellow-helpers with the truth.
“I wrote something to the church.” Hence we learn that it is a mistake to suppose that the apostles never wrote other epistles than those we have. God took care that those meant for the permanent blessing of the believer should not be lost; as He inspired them for continual service, He watched over them accordingly. We need not imagine such a thing as that the apostles never wrote anything else. Why not? But without pressing overmuch the allusion here, the fact cannot be doubted that communications by inspired men were written not necessarily inspired to form part of the Scriptures. We find a similar fact in the Old Testament, as for instance books by Solomon and others. If God has not preserved the whole amount, He has secured what was inspired for abiding use, of which His prophets were made competent to judge. When such inspiration ceased for Old or New Testament, the prophets also ceased.
This divine selection is a thing to admire instead of causing difficulty. Had all the books been written that might have been written, the world could not contain them, as our apostle declares. The words and works of our Lord alone, if written out as they deserved, would overfill the world. How precious is that all-wise selection which is a characteristic of inspiration! God was the only judge of what is to most profit. Even the Bible, as it is, how little it is really known by those to whom it is dearer than life! Would that every child of God knew it all more thoroughly. Were you to read the Bible often every day of your life, not only in a way both pious and studious, any real Christian will tell you how far you would be from fathoming its depths. It is always beyond the greatest teacher. If there were only as many books as there are verses or even chapters of equal length, it is evident that the difficulty for the serious reader would be increased enormously.
Let us admire God’s wisdom in selecting by inspiration what was for perpetual use within the short compass of the Bible as He has given it to us. It is not a bad adage that one may have too much of a good thing as well as too little. In the Bible we have neither, but what the only wise God saw best to His glory and for our blessing. It was of prime importance that His word should be as brief as could be consistent with the fulness of revealed truth. “I wrote something to the church, but Diotrephes that loveth pre-eminence among them receiveth us not” (ver. 9). There is no difficulty then in understanding why we have not the letter that John wrote. It would seem that Diotrephes showed his bad spirit by having this letter to the church kept back, and that in this way the apostle was not received by him.
“For this reason if I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth, babbling against us with wicked words and not content with these things, neither himself receiveth the brethren and those who would he hindereth, and casteth them out of the church.” Whatever his doctrine might be, his works were evil. “Wherefore if I come, I will remember his deeds.” The same spirit which Diotrephes showed in rejecting what the apostle wrote – if that be the meaning of not receiving the apostle – displayed itself in his contempt for the brethren who went about preaching. His feeling seemed to be this: What business have they to come here? “I am here. It is for me to look after the truth; and I never thought of asking their help, especially as they are strangers who come without being sent for or in any way sent. They are intruders.” This is not an uncommon sentiment, and although some may not express it, how often is it not felt! It ran through the spirit and the conduct of this man, so high up in his own esteem as to evince a total want of respect toward the apostle. Who can wonder at his hostility toward the lowly brethren who addicted themselves to preaching far and wide? Doubtless he thought it a better thing if they had stuck to earning an honest living instead of going where he at least did not want them.
“Beloved,” as the solemn reference is, “imitate not what is evil but what is good.” Diotrephes was clearly doing that which was evil; Gaius must steer clear of imitating the evil, for evil is infectious. Let him adhere to the good. “He that doeth good is of God; he that doeth evil hath not seen God” (ver. 11). We may not affirm that Diotrephes was absolutely involved in this tremendous character; but he gave serious ground for fearing it. The language is general but guarded. The apostle simply lays down the certain principle – doing evil is not of God. He who does it as the habit of his life has not seen God. How comforting is the other side! He is of God. To see God leaves its impress on your soul for ever. One cannot have seen God and be a doer of evil. Evil was true of Diotrephes to a certain and serious point. Whether it characterised him we may leave.
“Demetrius hath witness borne to him by all, and by the truth itself, and we also bear witness, and thou knowest that our witness is true” (ver. 12): Here is a fine character not heard of before. The truth itself, as well is all, bore witness to Demetrius; and we also bear witness, which Gaius consciously knew to be true. “We also bear witness.” Gaius could have the fullest fellowship with Demetrius. One reason as it seems why the Spirit of God thus notices Demetrius is that, even in our evil day, we may look for others who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. So here, if we are told of one Diotrephes, there were two to praise, Gaius and Demetrius, to say nothing of the faithful brethren though strangers, of whom Diotrephes had nothing good to say. The apostle would have us not to be overmuch oppressed by the sense of evil or by evil-speakers, but to have our hearts encouraged in the truth and in love.
Many things I had to write to thee, but with ink and pen I will not write to thee: but I hope soon to see thee, and we will speak mouth to mouth. Peace to thee. The friends greet thee. Greet the friends by name” (vers. 13, 14). We are not to fall under the cloud of evil. There is always a danger of throwing up one’s hands, exclaiming that all is gone. Never could I sympathise with so unbelieving a thought. The prevalence of the worst evil, the breaking down of not a few who have seemed faithful, is the more reason to distrust ourselves, yet to abide in the Lord with purpose of heart. Let us never forget that the Holy Spirit abides in and with us for ever, to gather to His name yet more than to convert sinners, though He does both.
How simple and true are the concluding words in the Third Epistle as in the Second! Great artists used to represent not only the Lord but the apostles and the saints with a halo over the head. Scripture speaks of all with unpretending simplicity: the Lord the meekest and lowliest of men; and the apostles differing from other brethren in deeper self-abnegation and a more vivid sense of abiding in God, the privilege of His grace. And here who can fail to discern the heavenly-minded dignity of being but “a bondman of Jesus,” as the greatest of them loved to designate himself?
The Holy Spirit gave energy to work signs and wonders and powers, and yet to work as if oneself nothing. The inspired man had many things to write with ink and pen, but he hoped to see his beloved Gaius when “we shall speak mouth to mouth.” He preferred living fellowship, and wished him peace meanwhile. Here we have the friends saluting mutually, and in no vague way but “by name;” as in the Second Epistle it is family greeting: “the children of thine elect sister greet thee.”
Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: 3Jn 1:1
1The elder to the beloved Gaius, whom I love in truth.
3Jn 1:1 “The elder” The term elder is synonymous with the term “pastor” and “bishop” (cf. Tit 1:5; Tit 1:7; Act 20:17; Act 20:28). See full note in 2Jn 1:1.
“the beloved” This is characteristic of John’s letters (cf. 1Jn 2:7; 1Jn 3:2; 1Jn 3:21; 1Jn 4:1; 1Jn 4:7; 1Jn 4:11; 3Jn 1:1-2; 3Jn 1:5; 3Jn 1:11), but is not found as a title for believers in the Gospel or the Revelation.
“Gaius” There has been much discussion as to whether Gaius or Diotrephes is the pastor of this local church. It is hard to make any dogmatic statement from this slight amount of information which is available. Because of 3Jn 1:9, where “the church” and “them” are mentioned, it is possible that Diotrephes was the leader of one house church and Gaius was the leader of another house church which was very close by, but this is pure speculation.
“whom I love in truth” “Love and truth” are found together often in John’s letters (cf. 2Jn 1:1-4; 3Jn 1:1; 3Jn 1:3-4; 3Jn 1:8; 3Jn 1:12). Truth can refer to
1. the Holy Spirit (cf. Joh 14:17)
2. Jesus the Son (cf. Joh 8:32; Joh 14:6)
3. the content of the gospel (cf. 1Jn 2:2; 1Jn 3:23)
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
unto = to.
wellbeloved. App-135. Same as “beloved”, 3Jn 1:2, &c.
Gaius. It is impossible to say whether this was the same as any one of the others of the same name mentioned Act 19:29; Act 20:4. Rom 16:23. 1Co 1:14.
love. App-135.
in. App-104.
the. Omit.
truth. See p. 1511.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
——
1.] ADDRESS. The elder (see prolegg. to the two Epistles) to Caius the beloved (on Caius, see prolegg. The epithet seems to be used this first time in a general sense: cf. below), whom I (for my own part: Caius was generally beloved, and the Apostle declares that he personally joins in the affection for him) love in (the) truth (see 2Jn 1:1, note. , c.).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
3Jn 1:1. , The Elder) An appropriate title for a familiar Epistle, such as this, and the one that follows. And indeed the gravity of the argument, and the familiarity of the little Epistle, are wonderfully combined and adjusted. The parts of the Epistle are three.
I. THE INSCRIPTION, 3Jn 1:1-3.
II. AN EXHORTATION to perseverance in true love and faith, 3Jn 1:4-11.
III. THE CONCLUSION, 3Jn 1:12-13.
-, elect) He calls her elect, from her spiritual condition: for that this name is appellative, is plain from the circumstance of its being attributed to her sister also, 3Jn 1:13; and if it had been a proper name, it would have been , from . They were either widows, or women of piety beyond their husbands. But [answering to the Hebrew Martha.-V. g.], as in other places, so here, is a proper name, as the Pcile of Heuman teaches, T. 2, Book iii. art. 13, and T. 3, Book i. art. 2. Nor can any one doubt it, unless he is ignorant of the style of the ancients, or does not bear it in mind. The appellative , a mistress, independently of the relation to her slaves, could scarcely be given to a queen at that time without exciting envy. Proper names were usually employed of old,
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
3Jn 1:1-4
ADDRESS AND SALUTATION
(3Jn 1:1-4)
1 The elder unto Gaius the beloved, whom I love in truth. The author is thus the same as the writer of the second epistle, “the elder,” i.e., the apostle John. (See the Introduction to the Second and Third Epistles of John.) The missive was addressed to Gaius. The name occurs in Acts 19:29 20:4; Rom 16:23 ; and 1Co 1:14, but inasmuch as it was a common name in the Roman Empire of the time, we are not justified in inferring that it was one of those thus referred to. The description, “the be-loved,” reveals the esteem in which Gaius was held by those who knew him. “Whom I love in the truth” was John’s specific affir-mation of regard, in addition to that in which the disciple Gaius was generally held. For the significance of the phrase “in truth,” see the comments on 2Jn 1:1.
2 Beloved, I pray that in all things thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.–Four times, in this brief letter, the word “beloved” occurs, viz., verse 1, here, and in verse 5 and 11. This verse thus contains an address of affec-tion; it reveals that John was praying for his beloved friend and brother in the Lord; informs us that that for which he prayed was that Gaius might (a) prosper (financially); and (b) be in health; that such should be to the extent that his soul prospered. Here, incidentally, is the standard by which to determine how rich one may safely become: just so long as the soul prospers! So long as one enjoys soul prosperity, his riches bless and benefit not only himself, but others; when they impair spiritual health, the interests of the soul demand, as in the case of the rich young ruler (Mark 10:17 31) that a surgical operation be performed and they be severed from us!
It would appear from the apostle’s petition that Gaius’ health was not good and that he was also not a prosperous man. It is possible his soul health was better than either his physical or finan-cial health, hence the prayer that these might equal that. On the other hand, it may be that the prayer was a simple petition for the welfare of Gaius without any implication that either his finan-cial condition or physical health was good or bad, but that they might be as good as his soul already was. In either view, the principle is the same: a recognition of the superior importance of the interests of the soul. The apostle was speaking in the spirit of his Master’s admonition when he said: “But seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. (Mat 6:33.) Having put first things first, it was entirely in order that Gaius should have health and pros-perity. It is a lesson so sorely needed among us today. We should ever remember to subordinate the material to the spiritual, and never allow the world to gain precedence in our thoughts and lives.
3 For I rejoiced greatly, when brethren came and bare wit-ness unto thy truth, even as thou walkest in truth.–The apostle rejoiced-; the occasion of his joy was the witness which the brethren brought of the faithfulness of Gaius that he walked in truth. The verbs, “came,” and “bear witness,” are present participles, (erchomenon, marturounton), and thus suggest repeti-tive action, i.e., “brethren are constantly coming, and continually bearing witness to me of thy truth.” The clause, “even as thou walkest in truth,” is not an independent one by which the apostle added the testimony of his own to that of the brethren; but is epexegetical of the former, and gives the substances of the testi-mony which they brought.
The brethren who bore this testimony regarding Gaius to John are not certainly known, though they may well have been those to whom the apostle refers in verse 5. These brethren had carried a letter of recommendation to the church, which John had written, and though entertained by Gaius and given hospitality by him. had been rejected by the church through the influence of Dio-trephes. (Verse 5-11.) These would, therefore, be able to testify of the kindness and faithfulness of Gaius, in contrast with the un brotherliness of Diotrephes. It seems reasonable to assume that these bearing witness particularly referred to here were indeed the brethren whom the apostle had sent. The final clause of verse three, rendered, “Even as thou walkest in truth,” has, in the origi-nal text the pronoun “thou” in emphatic position: “Thou (in con-trast with Diotrephes), walkest in truth.”
From verses 5 and 6, it appears that Gaius’ faithfulness con-sisted not only of devotion to the cause of the Lord, but in liber-ality, hospitality and good works. In these matters that disciple continued; and this, John described as walking in truth! Again, there is emphasized here, that which is repeatedly taught through-out the Bible: it is not possible to separate theory and practice in genuine Christianity. “What doth it profit, my brethren, if a man say he bath faith, but have not works? can that faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked and in lack of daily food, and one if you say unto them, Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; and yet we give them not the things needful to the body ; what dothprofit?Evensofaith, if it have not works, is dead in itself. Yea, a man will say, Thou bast faith, and I have works show me thy faith apart from thy works, and I by my works will show thee my faith. Thou believest that God is one; thou doest well: the demons also believe, and shudder. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith apart from works is barren? Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith.” (James 2 14-20, 24.) There is thus no genuine faith without works, nor are works of value without faith, or such as are produced by faith. It is only when the two are united that the practice of genuine Christianity results.
4 Greater joy have I none than this, to hear of my children walking in the truth.–“Greater,” here (meizoteran), is a double comparative, and thus a term of great emphasis. Compare the “more better” of Paul in Php 1:23. These forms are of frequent occurrence in both biblical and classical Greek. In Eph 3:8, there is a comparative on a superlative: “Unto me whom am less than the least of all saints . . .” In this manner did the apostle indicate the tremendous satisfaction he derived from the knowledge that his children (those whom he converted to the truth, or with whom he had been closely associated in the work of the Lord), walked in truth. That which brought joy to the apostle’s heart is likewise a source of much satisfaction to all faithful gospel preachers today. To know that those we have been instrumental in leading to the truth are continuing stedfastly in faith and good works warms the heart and stirs the emotion of all true teachers of the word.
Commentary on 3Jn 1:1-4 by E.M. Zerr
3Jn 1:1. The clder. This term is explained at verse 1 of 2 John. There are several persons named Gaius in the New Testament. Thayer notes them in connection with certain passages, and at our verse lie says the following: “An unknown Christian, to whom the third epistle of John is addressed.” Robinson’s Lexicon, Funk and Wagnalls New Standard Bible Dictionary all favor the same identity. He was evidently John’s convert, for in verse 4 he is included in “my children.” Whom, I love in the truth is the same thing he says of the “lady” in the preceding book. It means his love for them is because of their devotion to the truth.
3Jn 1:2. This verse is similar to many passages where the grace of God is wished for the disciples. However, in this the writer is first expressing a wish for the physical health of his convert. He is interested in his spiritual welfare, of course, but he seems to know that Gaius is in satisfactory condition in that respect, which is indicated by the words as thy soul prospereth.
3Jn 1:3. Some brethren had brought a report of the conduct of Gaius which was favorable. That is the basis of his remark about his soul prospering.
3Jn 1:4. The joy over the faithfulness of this convert is the kind of “reward” that he means in 2Jn 1:8. Being one of his converts John speaks of him as being among his children. (See explanation of this subject at 1Ti 1:2.)
Commentary on 3Jn 1:1-4 by N.T. Caton
3Jn 1:1-The elder unto the well beloved Gaius.
This is a repetition of what was said in the second epistle by the writer as to himself. He calls himself here, as there, the elder. It may be an allusion to his age; in any event, it exhibits the same modesty that his brother apostle, Peter, showed in his writings. For this characteristic the apostle John was specially noted.
3Jn 1:1 –Well beloved Gaius.
Whether it be of importance to know something of the person to whom the aged apostle pens this letter or not, it can not be amiss to notice what the inspired text says of one having a similar name. “And the whole city was filled with confusion: and having caught Gaius and Aristarchus, men of Macedonia, Paul’s companions in travel, they rushed with one accord into the theatre” (Act 19:29). This was at Ephesus, the place where the writer of this epistle is supposed to have resided after the destruction of Jerusalem. A companion of Paul in his labors and travels would sufficiently indicate a character devoted to the cause of the gospel as would entitle him to the endearing words applied to him by the disciple whom Jesus loved, “the well-beloved Gaius.” And, not withstanding his rough treatment at Ephesus, he continued in the company of Paul in some of his subsequent journeyings, as we learn from Act 24:4. Before his sufferings for the cause of Christ, he is mentioned as a householder at Corinth, where of him the apostle Paul, in his letter to the Romans, makes mention as follows: “Gaius mine host, and of the whole church, saluteth you” (Rom 16:23). The character here given of the man is in keeping with the view that the writer of the third epistle of John would doubtless have us entertain. He is one of the few Corinthians that was baptized by the apostle Paul in person. (1Co 1:4.) Take the history all in all, I am inclined to believe that these mentions of the name of Gaius, however few they may be in number, refer to one and the same individual. With these references to the well-beloved Gaius, the curtain of sacred history drops upon him forever, and no further view is permitted of one so highly esteemed for his devotion to and steadfastness in the faith by our Lord’s last surviving ambassador on earth. Enough, however, is outlined by his Christian character to justify John, in our judgment, for his expressions of love for him in the truth. More of like character in the church of Christ would render that church a much greater factor in accomplishing the moral reformation of the world.
3Jn 1:2-Beloved, I wish above all things.
The writer unbosomed himself to the person he addresses by showing his warm affection for him in the expression: “I wish above all things.” The wish is, that he may prosper and be in health, and the extent of that prosperity and health which he wished Gaius to enjoy, he measures by the prosperity of his soul. This was a measure Gaius would easily comprehend by his own consciousness. Gaius would know within himself how unselfishly he was devoted to the Lord and his cause; and just to the extent he prospered spiritually, he was to understand that just to that extent John wished him to prosper and have good health.
3Jn 1:3-For I rejoiced greatly.
John now gives Gaius a view of how the reports the brethren brought him of the conduct and conversation of Gaius affected him. He was overjoyed to learn that Gaius exhibited all these unmistakable evidences of being a true follower of the Master, notwithstanding his evil surroundings.
3Jn 1:3 –I have no greater joy than to hear.
John’s life was wrapped up in his desire to have all men learn, and know, and obey the truth. For this he lived; for this he labored; for this he suffered. And when he heard of men and women who had taken upon themselves the name of Christ, acting in accord with the instruction they had received, it gave him great pleasure. This is the compensation he sought, all the reward he seemed to care for on earth.
3Jn 1:4 –My children walk in truth.
How tenderly the aged apostle looked upon the children of his Master. He calls them “My children.” They may have been such when age is taken into the account, or with reference to the time they became servants of the Lord, as compared to his own service, or with regard to the relationship, spiritually, that existed-the same close, tender ties that exist between father and son.
3Jn 1:4 –Walk in truth.
The course of conduct enjoined by the inspired instructors. The Master had said, “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Mat 28:20). First. Preach the gospel. Secondly. All who believe the gospel so preached and trustingly accept-baptize. Thirdly. The baptized ones teach how they shall conduct themselves throughout their life’s journey. Fourthly. Assuring them by such conduct of the reward of eternal life. All such as observe, the inspired instruction given them after becoming members of Christ’s body, the church, are said in Scripture to be walking in the truth.
Commentary on 3Jn 1:1-4 by Burton Coffman
JOHN’S THIRD LETTER
3Jn 1:1 –The elder unto Gaius the beloved, whom I love in truth.
The elder … For another comment on the apostle’s use of this title, see under 2Jn 1:1.
Gaius … It is impossible to make any positive identification of this man with any of the four other persons of the same name mentioned in the New Testament. See in introduction, above. Nothing whatever is known of this man, except that which may be supposed or surmised from what is written in this letter.
The beloved … This expression is personal and intimate, contrasting sharply with the far more general “whom I love in the truth” used in connection with it; and, significantly, it was the general expression only that John used in Second John, indicating that the 2nd epistle was actually addressed to a church, and not to an individual. “Whom I love in the truth” is a broad greeting, much like, “in Christian love,” and carries nothing of the personal intensity conveyed by “the beloved.”
The truth … Of this expression, Plummer noted:
We have to notice the characteristic repetition of the word “truth,” which occurs four times in the first four verses … “To walk in the truth” is nothing less than to follow in the footsteps of the Lord.[7]
It is this and other typical words which require the conclusion that the apostle John is indeed the author of all these letters ascribed to him.
ENDNOTE:
[7] A. Plummer, The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 22,3John (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), p. 1.
3Jn 1:2 –Beloved, I pray that in all things thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.
Beloved … “Three of the first eleven words with which the Epistle opens refer to love.”[8]
That thou mayest prosper … Here the apostle prayed for the prosperity of Gaius, and from this it is clearly not wrong for Christians to pray for prosperity; however, the qualifier should be carefully noted, “as thy soul prospereth!” The prosperity of the soul is paramount. Truly Christian people need prosperity that they may be able, as Gaius was, to dispense hospitality, aid good causes, and prevent themselves from becoming burdens upon the backs of other people. Beza translated the verse here as a prayer “for things temporal as well as for things spiritual.”[9] “Prosper literally means to have a good journey.”[10]
And be in health … Good health is likewise a blessing which Christians are privileged to pray for; because, without good health, Christian service must necessarily be curtailed or abandoned, The apostles were, in no sense, health fadists, Paul even saying that “bodily exercise profiteth little (or for a little while)”; but, having due regard for the transitory nature of all earthly endowments, the child of God should nevertheless strive mightily for the maintenance and preservation of good health, the greatest of all physical blessings.
[8] John R. W. Stott, Tyndale New Testament Commentary, Vol. 19 (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964), p. 218.
[9] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 158.
[10] John R. W. Stott, op. cit., p. 218.
3Jn 1:3 –For I rejoiced greatly, when brethren came and bare witness unto thy truth, even as thou walkest in truth.
When brethren came … “The present tense indicates that not on one occasion, but on several, report[11] came.” Wilder also agreed that, “The Greek participles here indicate that numerous such reports had come in.”[12]
Their witness unto thy truth … This refers to the enthusiastic reports of traveling missionaries in their appearances in various congregations where they were privileged to speak (3Jn 1:6). “Witnessing” of this kind was done by the apostles themselves when they reported to “sponsoring” congregations that sent them out.
That thou walkest in truth … Truth in the apostolic age was almost a technical term meaning “the faith,” “the doctrine of Christ,” or “the true religion.” The modern conception of “all of us disciples are merely trying to find out what truth is” was never heard of by the primitive church. They knew the truth; they had obeyed the truth; they were walking in the truth; they loved the truth. With regard to the great basics of Christianity, one must indeed know them before he can even become a Christian.
[11] Charles C. Ryrie, Wycliffe Bible Commentary, New Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 1036.
[12] Amos N. Wilder, The Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (New York: Abingdon Press, 1956), p. 309.
3Jn 1:4 –Greater joy have I none than this, to hear of my children walking in the truth.
Greater joy have I none … The word “greater” here, in the Greek is, “a double comparative as betterer would be in English.”[13] Paul frequently used such expressions, as in Eph 3:8; and Shakespeare has, “How much more elder art thou than thy looks!”[14]
My children walking in the truth … Some have surmised from this that John had converted Gaius, but “this is not certain.”[15] After all, John’s writing as “the elder” to congregations and persons over whom he had spiritual oversight was fully justified in this usage, whether or not he had converted all of his charges.
Walking in truth … What does this mean? See under 3Jn 1:3. Bruce gave the following definition of it:
“The truth” is Christianity to its fullness; when one who professes allegiance to Christianity lives a life in conformity with his profession, then he does not merely pay lip-service to the truth but “walks in the truth.” In effect, walking in the truth is the same things as walking in the light (1Jn 1:7).[16]
[13] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 1062.
[14] William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, IV, 1.
[15] Amos N. Wilder, op. cit., p. 309.
[16] F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972), p. 134.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
NOTES ON 3 JOHN
—-
1. ] Cf. 2Jn 1:1 note.
] Three persons of this name are mentioned in the N. T. (1) Gaius the Macedonian, who is mentioned together with Aristarchus in connection with the tumult in the theatre at Ephesus (Act 19:29). They are described as Macedonians, fellow travellers of S. Paul. (2) Gaius of Derbe, one of S. Pauls companions on his last journey to Jerusalem. (3) Gaius of Corinth. Cf. Rom 16:23, : 1Co 1:14, , whom S. Paul mentions as the only Corinthians, besides the household of Stephanas, whom he had baptized himself. Of this Gaius, Origen says that according to tradition he was the first Bishop of Thessalonica. Cf. Origen, Comm. in Ro. x. 41, Fertur sane traditione maiorum quod hic Gaius primus episcopus fuerit Thessalonicensis ecclesiae. Dom Chapmans ingenious attempt to connect the Epistle with Thessalonica on this ground is not convincing (see Introd.). Coenen (ZWTh., 1872, p. 264 ff.) has attempted to show that Gaius of Corinth is intended in the fictitious address of this Epistle, on the ground of the similarity of the conditions prevailing here and at Corinth, as testified by the Pauline Epistles. The similarities are of too general a character either to compel identification or even to make it probable. Coenens interpretation of (2Co 11:4) as a pillar apostle whom S. Pauls opponents threatened to invite to Corinth to overthrow his authority, is certainly not helped by the statement in our Epistle of the Elders intention of paying a visit to the Church of Gaius. But perhaps it is not necessary now to spend time in dealing with the theory that the two smaller Johannine Epistles owe their origin to the desire of the great unknown to gain credence for the view that his more important forgeries (the Gospel and First Epistle) were really the work of the son of Zebedee. As Windisch says, III. (i.e. 3 Jn.) fr Fiktion zu erklren, widerspricht allen gesunden Sinnen. The statement in Const. Apostol. vii. 46, that Gaius was the first Bishop of Pergamus, is of too slight historical value to guide our conjectures as to the recipient of this Epistle (vid. Introd.). Bartlets suggestion of Thyatira does not claim more than relative probability. But all such attempts at identification of the Church or the individual addressed are mere speculation. Where our knowledge is inadequate the building up of hypothesis is of the nature of pastime rather than of serious work. Truer scholarship is seen in Harnacks less interesting judgment, Gaius, to whom (the Epistle) is addressed, receives no title of honour. That he occupied a prominent position in his Church is clear from what follows. In Commentaries, if not in periodicals, the rule should be remembered that there is a time to keep silence.
] A favourite word of the writer of these Epistles, in which it occurs ten times, though it is not found in the Gospel. For its use in salutations, cf. Rom 1:7, Rom 1:16:5, Rom 1:8, Rom 1:9, Rom 1:12; Col 4:9, Col 4:14; 2Ti 1:2; Phm 1:1.
] Cf. 2Jn 1:1 (notes).
] om. boh-cod.
2. ] must be taken with . The writer prays for the prosperity of Gaius in all respects, and especially in the matter of health. There is no need to alter into the conventional of epistolary introductions. The converse change would be far more likely to have taken place.
] Bartlets ingenious conjecture that the other name of Gaius may have been Euodias, is again outside the sphere of commentary. The word is part of the common and conventional language of Epistles. For its use in the N. T., compare Rom 1:10; 1Co 16:2. Cf. also Hermas, Sim. vi. 3, 5.
] The word may possibly suggest that Gaius health had caused his friends anxiety; but it certainly does not necessarily do so. Its use in letters is conventional. Cf. Oxyrh. Pap. ii. 293 (p. 293), [] , and ii. 292 (p. 292), .
] Cf. Philo, Quis rer. div. heres, p. 514 (Wendland, iii. p. 65). Philo is commenting on (Gen 15:15). ; , , .The reference is to be found in Wettstein.
] om. boh-codd. | ] + Ic 364 (137).3. ] Cf. 2Jn 1:4; Php 4:10.
] The tense almost precludes the reference of the words to a single occasion, and their evidence should not be so interpreted in attempts to discover the historical setting of the Epistles. They suggest rather the means by which the Elder kept himself in touch with the Churches for whose welfare he regarded himself as responsible, and over which he exercised his supervision.
] As always in the Johannine writings, truth covers every sphere of life, moral, intellectual, spiritual. Those who visited Ephesus had from time to time borne witness that Gaius whole life corresponded to the highest standard of life and conduct.
] Cf. note on 1Jn 1:6.
A B C K L P al. pler. boh-codd. syrbodl et p Thphyl. Oec.] om. 4. 5. 6. 13. 25. 65. 100 dscr vg. boh-ed. sah. arm. aeth. | ] Ia 64 (328) sah. (uid.) | ] Ia 158, 1100 (395): caritati boh-cod. | ] pr. 22. 56. 80. 98 arm-codd. (uid.): om. A 37.
4. ] Cf. , Eph 3:8; Deissmann, Bibel Studien, p. 142, who quotes Pap. Lond. 130, .
] explained by the clause introduced by . The plural is used instead of the singular, as the writer is thinking of more than one occasion on which he had experienced the joy of which he speaks. If this explanation of the plural is correct there is no need to correct the text by supplying before , as Wilamowitz suggests (Hermes, 1898, p. 531). In his interesting note on the Epistle he does not offer any explanation of . Cf. Joh 15:13, , . The is actually found in one Greek cursive.
] The variant is probably due to scribe, who substituted a commoner phrase. Cf. 2Co 1:15. For , cf. 1Jn 1:4; 2Jn 1:12; Phm 1:7.
] Those over whom he exercises his fatherly supervision, whether actually his children in the faith or not. The bearing of this phrase on the meaning of in the Second Epistle should not be overlooked.
] Ib 78-157 (-): 137 | ] post H 257 (33) Ia 505. 192 (69) O 46 (154) | ] 27. 29. 31. 40. 66**. 68. 69. 73 dscr al. fere. 10 sah. boh-ed. syrbodl Dam. | ] post C 31. 68 aeth. | ] om. Ic 364 (137) | B* | A C K L P al. pler. cat. tol. arm. sah.] B 7. 35 vg. cop. | ] pr. 69 vg. (maiorem horum quam ut) vid. sup. | Ia 216 355 (301) | ] Ic 114 (335).
5. ] Cf. vv. 1, 2. ] either (1) thou doest a faithful thing, an action corresponding to the faith that is in thee, which is the natural meaning of the word, if we consider the general usage of the writer, though there is no exact parallel; or (2) thou makest sure whatsoever thou mayest do, thou doest that which shall not fail of its true issue, shall receive its due reward. Cf. Xen. (quoted by Wettstein) , .
] The judgment is expressed absolutely, the present tense being used. The covers both the past action, to which the recipients of Gaius hospitality have borne public witness before the Ephesian Church, and the future benefits, which the Elder feels confident that Gaius will confer at his request.
] For , cf. 1Co 6:6, , : Php 1:28, , : Eph 2:8, . Its use in Rom 13:11 is rather different.
The recognition of the duty of among Christians is fully testified, 1Ti 5:10; Rom 12:13; Heb 13:2; Heb_1 P. 4:9, as also the special duties of the leaders in this respect, 1Ti 3:2; Tit 1:8. Cf. also Herm. Sim. ix. 27, , , , . Justin, Apol. i. 67, (sc. ) .
] pr. uenim et boh-cod.: Ia 175 (319) | B C K L Pal. omnuid cat. etc.] A | ] om. H 6 () | A B C 17. 27. 29. 33. 66**. 68. 81. 97. 126mg vg. syrbodl et p sah. cop. arm. aeth.] Ia 200f (83): K L P al. pler. dscr (om. ) cat. Thphyl. Oec.
6. …] The to which they bore witness was clearly manifested in the hospitable reception of those who were strangers to him, some of whom must subsequently have visited Ephesus. It is natural to interpret this verse as referring to one of the occasions mentioned in ver. 3, or more than one if the witness is to be regarded as a single fact, though including a series of acts.
] The absence of the article is significant. The anarthrous phrase denotes a meeting of the Church at which the witness was borne. Cf. 1Co 14:19, 1Co 14:35, : Joh 18:20, : also 6:59. ] The reading is probably a correction. is a common phrase in letters, and no special stress should be laid on it. It is a conventional expression. In many papyrus letters the double future occurs. Many letter writers would have written . But the textual evidence does not justify our attributing such a solecism to the author. For the phrase, cf. Tebtunis Pap. i. 56, p. 167, : 57, p. 168, : Oxyrh. Pap. ii. 294 (p. 294), : 297 (p. 298), : 299 (p. 300), : 300 (p. 301), : i. 116 (p. 182), . It is so common that a schoolboy uses it sarcastically, ii. 119, . Cf. also ps.-Aristias, 39, …: 46, .
] Cf. Tit 3:13, . It is also found in Acts and the earlier Pauline Epistles (Ro.; 1, 2 Co.).
] Cf. 1Th 2:12, … The adverb is also found with the following genitives: (Rom 16:2), (Eph 4:1), (Php 1:27), (Col 1:10).
] o K | ] Ia 64 (328): om. Ib 309 (35) | H 162 (61) Ic 364 (137) | ] pr. Ia 200. 175. 101 (83) O46 (154): ecclesiarum eorum boh-ed. | ] B* | A B K L P etc. (7. 18. 27. 29. 68 demid. tol. al.) am. fu. tol. demid. boh-sah.] C vg. (benefaciens deduces) arm. (deducis) | ] Ia 70. 175 (505) | ] Ia 70.f (505) O46 (154): om. Isa_55 (236).
7. ] gives the reason why they deserve such help. For the phrase, cf. Act 5:41, . We may also compare Rom 1:5, . Dom Chapmans interpretation of the phrase as hinting at withdrawal from the scene of persecution, or even banishment, at a time when the mere fact of being a Christian was enough to procure condemnation (cf. 1 P. 4:14, : 15, , ) is wholly unnatural. As Bartlet has pointed out, it might be possible if the phrase used were .The absolute use of , which is found in the passage quoted from Acts (cf. also Php 2:9), is also to be found in Ignatius (ad Eph. iii. : vii. : ad Philad. x. ). The name is clearly that of Christ. The fact that their having gone out on behalf of the name is put forward as the reason why they deserve hospitality, certainly does not carry with it the necessity of regarding the name as that of brother. Missionaries no doubt proclaimed the brotherhood of believers, but their first duty was to proclaim the name of Christ.
] probably from Ephesus, though Dr. Westcotts more cautious statement, from some Church well known to the Apostle and Gaius, is alone completely justified by the facts known to us from the Epistle and by the language used.
] The form of the sentence () states more than the bare fact. It was their custom, a custom which emphasized the character of their work, to carry out the spirit of the Commission to the Twelve (Mat 10:8, , ), and the tradition established by Paul (cf. 2Co 12:14, , : 1Th 2:9, . They carried out as their rule of mission work the Pauline custom of refusing support from those amongst whom they were working as Missionaries. They had therefore a special claim on the hospitality and help of the Churches in places through which they had to pass. There is an interesting parallel to the sentence in the Didache xi. 6, , , . It is hardly necessary to deal at length with the interpretation which connects with , and bases their claim to help on the fact that they had been expelled from their home because of their faith, eiecti erant propter religionem ab extraneis, nihilque secum apportauerunt (Carpzov quoted by Poggel).
] For with , cf. Mat 17:25, ; and for the contrast between Christians and , cf. Mat 5:47, , ; ;
A B C K L P al. plu. cat. am. fu. sah. cop. syrp txt armed. Thphyl. Oec. Bed.] + minusc. mu. vg. demid. syrbedl et p armed. aeth. | ] Ib 157 (29) | ] 5. 13. 29. 118 dscr Rev_5 | A B C Rev_12 fu. tol. (gentilibus) boh-ed.] K L P al. longe. plu. boh-codd.: gentibus vg. am. demid. sah.
8. ] In view of their policy of refusing support from the heathen to whom they minister, we Christians are under a special obligation to do what we can to forward their work.
] Cf. 1Jn 2:6, 1Jn 3:16, 1Jn 4:11, and Joh 13:14.] The of the Textus Receptus must be merely a scribes error; the word is always used in the sense of receiving or getting, or getting back what is due (cf. 2Jn 1:8, ). occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only in the Lucan writings, in the various senses of answer, suppose, receive ( , Act 1:9). The usage of the LXX is similar. But in other Greek it is often used in the sense of receiving with hospitality, and especially of supporting. Cf. Strabo, p. 653, . It suggests support as well as welcome.
] Cf. 1Co 16:16, , and ver. 18, . All who act on such principles have a claim on our help and support.
. ] The word may mean either (1) become fellow-workers with them in the cause of the truth, or (2) become fellow-workers with the Truth. In support of (1) are quoted 2Co 8:23, : Col 4:11, . There is no other example of with the dative in the N.T., the usual construction being with the genitive, either of the person or the work, or with a preposition. But the dative with is not uncommon. Cf. Jam 2:22, . Cf. also 1 Est 7:2, .: 1 Mac. 12:1, . In view of this usage, and the writers use of , which he often almost personifies, the second is more probably the correct interpretation. Cf. ver. 12, .
A B C * 13, 16. 27. 29. 46. 66**. 68. 73. 126mg Oeccod] post Ia 56 (316): Ccav K L P al. pler. cat. Thphyl. | ] post Ia 251 (326): K 42. 69. 105 al. fere.10 cat. Thphyl: C 100 | ] * A.
9. ] The addition of is clearly an attempt to remove the (supposed) difficulty of admitting that a letter written by an Apostle has not been preserved, or could have failed in its object. It must have been added at a time when the supposed reference to the Second Epistle was unknown, or at any rate not accepted.
] Cf. Mat 20:20, . It must be taken as strictly indefinite. It suggests neither something great (Gal 2:6, ) nor something insignificant. Its omission in the Textus Receptus is probably due to error.
] The local Church of which Gaius and Diotrephes were members. Cf. S. Pauls usage in his earlier Epistles (1, 2 Th.; Gal.; 1, 2 Co.) and the usage of the Apocalypse (1:4, 2:1, etc.).In spite of the close resemblance in form between the Second and Third Epistles, which certainly favours the view that they are companion Epistles, and the many points of similarity in the circumstances of the Churches to which, or to members of which, they are addressed, the context of ver. 9; makes it almost impossible to see in the words a reference to the Second Epistle. (Cf. Introduction, 83.) It must, of course, be admitted that Diotrephes probably favoured, or at least condoned, the Gnostic or other teaching which the writer condemns in the Second Epistle. And in spite of what Harnack has said, it is doubtful whether that Epistle must have contained a reference to the sins of Diotrephes if it had been addressed to the Church of which he was a member. But ver. 9; must be read as it stands, between verses 8 and 10. The reception, or the refusal to receive, the Missionary brethren is the subject of both these verses. The letter to which reference is made in the intermediate verse, and which the writer fears that Diotrephes will suppress or persuade his Church to neglect, if, indeed, he has not already done so, must have contained some reference to the question of the hospitable reception of these brethren. If we add to this the totally different aim of the two letters, on which Harnack rightly lays stress, the warning not to receive false brethren in the Second, and the exhortation to welcome the true brethren in the Third Epistle, the case against the supposed reference is convincingly strong. The most natural interpretation of the words is that the Elder wrote to the Church a letter of similar content to the private letter to Gaius, exhorting them to show hospitality to Demetrius and the brethren whom he commends to their care: but knowing the power of Diotrephes to oppose his wishes he wrote a private letter to Gaius, a member of the Church on whose loyalty he could thoroughly depend. The Second Epistle, with its sharply expressed prohibition of any intercourse with those who claimed the rights of brethren, but who had forfeited them by their false teaching, fails altogether to correspond to the requirements of the case.
] The letter had been written, but the writer feared that it would fail to secure the carrying out of his wishes.] not found elsewhere, except in Patristic writings, where it is derived from this passage. A scholion in Matthaei (p. 162) explains it as equivalent to . The cognate and are both found. Of the passages quoted by Wettstein in illustration of the word two will suffice: Plutarch, Alcibiad. p. 192, : Agesil. 596 D, . The word expresses ambition, the desire to have the first place in everything. It should not be pressed either to prove or disprove the possession by Diotrephes of an episcopal position. It certainly does not suggest aspiring to a place not already obtained.
] The members of the Church to which the Elder had written. For the construction, cf. 1Co 1:2, .
] is not found in the N.T., except here and in the following verse, where it is used in a somewhat different sense. Diotrephes refuses to recognize the authority of the Elder and those who side with him. Cf. 1 Mac. 10:1, : 12:8, : 12:43, 14:23. In papyri it is used for accepting the terms, of a lease, etc. (esp. ). For its use in ver. 10 we may compare Oxyrh. Pap. 2:281 (p. 272), .
] B sah.: + c 13. 15. 18. 26. 29. 33**. 36. 40. 49. 66**. 73. 180 dscr cat. vg. syrbodl et p | A B C 7. 29. 66**. 68 sah. cop. arm.] om. K L P al. pler. vg. syrbodl et p aeth. Thphyl. Oec. | ] quia sah. | ] Ia 106, 397 (179) | ] pr. Ia 173 (156) | ]Ia 264 (233) boh-ced.: H162 (61) | H6 ()| ] H162 (61) | Ia 397f (96).
10. ] Because of his refusal to recognize our authority, and the lengths to which he has gone in opposing us in consequence.
] Those who find in the Second Epistle the letter to which ver. 9; refers naturally see in these words a reference to ver. 12 of that Epistle ( ). They are equally well explained by the expectation expressed in ver. 14 of this letter. The writer perhaps speaks somewhat less confidently () of his coming than he does of the arrival of false teachers in the Church to which 2 Jn. is addressed ( ). But the difference between the two constructions cannot be pressed.
] Cf. Joh 14:26, . The Elder will recall to them the whole conduct of their leader and show it in its true light.
] Cf. Joh 3:19 ff ( ). The writer is confident that the conduct of Diotrephes will not stand the light of truth, and that the Church will recognize the fact.
…] Two accusations are brought against Diotrephes: his boastful opposition to the Elder and his friends, and his harsh action in the matter of the Missionaries.] Cf. 1Ti 5:13, (uerbosae, vg.) , . Oecumenius interprets , . The word is not found elsewhere in the N.T. It emphasizes the emptiness of the charges which Diotrephes brings against the Elder in so many words.
] Cf. 1Ti 6:8, : Heb 13:5, . The construction with is not found elsewhere in the N.T. The nearest parallel to this passage is, perhaps, 2 Mac. 5:15, .
. . ] For the construction, cf. Joh 4:11, .
] Cf. note on ver. 9. This refusal to receive the brethren probably has special reference to some former visit of the Missionaries, when Diotrephes refused to receive them in spite of the commendatory letter which they brought with them. But the present indicates a general practice rather than a particular incident. The words may simply mean that D. will not recognize as true Christians the brethren who side with the Presbyter. He will recognize neither the Presbyter nor his followers. It is better, however, not to exclude the reference to Diotrephes former ill-treatment of those whom the Elder now commends to Gaius. The question of the welcome to be given to those who went from place to place was an important one at the time, and probably for some time afterwards. Cf. Didache 12:1, , and the whole chapter, esp. 5, , .
] sc. . His custom is to put every hindrance in the way of their carrying out their wishes, or he actually prevents them. The description of his action does not decide his position. The words used express action possible either in the case of a monarchical bishop, or of an influential and self-willed leader. ] Joh 9:34 f. is rightly quoted in illustration. But the difference in tense should also be noticed ( ). Again a policy or practice is described rather than a single incident. And the words cannot be used to determine the exact position of Diotrephes. Even if he had already obtained the monarchical position he could not have inflicted the penalty of excommunication without the concurrence of the whole Church. And a leading presbyter might well succeed in forcing his will on the community. The words, therefore, only indicate the position of power to which he had attained. And they do not determine whether the sentence of excommunication had been actually carried out, either in the case of those who wished to receive the Missionaries to whom reference is made in this Epistle, or in any other case.
The suggestion of Carpzov, revived by Poggel, to make the object of , involves a construction which is intolerably harsh. The writers love of parenthesis, even if is the true reading in Joh 1:15, hardly goes so far as this. And the arguments by which it is supported are not convincing: (1) Diotrephes could not have expelled those whose only offence was the desire to show hospitality to the Missionaries; (2) if he succeeded in preventing them from carrying out their wishes, why should he go further?
] O46 (154) | ] + mala boh-cod. | Ia 180 (1319) | ] pr. C vg.: H162 (61) Ia 158 (395) Ib 62 (498) Ic 258 (56) | ] om. H162 (61) | ] Ic 208, 174 (307): + uos neque accipit sahw | A B K L P al. pler. cat. am. fu. cop. syrp txt aeth. Thphyl. Oec.] C 5. 7. 27. 29. 66** vg. demid. tol. sah. syrbodl et p mg arm.: + suscipere boh. | -] 4 | A B C K L P al. plu. Thphyl. Oec.] om. 2. 3. 15. 25. 26. 36. 43. 95*. 98. 99. 100 bscr hscr.
11. ] Cf. note on ver. 2.
] Cf. Heb 13:7; 2Th 3:7, 2Th 3:9. The use of is more frequent in this writer, but is found in Joh 18:23 ( ). It is not necessary to limit the writers meaning to the examples of evil and good afforded by Diotrephes and Demetrius, especially as the conduct of the latter would seem to have needed apology. If two special examples are intended, they must be the action of Diotrephes, and that of Gaius and his friends who wished to show hospitality. But the writers object is rather to set two courses of action in the sharpest possible contrast, and to help forward a right decision by showing the true character of the point at issue in all its simplicity. Viewed rightly, it is simply a matter of refusing the evil and choosing the good. There are times when the simplest platitude in the mouth of authority is the expression of the truest wisdom; cf. Mar 3:4 (= Luk 6:9).
] Cf. 1Jn 3:9, 1Jn 3:10. He who does good shows by his conduct that the inspiration which dominates his life and work comes from God. He who does evil shows similarly that he has not made even the first step towards union with God; cf. 1Jn 3:6, (Dr. Westcotts note); Joh 3:3, Joh 3:5.For the use of , , and cognate words, cf. 1P. 3:17, 2:15, 20, 3:6, 4:19, 2:12, 14, 4:15. Several points of connection between 2 and 3 John and 1 Peter have been noticed by Dom Chapman in his articles on the historical setting of these Epistles.
2o A B C K P h. al. longe. plu. cat. d vg. boh-codd. sah. syrp] + L 31 ascr al. mu. tol. boh-ed. arm. aeth. Did. Dam. Thphyl. Oec.
12. ] Nothing is known of Demetrius except what can be gathered from the Epistle itself. The conjecture that he should he identified with the Demas mentioned in the Pauline Epistles (Col 4:14; Phm 1:24, and 2Ti 4:10), and the less improbable suggestion of his identity with the Ephesian silversmith whose opposition to S. Paul is recorded in Act 19:21 ff., have been referred to in the Introduction. Purely conjectural identification is hardly a branch of serious historical study. But the mention of Demetrius here may be interpreted in different ways. (i.) It is possible to regard him as a member of the Church of Gaius and Diotrephes, whose conduct had somehow or other given cause for suspicion, even if we cannot follow the ingenious attempts of Weiss to show that he must have been the leader of the Church to whom under the special circumstances of the case the Elder had sent his letter to the Church (ver. 9), and of whose attitude Gaius was uncertain, as he stood between the two parties (Weiss, p. 210).
(ii.) With greater probability he has been regarded as the bearer of the Epistle (3 Jn.). Wilamowitz and others are probably right in finding in this Epistle a commendatory letter on behalf of Demetrius and his companions. The special emphasis of ver. 12 is most easily explained, as Dom Chapman, Mr. Bartlet and others have seen, by the supposition that Demetrius had fallen under suspicion, though the grounds for such suspicion are altogether unknown. On the whole, the hypothesis which best suits the facts of the case which are known to us is that he was one of the Missionaries, perhaps their leader. The main object of the letter is to commend them to the hospitality of the Church of Gaius. This the Elder had already attempted to do in a letter written to the Church. But his object had been frustrated by the machinations of Diotrephes, who had succeeded in forcing his will upon the Church. Probably Diotrephes had found his task the easier because of suspicions felt about Demetrius, which were not altogether unwarranted. We cannot, however, say more than that of several possible hypotheses this is the most probable. ] Cf. Papias quotation of the words of the Elder (Eus. H. E. 3:39. 3), . The tendency to personify the Truth is clearly marked in the Johannine writings. The relation of the Truth, as thus personified, to Christ and to the Spirit is not so clearly defined. In view of the language of the Farewell discourses in the Gospel (cf. especially Joh 16:13), and the statement of 1Jn 5:6, , there is much to be said in favour of Huthers view, that the expression is not merely a personification of Truth, but a description of the Holy Spirit. Against this, however, must be set the language of Joh 14:6, . With this want of clearness we naturally compare the difficulty which is so often found in the First Epistle of determining whether the writer is speaking of the Father or the Son. The writer does not think in the terms of modern conceptions of personality as applied to the Godhead, or of the more precise definitions which were the result of the Trinitarian controversies. His function is rather to provide the material out of which later thought developed clearer definition.
In what manner the Truth is said to bear witness to Demetrius is a different question. Probably it is in so far as his life and conduct show those who know him that the ideal of Christianity has been realized in him, that he abides in the truth.
] If any qualification of the words is necessary, that of Oecumenius will serve the purpose, . And his further suggestion is appropriate, , , and also his comparison of S. Pauls . But the natural exaggeration of this use of , where the meaning practically is all whom the matter may concern, or all who might be expected to do the thing spoken of, is common in all language, and is best left to explain itself.
] For the construction, and also for the combination of the witness of men with the higher witness, cf. Joh 15:26 f. , . The meaning of in these Epistles is often difficult to determine,-a difficulty which is unnecessarily exaggerated by the attempt to discover one meaning which it must have throughout. It is certainly unsatisfactory to find in it an expression for the of the Province of Asia as often as Dr. Zahn suggests, a fact which his critics are never tired of emphasizing. But there are several passages in which the writer would certainly seem to mean by himself and all who can speak with authority as to the truth of Christianity and the teaching of Christ, and where he is, perhaps, thinking primarily of a company, most of whose lives have passed into the unseen. At any rate, he means something more than I and those who are like-minded with me. It is not altogether fanciful to suppose that the words of Joh 15:26 f. are in his mind as he writes. In the present verse, however, there is nothing to suggest that he means more than we who are personally acquainted with Demetrius.
…] The close connection of this clause with Joh 21:24, , is obvious. There is very little to determine which should be regarded as the echo of the other.
] The plural of the Textus Receptus is not well supported, and the personal appeal to Gaius is more natural. Possibly the correction is due to the influence of the plural in Joh 21:24.
The writer apparently makes his appeal to Gaius knowledge of himself, and the trustworthy character of his witness in general. It is possible, however, that he is thinking of Gaius knowledge of Demetrius, which would help him to judge of the truth of the Elders witness in this particular case.
] om. boh. sah. | ] pr. C syrbodl et p mg arm. (om. ): A* | A B C al. plus 20 cat. d vg. sah. boh-ed. arm.] K L P al. longe. plur. syrbodl et p aeth. Thphyl. Oec.: 14*. 38. 93. 104. 180 Rev_3 scr boh-codd.: om. ascr: om. H6 () | -] (. .68) C 68: . .31aeth.
13-15. The close of the Epistle
13. ] This is probably the true text, though the variants – are found. The use of the tenses is correct. The much which he has to communicate is naturally regarded as a whole, the aorist being used. But he does not wish to go on using pen and ink ().
] Cf. 2Jn 1:12.
] The reed, the pen of the ancients, here takes the place of the writing material mentioned in 2 Jn. Cf. Psa_44. (45.):1, , Oxyrh. Pap. 2:326 (p. 306)
.
] Ib 157 (29): habens boh-ed (?) | A B C Rev_10 d vg. sah. cop. syrbodl et p arm. (uobis codd.) aeth. Thphyl.] K L P al. pler. cat. Oec.: Ic 299 (-) | ] A : 27: nolui vg. | -] per chartam et atramentum arm. | B C 5. 27. 31. 33. 105] A 73: K L P al. pler. cat. Thphyl. Oec.: om. 4.16arm.
14. ] Cf. 2Jn 1:12, .
The may possibly suggest that the intended journey is nearer than when 2 John was written. The action of Diotrephes, and perhaps of others in other places, may have brought matters to a crisis.
] Cf. 2Jn 1:12 (notes). ] The Christian wish (cf. Joh 14:27) takes the place of the usual , or of ordinary correspondence.
] In the private letter the private greetings are given instead of the general greeting of the members of the Church in the more formal Epistle (2Jn 1:13).
A B C 5. 31. 73. d vg.] K L P al. pler. cat. cop. Thphyl. Oec.: uenire ad te sah. | ] K 22. 26. 33. 41. 99 Thphyl.: H 103, 162 (25) I a 70, 200f (505): loqui tibi arm.
15. ] These forms of greeting are part of the common stock of epistolary correspondence, and should not be pressed as evidence about the state of parties in the Church of Gaius. It is especially misleading to interpret as a proof of the scanty following left to the Elder in it. Compare the greetings in the letter of Amon the soldier to his father (Berlin Museum: Deissmann, Licht von Osten, p. 118), : and Oxyrh. Pap. ii. 123, , : or Tebtunis Pap. ii. 299 (p. 422), .
] om. Ia 170 (303) | ] uobis arm-codd. | B C K L P al. pler. d vg. sah. cop. syrbodl syrp txt arm. Thphyl. Oec.] A 3. 13. 31. 33. 65. 67 dscr syrp mg aethutr | ] 40 | ] 33. 81. 160 boh-cod. syrp:+ H 6. 162 (): + nostros arm. | ]+L 15. 26 vg. mss. arm.
A 4. Codex Alexandrinus. London. Brit. Mus. Royal Libr. I. D. v.-viii. (v.).
B 1. Codex Vaticanus. Rome. Vat. Gr. 1209 (iv.).
C 3. Codex Ephraimi. Paris. Bibl. Nat. 9 (v.); 1Jn 1:1 -(2) []. 4:2 -(3Jn 1:2) .
L 5. Rome. Angel. 39 (ol. A. 2. 15) (ix.).
P P. 3. Petersburg. Bibl. Roy. 225 (ix.). Palimpsest. 1Jn 3:2-1 .
. 2. Codex Sinaiticus. Petersburg (iv.).
13 13 ( = 33gosp.). 48. Paris. Bibl. Nat. Gr. 14 (ix.-x.).
6. Athos. Lawra 172 (52) (viii.-ix.).
h. h. Fleury Palimpsest, ed. S. Berger, paris, 1889, and Buchanan, Old Latin Biblical Texts, Oxford (v.). 1Jn 1:8-20.
Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament
Book Introduction – 3 John
WRITER: The Apostle John.
DATE: Probably about A.D. 90.
THEME: The aged Apostle had written to a church which allowed one Diotrephes to exercise an authority common enough in later ages, but wholly new in the primitive churches. Diotrephes had rejected the apostolic letters and authority. It appears also that he had refused the ministry of the visiting brethren (3Jn 1:10), and cast out those that had received them. Historically, this letter marks the beginning of that clerical and priestly assumption over the churches in which the primitive church order disappeared. This Epistle reveals, as well, the believer’s resource in such a day. No longer writing as an apostle, but as an elder, John addresses this letter, not to the church as such, but to a faithful man in the church for the comfort and encouragement of those who were standing fast in the primitive simplicity. Second John conditions the personal walk of the Christian in a day of apostasy; Third John the personal responsibility in such a day of the believer as a member of the local church. The key-phrase is “the truth” (see 2 John, Introduction).
There are three divisions:
1. Personal greetings, 3Jn 1:1-4
2. Instructions concerning ministering brethren, 3Jn 1:5-8
3. The apostate leader and the good Demetrius, 3Jn 1:9-14
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
ad 90, am 4094
elder: 2Jo 1:1
the wellbeloved: Act 19:29, Act 20:4, Rom 16:23, 1Co 1:14
whom: 1Jo 3:18, 2Jo 1:1
in the truth: or, truly
Reciprocal: Mat 10:2 – John Act 1:13 – Peter Act 14:23 – elders Act 20:17 – the elders Rom 16:5 – my 1Ti 5:1 – an elder Tit 3:15 – love 1Pe 5:1 – who
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
RELIGION AND PROSPERITY
The elder unto the wellbeloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.
3Jn 1:1
Here we have sketched for us the character of a most remarkable man.
I. His religious character.Beloved, says St. John, I wish concerning all things that thou mayest prosper, and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth. The strength of his religious character, and the growing strength of that characterfor the word prosper means to advanceis the first point to be noticed. It was so sound and wholesome that his best friend, in his best wishes, could not wish anything better for him than that his outward life, and perhaps his physical health, might be up to the mark of, and correspond to, his religious condition. Do you think that anybody that wanted to invoke a very large measure of worldly prosperity on your head would say, I wish your fortunes may prosper as your religion is prospering? Is it not far more often the case that Christian people have these two kinds of progress and prosperity in an inverse ratio?
II. His outward life moulded by Christian truth.St. Johns Epistle goes on to say, I rejoiced greatly, when the brethren came and testified to the truth that is in thee, even as thou walkest in the truth. The truth means here neither more nor less than the whole sum of the revelation of God, which St. John had had entrusted to him, and had given to Gaius. It is all gathered up in the one Person Who is Himself the Incarnate Truth; and to walk in the truth means neither more nor less than that the outward life, that is, the walk, the external activity of a man, should be in the truth, as it were, the path that is traced out, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in it.
III. His Christian service.Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers. A handful of Christian messengers had come from the Apostle to the Church with which Gaius was connected. There was hesitation in that Church to receive them; some of the members would not have anything to say to them. Gaius took in the strangers because they were brethren, and received them after a godly sort.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
3Jn 1:1. The clder. This term is explained at verse 1 of 2 John. There are several persons named Gaius in the New Testament. Thayer notes them in connection with certain passages, and at our verse lie says the following: “An unknown Christian, to whom the third epistle of John is addressed.” Robinson’s Lexicon, Funk and Wagnalls New Standard Bible Dictionary all favor the same identity. He was evidently John’s convert, for in verse 4 he is included in “my children.” Whom, I love in the truth is the same thing he says of the “lady” in the preceding book. It means his love for them is because of their devotion to the truth.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
I.Address and Expression of Goodwill.
3Jn 1:1-2. Three men called Gaius, the Latin Caius, are mentioned by St. Paul, and one of them with the same acknowledgment of his large hospitality; but these lived in an earlier generation. Nothing is said as to his holding any office; he is beloved only, the ordinary term of Christian fellowship, though evidently used here in its strongest meaning, whom I love in truth, and emphatically repeated in several verses. Instead of the ordinary greeting we have an expression of goodwill, I wish, which however is really, as every Christian good wish must be, prayer to God (Jas 5:15).
Concerning all things must be connected with the prosper, or make good advancement; and one particular is singled outpossibly because Gaius had been sick,and be in health. The prosperity of the soul is the standard of all prosperity: even as thy soul prospereth, or makes good advancement.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, 1. The penman and writer of this epistle, St. John, who wrote the two former, as appears by agreement of them in words and phrases, which are peculiar to this apostle; he styles himself not an apostle, though he was so, but an elder: that word being a name of honour and dignity belonging to the chief of their tribes, agrees very well with the office of the apostles, set over the twelve tribes of the house of Israel.
Observe, 2. The person to whom this epistle is directed, Gaius: we find three persons of this name in the New Testament, to wit, Gaius of Macedonia, Act 19:29; Gaius of Derbe, Act 20:4; and Gaius of Corinth, Rom 16:23 whom St. Paul calls his host, and of the whole church, who being eminent for his hospitality, especially to the ministers who went out to preach the gospel among the Gentiles, taking nothing of them; this man seems to be the person who had the honour of an epistle sent to him from the pen of an eminent apostle; such as do excel in their kindness to the faithful ministers of Jesus Christ, have oft-times in this life some special marks of honour and respect put upon them by God, as a token of his gracious acceptance of them.
Observe, 3. The interest which Gaius had in St. John’s affections, he styles him the well beloved Gaius; and shows also what was the motive and attractive of that his love, namely, the truth, that is, the gospel of Christ, called eminently the truth; he loved Gaius in the truth, that is, in great sincerity, and for the truth, for his sincere professing and practising the doctrine of the gospel. The elder unto the well-beloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth: such as love the truth are and ought to be the special objects of our love.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Gaius Just as he did at the beginning of 2 John, the apostle describes himself as aged in addressing this personal letter to Gaius, whom he loved. The term here for beloved suggests a very close relationship. John sincerely loved him. Gaius had taken care of his soul’s needs, so now John prayed that he might prosper financially and in health equally as well ( 3Jn 1:1-2 ).
The apostle knew of Gaius’ spiritual health because some brethren had reported to John concerning his faithful life of service. John’s heart was made light because of this report. It may well be that Gaius was one of John’s converts. A worldly man might list a number of things that make him happy but the follower of Christ rejoices when the cause of the truth is furthered in a life ( 3Jn 1:3-4 ; 1Co 13:6 ; Php 4:14-17 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
3Jn 1:1. The elder unto the well-beloved Gaius Gaius, or, according to the Latin orthography, Caius, was a common name among the Romans. In the history of the Acts and in the epistles we meet with five persons of this name. 1st, One mentioned Act 19:29, called a man of Macedonia, and Pauls companion in travel. 2d, A Gaius of Derbe, a city of Lycaonia, mentioned Act 20:4. Gaius with whom St. Paul lodged at Corinth, and called his host, Act 16:23. ne of that name, whom the apostle had baptized at Corinth, mentioned 1Co 1:14, who probably was the same person with the Gaius last mentioned. 5th, A Gaius to whom John wrote this epistle, thought by Estius and Heuman to be a different person from all those above mentioned; because the apostle hath intimated, 3Jn 1:4, that he was his convert, which they suppose he could not say of any of the Gaiuses mentioned above. Lardner supposes he was an eminent Christian, who lived in some city of Asia, not far from Ephesus, where St. John chiefly resided after his leaving Judea. For, 3Jn 1:14, the apostle speaks of shortly coming to him, which he could not well have done if Gaius had lived at Corinth, or any other remote place. This Gaius being neither a bishop nor a deacon, but a private member of some church, (as appears by the contents of the epistle,) his hospitality to the brethren, who came to him, is a proof that he possessed some substance, and that he was of a very benevolent disposition. The design of St. John, in writing to him, was not to guard him against the attempts of the heretical teachers, who were gone abroad, or to condemn the errors which they were at great pains to propagate; but only, 1st, To praise Gaius for having showed kindness to some Christian strangers, who, in journeying among the Gentiles, had come to the place where Gaius resided; and to encourage him to show them the like kindness, when they should call upon him again, in the course of their second journey. 2d, For the purpose of rebuking and restraining one Diotrephes, who had arrogantly assumed to himself the chief direction of the affairs of the church, of which Gaius was a member, and who had both refused to assist the brethren above mentioned, and had even hindered those from receiving and entertaining them who were desirous to do it. 3d, The apostle wrote this letter to commend an excellent person named Demetrius, who, in disposition and behaviour, being the reverse of Diotrephes, the apostle proposed him as a pattern, whom Gaius and the rest were to imitate.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1. Gaius was eminent for hospitality and other Christian graces.
2. John prays for the temporal prosperity of Gaius, harmoniously with the spiritual.
3. Brethren peregrinating have brought good news relative to Gaius, in which John rejoices.
4. Gaius and others to whom he writes are his spiritual children.
5. Divine love does not discriminate, but extends its benefactions to strangers.
6. Gaius has lodged and blessed strangers and sent them on their way rejoicing.
7. At this time Gentile converts were multiplying rapidly, which John appreciates, commending them to all of the churches.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
3Jn 1:1. Salutation.Gaius (or Caius) was a common Roman name, being applied elsewhere in the NT to men belonging to Macedonia (Act 19:29), Derbe (Ac. 204) and Corinth (1 Cor. 114). The Gaius of 3 Jn. may have been distinct from all these, though early tradition says that Gaius of Corinth acted as Johns scribe, and that the apostle appointed a Gaius as Bishop of Pergamum.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 1
Gaius. Several persons of the name of Gaius are mentioned–one of Macedonia, (Acts 19:29,) one of Derbe, (Acts 20:4,) and one of Corinth, (1 Corinthians 1:14,) which last is the same, probably, with the one whom Paul mentions as his host at Corinth. (Romans 16:23.) There is no evidence in respect to the identity of either of these with the one to whom this Epistle is addressed.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
1:1 The {1} elder unto the wellbeloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.
(1) An example of a Christian greeting.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
I. INTRODUCTION V. 1
John identified himself and greeted the recipient of this shortest New Testament epistle to set the tone for what follows.
As in 2 John, the Apostle identified himself as "the elder." We do not know exactly who Gaius was. Early church tradition did not identify him with Paul’s native Macedonian companion (Act 19:29), Paul’s companion from Derbe (Act 20:4), or the Corinthian Paul baptized who hosted the church in Corinth (Rom 16:23; 1Co 1:14).
"It is generally agreed that the Gaius to whom the Elder wrote this letter is not to be identified with any of the men by that name who were associated with Paul." [Note: D. Edmond Hiebert, "Studies in 3 John," Bibliotheca Sacra 144:573 (January-March 1987):58.]
The reason for this is that Gaius was a common name in Greek and Latin then, as the name John is in English now. [Note: J. H. Moulton and G. Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources, p. 120.] This Gaius probably lived somewhere in the province of Asia. He was obviously someone whom John loved as a brother Christian.
John’s concern for both love and truth is evident again in this epistle (cf. 2 John). "In truth" means truly and in accord with God’s truth. Both John and Gaius held the truth as the apostles taught it.