3 John New Testament

In 2 John, we are told to not welcome travelling false teachers into the church. In 3 John, Gaius is praised for his hospitality toward itinerant or travelling teachers. However, an abusive leader named Diotrephes had the practice of banishing these travelling teachers from his church—especially those sent from the apostle John. So, while Gaius was welcoming travelling teachers (3 Jn 6), Diotrephes was excommunicating them. Therefore, these two letters are two sides of the same coin: In 2 John, we should reject false teachers, and in 3 John, we are told to confront those who reject true teachers (e.g. Diotrephes). In this short letter of 219 words, we receive insight “concerning the life and tensions of an early Christian community.” John explains how to handle abusive leaders like Diotrephes.

(1:1) “The elder to the beloved Gaius, whom I love in truth.”

Just like in 2 John, the author refers to himself as “the elder.” John is writing to “Gaius” a fellow Christian and friend. We don’t know exactly who this man was, because Gaius was such a popular name in the Greco-Roman world (Acts 19:29? Acts 20:4-5? 1 Cor. 1:14? Rom. 16:23?). Most commentators aren’t sure who this man is (e.g. Stott, Hodges, etc.).

(1:2) “Beloved, I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers.”

“Good health.” This was a first-century cultural convention to wish Gaius “good health” (see Stott, Akin, and Barker), and it doesn’t require that he was actually sick. At the very least, however, it shows John knew him well and cared about him.

“Just as your soul prospers.” Here is the more important point: John knew Gaius well, and he thought he was a spiritually strong man.

(1:3) “For I was very glad when brethren came and testified to your truth, that is, how you are walking in truth.”

“Brethren came and testified to your truth.” A group of Christians visited Gaius’ church and were sharing with John what they saw. They told John about Gaius’ faithfulness to Christ. Perhaps Gaius didn’t even know they were from John’s church, but he still showed them love (“especially when they are strangers,” v.5).

(1:4) “I have no greater joy than this, to hear of my children walking in the truth.”

This doesn’t refer to biological children—though that certainly is a great joy. In this context, John is referring to those whom he has impacted for Christ (cf. 1 Jn. 2:1; 3:18). It brings us joy to see younger believers growing with God.

John encourages Gaius’ loving leadership

(1:5-6) “Beloved, you are acting faithfully in whatever you accomplish for the brethren, and especially when they are strangers; ⁶ and they have testified to your love before the church. You will do well to send them on their way in a manner worthy of God.”

“Strangers” likely refers to travelling believers—not non-Christians. After all, these people “testified to [Gaius’] love before the church.” John encourages Gaius for his love and hospitality towards the visiting brothers from John’s church.

“You will do well to send them on their way in a manner worthy of God.” John tells us to support those who spread the good news faithfully.

(1:7) “For they went out for the sake of the Name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles.”

“They went out” (exēlthon) is the same term used to describe the false teachers going out to spread heresy (2 Jn. 7).

“The Name” refers to serving Jesus (Acts 5:41).

“Accepting nothing from the Gentiles.” These missionaries were preaching under the same principle as Paul: They wouldn’t accept money because they didn’t want this to bring suspicion on their motives (1 Cor. 9:12). While Hodges holds that John is referring to non-Christian Gentiles, it is more likely that he is referring to believing Gentiles. After all, why would non-Christian Gentiles want to support Christian missions?

(1:8) “Therefore we ought to support such men, so that we may be fellow workers with the truth.”

This is a great passage on giving to missions. When we support missionaries, we are “fellow workers” in spreading the gospel. God calls some people to be sent, and he calls others to be senders.

John exposes Diotrephes authoritarian leadership

(1:9) “I wrote something to the church; but Diotrephes, who loves to be first among them, does not accept what we say.”

“I wrote something to the church.” We do not possess this letter. John seems to have already written to Gaius’s church regarding Diotrephes, but this letter was rejected and “perhaps destroyed by Diotrephes himself.” This could refer to “Diotrephes’s refusal to receive the emissaries and letters of the author.”

“[Diotrephes] loves to be first among them.” Is Diotrephes a leader in this church? If he is a leader, he is a very poor one! He breaks from several attributes of godly leadership: hospitable (1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:8), not self-willed (Titus 1:7), gentle and not quarrelsome (1 Timothy 3:3), loving what is good (Titus 1:8), and having a good reputation with those outside (1 Tim. 3:7). Hodges writes, “Diotrephes provides us with our one New Testament glimpse of hierarchical Christianity, with a sobering reminder of the self-seeking which ecclesiastical hierarchies so easily foster.”

(3 Jn. 9-10) Does this passage speak against church discipline or for it? This passage speaks against the misuse of church discipline—not the prescribed use of church discipline.

How will John respond to Diotrephes? Akin writes, “One of the ‘sons of thunder’ now responds in a way that is in keeping with his old nickname.”

(1:10) “For this reason, if I come, I will call attention to his deeds which he does, unjustly accusing us with wicked words; and not satisfied with this, he himself does not receive the brethren, either, and he forbids those who desire to do so and puts them out of the church.”

“If I come.” This doesn’t mean that John is unsure if he will come. This means “when I come.”

What was Diotrephes doing that John was going to battle? When John visits this church and this mean, he is going to call out a number of Diotrephes actions:

First, he is “unjustly accusing” (phluareō) John of using “wicked words.” This refers to slander, gossip (1 Tim. 5:13), or “to spread malicious nonsense.”

Second, he refuses to allow godly itinerant missionaries from bringing apostolic teaching to his church. Kruse writes, “Diotrephes had sided with the secessionists and was treating the orthodox missionaries in the same way as the elder said the secessionist missionaries should be treated.”

Third, he was threatening to use church discipline if someone received a messenger from John (!). Diotrephes “put them out of the church” (ekballō). This is the same term used for how the religious leaders excommunicated the blind man from the synagogue (Jn. 9:34-35). This is an extreme overreach of leadership authority. After all, Kruse writes, “Even the elder, who in 2 John 10-11 had urged his readers not to provide hospitality for the secessionists, had not threatened with excommunication any who did so.” And this was written by someone with apostolic authority!

To bring everything together, Stott writes, “Diotrephes slandered John, cold-shouldered the missionaries and excommunicated the loyal believers—all because he loved himself and wanted to have the pre-eminence. Personal vanity still lies at the root of most dissensions in every local church today.”

“I will call attention to his deeds.” Barker writes, “There seems to be an implication that Diotrephes’ misdeeds were not yet fully known to the congregation; and perhaps it was the elder’s hope that once they were revealed, the church would either censure or expel Diotrephes from his position.” This strongly implies that we should not be wary of making issues public if they are serious and corporate in nature. John did not keep secrets in this regard. To the extent that Diotrephes sinned publicly, he should be corrected publicly. On the other hand, this assumes that Diotrephes was in the wrong, and John was in the right. Of course, this was true for John. But what about for us? If we bring a public charge against a leader, we need to be ready to face public debate regarding our views.

In the end, this is an important lesson to learn. Even Christian leaders can become spiritually sick, and we need to discern when this happens in a church and have the courage to confront authoritarian leaders like this.

(1:11) “Beloved, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good. The one who does good is of God; the one who does evil has not seen God.”

Diotrephes may have had many of the Christians in his church imitating and following him, but John encourages Gaius to “not imitate what is evil, but what is good.” When we serve under a corrupt leader, it can be hard to cast off what we learned and what was modeled for us. Yet, we are all called to change by focusing on Christ as our example (1 Cor. 11:1; Heb. 12:1-2).

John’s encouragement is based on what he himself is willing to do. He says that he himself is going to take down Diotrephes if he shows up, and he expects Gaius to do the same. He also points to the fact that Gaius has received the brothers (vv.5-8), while Diotrephes has not (v.10). Hodges writes, “Like many gracious individuals in our own day, Gaius may have abhorred confrontation—especially with willful people like Diotrephes—so that he may well have needed these words from John to instill in him the necessary backbone.” Likewise, Barker comments, “It was no pleasant experience that awaited the elder, but ‘truth’ without love is no truth at all.”

“The one who does good is of God; the one who does evil has not seen God.” Hodges doesn’t take this to mean that believers cannot do evil. Instead, if they do evil, they are not in fellowship with God (1 Jn. 1:3). After all, if Gaius did evil (succumbing to the peer pressure of Diotrephes), then he would become a non-Christian!

(1:12) “Demetrius has received a good testimony from everyone, and from the truth itself; and we add our testimony, and you know that our testimony is true.”

Who is Demetrius? Whoever he is, John knows and trusts his character. He has a “good testimony… from the truth itself.” This implies that he is faithful to the truth. John must mention him because Gaius probably felt inadequate to confront such an authoritarian leader like Diotrephes all alone. Demetrius was a good man who could help him in this endeavor.

(1:13-15) “I had many things to write to you, but I am not willing to write them to you with pen and ink; ¹⁴ but I hope to see you shortly, and we will speak face to face. ¹⁵ Peace be to you. The friends greet you. Greet the friends by name.”

(3 Jn. 13-14) Does this passage imply that verbal tradition is greater than Scripture? This reminds us of 2 John 12, where he writes that the reason he does “not wish to write with pen and ink” is “so that our joy may be made complete.” Talking face to face seems to be more effective and bring more joy. John writes. “I hope to see you right away” (“soon” NLT, “shortly” NASB, “right away” NET), leaving us to assume that the issue with Diotrephes is urgent.

Questions for Reflection

Read 3 John. What can we know about Gaius from this chapter? What can we know about Diotrephes?

Read verses 1-4. What is John’s relationship to Gaius?

Read verse 2. John tells Gaius that his “soul prospers.” What do you think he means by this?

Read verse 9. What happened when John wrote to Diotrephes’ church?

Read verses 9-12. Why is John writing this letter to Gaius?