3 John 1:10 Komentář

In this epistle the apostle congratulates Gaius upon the prosperity of his soul (Jo3 1:1, Jo3 1:2), upon the fame he had among good Christians (Jo3 1:3, Jo3 1:4), and upon his charity and hospitality to the servants of Christ (Jo3 1:5, Jo3 1:6). He complains of contemptuous treatment by an ambitious Diotrephes (Jo3 1:9, Jo3 1:10), recommends Demetrius (Jo3 1:12), and expresses his hope of visiting Gaius shortly (Jo3 1:13, Jo3 1:14).

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, Rom 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, Jo3 1:4; nor does he seem to be the same with Gaius of Macedonia, Act 19:29, or with Gaius of Derbe, Act 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 Gill on Jo2 1:1.

Wherefore, if I come,.... Where both Gaius and Diotrephes lived, as he trusted he should shortly, Jo3 1:14; I will remember his deeds which he doth; meaning, not only that he would tell him of them to his face, but make mention of them, and expose them to the whole church, and reprove him for them: and which are as follow, prating against us with malicious words; it is a common thing for ministers of the Gospel to be prated against, not only by the men of the world, but by professors of religion, and by such who call themselves preachers also; nor need it be wondered at, since John, an apostle of Christ, the beloved disciple, who was so harmless and inoffensive in his conversation, so kind and loving in his disposition and temper, so meek and humble in his deportment, and now in such an advanced age, was prated against by a Diotrephes: and what is said against Christ's ministers is no other than prating; silly, idle, trifling, and empty stuff, as the word used signifies; for want of greater things, they take up any little matter, and improve it against them; and this is often done with a malicious intent, to hurt their characters, spoil their usefulness, and render their ministry unprofitable. And not content herewith; with prating against the Apostle John, and the ministers with him, in this wicked way: neither doth he himself receive the brethren; the meaning is not, that he did not receive them into the church, for they were there, since afterwards mention is made of his casting them out from thence; but he did not receive them into his house, and entertain them as he ought to have done; for a minister of the Gospel, and a pastor of a church, ought to be hospitable, and given to hospitality, and entertain strangers, especially those who are brethren in Christ, and fellow ministers of the word: and the rather these were to be received, since they travelled about to spread the Gospel among the Gentiles, and took nothing of them. And this was not all, he not only did not receive them himself, and reject them, but was not willing that others should receive them: and forbiddeth them that would; on such who had a heart, as well as ability, to receive and entertain these poor brethren, he laid his injunctions, and gave them strict orders, in his lordly and tyrannical way, not to show any respect unto them; and casteth them out of the church; that is, he excommunicated them, either those that entertained them, or rather the brethren themselves; which was an abuse of the ordinance of excommunication, as that ordinance is abused, when any single person, a pastor, or any other, as here, assumes the power of doing it himself, and does it without the church; whereas it is a punishment or censure, to be inflicted by many, or to be done by the joint suffrage of the church; and when it is done in a wrong cause, for some small trifling matter, or none at all, and not in a case of heresy or immorality, obstinately persisted in; and when it is done from wrong principles, and with wrong ends, as to gratify the pride and passion of some; and not for the good of the person cast out, or to prevent others from falling into the same snare, or for the honour of religion, and the glory of God. The phrase seems to be taken from the Jews, who expressed their excommunication, or putting out of the synagogue, by a casting out; see Joh 9:34.

I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first among them, does not receive us. Therefore, if I come, I will bring to light the works he is doing, gossiping wickedly about us. And not content with that, he not only does not receive the brothers himself, but also forbids those who want to receive them and expels them from the congregation. "I will bring to light the works he is doing." If it is commanded that evil should not be repaid with evil (Rom. 12:17), what is it that he now threatens? Therefore, we say that this command is so that we do not repay evil to him who has sinned only against ourselves: For if it is a sin against us, and it brings an obstacle to faith, it should be referred to such, as Paul did to Elymas who was perverting the ways of the Lord. (Acts 13:10) "gossiping wickedly." That is, throwing insults and cursing.

For this reason, if I come, I will bring up his deeds. That is, by openly reproving, I will bring his works to the knowledge of all. Just like the apostle Paul said: "What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod?"

He acts, talking against us with malicious words. It should be noted that we should not arouse the tongues of detractors by our fault, lest they perish, but we should equally bear those that are incited by their own malice, so that merit may increase for us; sometimes, however, we should also curb them, lest while they disseminate evil about us, they corrupt the hearts of the innocent who could have heard good things. Hence John reproved the tongue of his detractor, lest those who could have listened might not hear his preaching and remain in their wrong ways.

If it is forbidden to repay evil for evil (Rom. 12:17), then how is the present threat of the Apostle to be explained? We answer: the commandment speaks of not repaying evil for evil to the one who sins against us, but when sin against us also causes harm to the faith, then the one committing such sin must be punished, just as Paul also brought evil upon Elymas, who was turning people away from the paths of the Lord (Acts 13:8–11).

The apostle's address to Caius, and his good wishes for his prosperity in body and soul, Jo3 1:1, Jo3 1:2. He commends him for his steadiness in the truth, and his general hospitality, especially to the itinerant evangelists, Jo3 1:3-8. Speaks of the bad conduct of Diotrephes; his abuse of his power in the Church; and his slander of the apostles, Jo3 1:9, Jo3 1:10. Exhorts Caius to avoid his example, and to follow what is good, Jo3 1:11. Commends Demetrius, Jo3 1:12. Excuses himself from writing more fully, and proposes to pay him a visit shortly, Jo3 1:13, Jo3 1:14.

If I come, I will remember - I will show him the authority which, as an apostle of Jesus Christ, I possess. Prating against us - Diotrephes might have been a converted Jew, who was unwilling that the Gentiles should be received into the Church; or a Judaizing Christian, who wished to incorporate the law with the Gospel, and calumniated the apostles who taught otherwise. This haughty and unfeeling man would give no countenance to the converted Gentiles; so far from it, that he would not receive any of them himself, forbade others to do it, and excommunicated those who had been received into the Church by the apostles. This appears to be the meaning of neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the Church. He had the complete dog in the manger principle: he would neither do, nor let do; and when good was done that he did not approve, he endeavored to undo it.

I--emphatical. I personally, for my part. On Gaius or Caius, see my Introduction before Second Epistle. love in the truth-- (Jo2 1:1). "Beloved" is repeated often in this Epistle, indicating strong affection (Jo3 1:1-2, Jo3 1:5, Jo3 1:11).

if I come-- (Jo3 1:14). I will remember--literally, "I will bring to mind" before all by stigmatizing and punishing. prating--with mere silly tattle. neither doth he . . . receive the brethren--with hospitality. "The brethren" are the missionaries on their journey. forbiddeth them that would--receive them. casteth them--those that would receive the brethren, by excommunication from the Church, which his influence, as a leading man (Jo3 1:9) in it, enabled him to do. NEANDER thinks that the missionaries were JEWS by birth, whence it is said in their praise they took nothing from THE GENTILES: in contrast to other Jewish missionaries who abused ministers' right of maintenance elsewhere, as Paul tells us, Co2 11:22; Phi 3:2, Phi 3:5, Phi 3:19. Now in the Gentile churches there existed an ultra-Pauline party of anti-Jewish tendency, the forerunners of Marcion: Diotrephes possibly stood at the head of this party, which fact, as well as this domineering spirit, may account for his hostility to the missionaries, and to the apostle John, who had, by the power of love, tried to harmonize the various elements in the Asiatic churches. At a later period, Marcion, we know, attached himself to Paul alone, and paid no deference to the authority of John.