3 John 1:10

3Jn 1:10. Ἐὰν ἔλθω, if I shall come) 3Jn 1:14.—ὑπομνήσω, I will remind him) A Metonymia of the antecedent for the consequent: that is, I will notice (punish), I will set a mark of censure upon, so that he may feel.—λόγοις πονηροῖς, with malicious words) by which he endeavours to excuse himself.—τοὺς βουλομένους, those that wish) that is, to receive us and them.—ἐκβάλλει, he casts out) a great amount of insolence.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3Jn 1:10 . ἐὰν ἔλθω : the aged Apostle with his failing strength can only “hope” ( cf. 3Jn 1:14 ) to undertake the journey. ὑπομνήσω αὐτοῦ τὰ ἔργα , not “remind him of his works” (contrast the “work” of Gaius in 3Jn 1:5 ), but “bring his works to remembrance,” by reciting them at a meeting of the Church. St. John does not threaten excommunication or any sort of discipline, but simply that he will state the facts and let them speak for themselves. A terrible reckoning, like that of the Day of Judgment ( cf. Rev 20:12 ) to hear a recital of all one’s passionate speeches and inconsiderate actions. Contrast St. Paul’s threats (1Co 4:21 ; 2Co 10:11 ; 2Co 13:1-3 ). St. John deserved to be called “the Apostle of Love”. φλυαρεῖν ( nugari, verschwatsen ), of foolish chattering. Suid.: φλύαρος · φλήναφος καὶ λῆρος καὶ μάταιος λόγος . The chatter of Diotrephes was not only foolish but malevolent ( λόγοις πονηροῖς ). μὴ ἀρκ ., see note on 1Jn 2:4 . οὔτε … καί , cf. Joh 4:11 . κωλύει , ἐκβάλλει , pres. implying not that he actually did it but that he tried to do it. ἐκβάλλει , here not of literal ejection ( cf. Joh 2:15 = Mat 21:12 = Mar 11:15 ) but of excommunication from the fellowship of the congregation.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10.] Notice of the hostility of Diotrephes. I wrote somewhat to the church (the τι does not imply that the thing written was specially important, nor on the other hand does it depreciate; but merely designates indefinitely: cf. Act 23:17, ἔχει γὰρ ἀπαγγεῖλαί τι αὐτῷ, and Luk 7:40, Σίμων, ἔχω σοί τι εἰπεῖν: and Mat 20:20. The contents of the Epistle are not hinted at. The “scripsissem forsitan” of the vulgate (ἔγραψα ἄν, see var. readd.) has arisen from a foolish notion that the Apostle must not be represented as having written any thing which has been lost to us. The ἐκκλησία is apparently the church of which Caius was a member: not as Bengel, that out of which the missionaries of ver. 7 had gone forth): howbeit (ἀλλά after an affirmative sentence is stronger than the mere adversative but: see Kühner, Gr. ii. p. 436) Diotrephes who loveth pre-eminence (ὁ ὑφαρπάζων τὰ πρωτεῖα as the ancient Schol. He appears to have been not, as , “hæresiarcha temporis illius quidam superbus et insolens, malens nova dicendo primatum sibi usurpare scientiæ quam antiquis sanctæ Ecclesiæ, quæ Johannes prædicabat, humiliter auscultare mandatis:” so much is not implied in the words, but only that be was an ambitious man who willed that not the Apostle but himself should rule the church) over them (the members of the church, implied in the word ἐκκλησία. The gen. after verbs of preeminence, as ὅς ἀριστεύεσκε μάχεσθαι Τρώων, Il ζ. 460: καλλιστεύσει πασέων τῶν ἐν Σπάρτῃ γυναικῶν, Herod. vi. 161. See Kühner, ii. p. 197) receiveth us not (does not recognize our authority: here in an improper sense, but in the next verse probably literal: see there. Its more usual sense in Polybius, who uses it frequently, is to admit of, τοῦ καιροῦ οὐκ ἐπιδεχομένου καταμονήν, iii. 79. 12. The ἡμᾶς wants no explanation such as “monita nostra,” “συστατικάς nostras,” or the like: in rejecting the Apostle’s person, he rejected all his influence). On this account, if I should come (see for ἐάν 1Jn 2:28), I will bring to mind (i. e. as Bede, “in omnium notitiam manifestius arguendo producam:” see reff. No αὐτόν is understood: it is not to his mind, but to the minds of all) his works which he doeth (what they were, is explained by the participle following), prating against us (this is the best rendering of φλυαρῶν, which conveys not only the λοιδορῶν, κακολογῶν of Œc., but also that the reproaches were mere tattle, worth nothing, irrelevant: so Eustathius on Il. χ. 361, in Raphel, h. l., τὸ ἐν οὐ δέοντι λόγους προϊέναι φλυεῖν λέγεται κ. φλυαρεῖν. Cf. 1Ti 5:13) with wicked speeches: and not satisfied with (ἀρκεῖσθαι is ordinarily (see reff.) with a dative: the ἐπί, as in χαίρειν ἐπί, and similar expressions, introduces the ground on which the ἀρκεῖσθαι superimponitur) this (more probably plur., as in ver. 4, where the whole matter in question is meant, than as agreeing with the λόγοι πονηροί, which had not been the only things mentioned of him), neither doth he himself receive the brethren (here ἐπιδέχομαι seems best taken in its literal sense, as in Polyb. xxii. 1. 3, ἅπαντας ἐπεδέχετο φιλανθρώπως (if the reading can be depended upon), of entertaining hospitably, see 2Jn 1:10. The ἀδελφοί are probably the same as in ver. 5, the travelling missionaries), and (so καί after οὔτε in reff., and Eur. Iph. Taur. 595 f., εἶ γὰρ οὔτε δυσγενής, καὶ τὰς Μυκήνας οἶσθα. τε is more frequently found, see Kühner, Gramm. ii. p. 441. The occurrence of the construction explains itself. It is found when the negative form of the first member of a series of connected clauses, is not possible or not convenient in the second or any following one. Here it might have been, but not so forcibly expressed, οὔτε τοὺς βουλομένους ἐᾷ) hinders (by forbidding: cf. 1Th 2:16) those that would (receive them), and casts them (those that would receive the brethren: not, as C. F. Fritzsche, Carpzov., al., the travelling brethren themselves) out of the church (manifestly, by excommunication, which owing to his influence among them he had the power to inflict. There is no difficulty, nor any occasion to take the word as pointing at that which Diotrephes was attempting to do or threatening to do, and so as spoken in irony (Huther): the present tense indicates his habit, as ἐπιδέχεται and ποιεῖ above. He was evidently one in high power, and able to forbid, and to punish, the reception of the travelling brethren. See prolegg.).

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 10. 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 endeavoured to undo it.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

10. Wherefore] Or, For this cause: see on 1Jn_3:1.

I will remember] I will direct public attention to the matter, ‘will bear witness of it before the Church’ (3Jn_1:6). It is the word used in Joh_14:26, ‘He shall bring all things to your remembrance.’

his deeds which he doeth] Or, his works which he doeth: see on 2Jn_1:11.

with malicious words] Or, with evil words: it is the same adjective (πονηρός) as is used throughout the First Epistle of ‘the evil one.’ The word for ‘prate’ (φλυαρεῖν) occurs nowhere else in N.T. It is frequent in Aristophanes and Demosthenes, and means literally ‘to talk non-sense.’ Its construction here with an accusative after it is quite exceptional. ‘Prates against us,’ garriens in nos, cannot well be improved: it conveys the idea that the words were not only wicked, but senseless. Comp. ‘And not only idle, but tattlers (φλύαροι) also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not’ (1Ti_5:13). Other renderings are ‘chiding against us’ (Wiclif), ‘jesting on us’ (Tyndale and Cranmer), ‘pratteling against us’ (Genevan), ‘chatting against us’ (Rhemish), plaudert wider uns (Luther).

neither doth he himself receive the brethren] The same word (ἐπιδέχεται) is used here and at the end of 3Jn_1:9. It occurs nowhere else in N.T. but is common in classical Greek. In 3Jn_1:9 the meaning probably is ‘admits not our authority,’ or ‘ignores our letter.’ Here of course it is ‘refuses hospitality to.’ But perhaps ‘closes his doors against’ may be the meaning in both places; ‘us’ being S. John’s friends. By saying ‘us’ rather than ‘me’, the Apostle avoids the appearance of a personal quarrel.

casteth them out of the Church] He excommunicates those who are willing to receive the missionary brethren. The exact meaning of this is uncertain, as we have not sufficient knowledge of the circumstances. The natural meaning is that Diotrephes had sufficient authority or influence in some Christian congregation to exclude from it those who received brethren of whom he did not approve. For the expression comp. Joh_9:34-35.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

10 Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.

Ver. 10. Prating against us] One would wonder what he could prate against St John, and yet he did, and that maliciously. True it is, he did but trifle and play the fool (as the Greek word φλυαρων signifies) in that he prated; but he showed his malice nevertheless. So do the Jesuits, as in many other their practices, so in this, that in their writings against us they confirm that with glorious words and arguments which we stick not at; to make the world believe that we deny all that which they so busily and so bravely prove, and so to make us odious; whereas they leave the main matter in controversy utterly unproven, thinking to carry it away with outfacing and great words. The word signifieth pompose sed nugaciter loqui, to talk big bubbles of words, saith Aretius; who also telleth us that it is a metaphor taken from over-seething pots, that send forth a foam; or (as others will have it) from overcharged stomachs, that must needs belch.

Forbiddeth them that would] Such as Gaius was; that himself only might have the prick and the praise. This is the property of envy, as we see in Saul, in the Pharisees, in Tiberius Caesar, who, tiger-like, laid hold with his teeth on all the excellent spirits of his times. Nero etiam omnium erat aemulus, &c. He forbad Lucan the poet to make verses, only because he could do it very excellently.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Wherefore, if I come - He was evidently expecting soon to make a visit to Gaius, and to the church, 3Jo 1:14.

I will remember his deeds which he doeth - That is, he would punish his arrogance and presumption; would take measures that he should be dealt with in a proper manner. There is no evidence whatever that this is said in a vindictive or revengeful spirit, or that the writer spoke of it merely as a personal matter. From anything that can be shown to the contrary, if it had been a private and personal affair merely, the matter might have been dropped, and never referred to again. But what had been done was public. It pertained to the authority of the apostle, the duty of the church, and the character of the brethren who had been commended to them. If the letter was written, as is supposed by the aged John, and his authority had been utterly rejected by the influence of this one man, then it was proper that that authority should be asserted. If it was the duty of the church to have received these men, who had been thus recommended to them, and it had been prevented from doing what it would otherwise have done, by the influence of one man, then it was proper that the influence of that man should be restrained, and that the church should see that he was not to control it. If the feelings and the character of these brethren had been injured by being rudely thrust out of the church, and held up as unworthy of public confidence, then it was proper that their character should be vindicated, and that the author of the wrong should be dealt with in a suitable manner. No one can show that this was not all that the apostle proposed to do, or that any feelings of private vindictiveness entered into his purpose to remember what Diotrephes had done; and the existence of any such feelings should not be charged on the apostle without proof. There is no more reason to suppose this in his case than there was in the case of Paul, in administering discipline in the church of Corinth, 1Co 5:3-5, or than there is in any instance of administering discipline now.

Prating against us - The word “prate,” (φλυαρέω phluareō,) occurring nowhere else in the New Testament, means to “overflow with talk,” (Greek φλύω phluō, Latin: “fluo,” flow;) to talk much without weight, or to little purpose; to be loquacious; to trifle; or, to use an expression common among us, and which accords well with the Greek, to run on in talk, without connection or sense. The word does not properly imply that there was malignity or ill-feeling in what was said, but that the talk was of an idle, foolish, and unpprofitable character. As John here, however, specifies that there was a bad spirit in the manner in which Diotrephes expressed himself, the real thing which is implied in the use of the word here is, that there were much talk of that kind; that he was addicted to this habit of “running on” against the apostle; and that he was thus constantly undermining his influence, and injuring his character.

With malicious words - Greek, “evil words;” words that were fitted to do injury.

And not content therewith - Not satisfied with venting his private feelings in talk. Some persons seem to be satisfied with merely talking against others, and take no other measures to injure them; but Diotrephes was not. He himself rejected the brethren, and persuaded the church to do the same thing. Bad as evil talking is, and troublesome as a man may be who is always “prating” about matters that do not go according to his mind, yet it would be comparatively well if things always ended with that, and if the loquacious and the dissatisfied never took measures openly to wrong others.

Neither doth he himself receive the brethren - Does not himself treat them as Christian brethren, or with the hospitality which is due to them. He had not done it on the former visit, and John evidently supposed that the same thing would occur again.

And forbiddeth them that would - From this it is clear that there were those in the church who were disposed to receive them in a proper manner; and from anything that appears, the church, as such, would have been inclined to do it, if it had not been for the influence of this one man.

And casteth them out of the church - Compare Luk 6:22. It has been made a question whether the reference here is to the members of the church who were disposed to receive these brethren, or to the brethren themselves. Lucke, Macknight, and some others, suppose that it refers to those in the church who were willing to receive them, and whom Diotrephes had excommunicated on that account. Heumann, Carpzoviius, Rosenmuller, Bloomfield, and others, suppose that it refers to these strangers, and that the meaning is, that Diotrephes would not receive them into the society of Christians, and thus compelled them to go to another place. That this latter is the correct interpretation seems to me to be evident, for it was of the treatment which they had received that the apostle was speaking.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

10. Remember his deeds—Compare the terrible apostolic threats of St. Paul, in 1Co_4:19-21.

Prating—The Greek word implies a certain full flow, or fluency, of contemptuous languages.

Malicious—Not only hostile, but intrinsically evil words.

Casteth… out of the church— He had such a mastery over his own congregation that he was able to excommunicate the apostolic believers, in spite of such men as Demetrius and Gaius in the same or other congregations of the church.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For this cause, if I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth. The apostle is proceeding on the lines prescribed by Christ. He has remonstrated with Diotrephes privately; he has sent messengers to him to speak in his name, and Diotrephes has declined to receive them. There remains one step more, and St. John means to take it. "If he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the Church: and if he refuse to hear the Church also, let him be unto thee as the Gentile oJ ejqnikov, as in verse 7 and the publican". (Mat_18:17) 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 ponhrov 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)

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He prateth against us - Both them and me, thereby endeavouring to excuse himself.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

10. Wherefore, if I come. It may be necessary for him to come. If he does, he will arraign Diotrephes for his deeds. Prating against us. Excusing himself by maligning John. Neither doth he himself receive the brethren. The messengers John sent. He forbiddeth. Seeks to prevent any of the church from hearing or extending hospitality to these messengers. Casting them out of the church. Seeks to have them denied Christian fellowship.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

10. For βουλομένους ([983][984][985] and most Versions) [986] and Thebaic have ἐπιδεχομένους.

[983] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.

[984] 5th century. Brought by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople, from Alexandria, and afterwards presented by him to Charles I. in 1628. In the British Museum. All three Epistles.

[985] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.

[986] 5th century. A palimpsest: the original writing has been partially rubbed out and the works of Ephraem the Syrian have been written over it. In the National Library at Paris. Part of the First and Third Epistles; 1Jn 1:1 to 1Jn 4:2; 3Jn 1:3-14. Of the whole N.T. the only Books entirely missing are 2 John and 2 Thessalonians.

10. διὰ τοῦτο. For this cause. See on 1Jn 3:1.

ὑπομνήσω. ‘I will direct public attention to the matter’; equivalent to ‘bear witness of it before the Church’ (3Jn 1:6). For the construction comp. ὑπομνήσει ὑμᾶς πάντα (Joh 14:26). I will call to remembrance his works (see on 2Jn 1:11).

λόγοις πονηροῖς. With evil words: the connexion with ‘the evil one’ must not be missed either here or in 2Jn 1:11.

φλυαρῶν ἡμᾶς. The verb occurs nowhere else in N.T., and the construction with an accusative is quite exceptional. It is frequent in Aristophanes and Demosthenes, and means literally ‘to talk nonsense.’ Therefore ‘prates against us,’ garriens in nos, cannot well be improved: it conveys the idea that the words were not only wicked, but senseless. Comp. ‘And not only idle, but tattlers (φλύαροι) also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not’ (1Ti 5:13). Other renderings are ‘garringe, or chidinge, in to us’ (Wiclif), ‘chiding against us’ (Purvey), ‘jesting on us’ (Tyndale and Cranmer), ‘pratteling against us’ (Genevan), ‘chatting against us’ (Rhemish), plaudert wider uns (Luther). ‘Prating about us’ may be right: comp. ἀλλάλαις λαλέοντι τεὸν γάμον αἱ κυπάρισσοι (Theocr. XXVII. 58).

The description of the ψευδοπροφήτης in the Shepherd of Hermas (Mand. xi. 12) illustrates this account of Diotrephes: “He exalts himself and wishes to have the chief seat (πρωτοκαθεδρίαν), and forthwith is hasty, and shameless, and talkative.” Comp. 1Pe 5:3.

ἀρκούμενος ἐπὶ τ. The ἐπί is unusual. Both in N.T. and in classical Greek ἀρκεῖσθαι usually has the dative without a preposition: Luk 3:14; 1Ti 6:8; Heb 13:5.

οὔτε … καὶ … The combination οὔτε … τε … is not uncommon in classical Greek, but οὔτε … καὶ … is late. It seems to occur, however, in Eur. I. T. 591 εἶ γὰρ, ὡς ἔοικας, οὔτε δυσγενὴς καὶ τὰς Μυκήνας οἶσθα. Comp. οὔτε ἄντλημα ἔχεις καὶ τὸ φρέαρ ἐστὶν βαθύ (Joh 4:11). Winer, 619.

ἐπιδέχεται. The word occurs nowhere in N.T. but here and 3Jn 1:9, though common enough elsewhere. In 3Jn 1:9 the meaning seems to be ‘admits not our authority,’ or ‘ignores our letter.’ Here of course it is ‘refuses hospitality to.’ But perhaps ‘closes his doors against’ may be the meaning in both places; ‘us’ being S. John’s friends. By saying ‘us’ rather than ‘me,’ the Apostle avoids the appearance of a personal quarrel.

ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλ. ἐκβάλλει. He excommunicates those who are willing to receive the missionary brethren. The exact meaning of this is uncertain, as we have not sufficient knowledge of the circumstances. The natural meaning is that Diotrephes had sufficient authority or influence in some Christian congregation to exclude from it those who received brethren of whom he did not approve. For the expression comp. Joh 9:34-35.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10. διὰ τοῦτο] Because of his refusal to recognize our authority, and the lengths to which he has gone in opposing us in consequence.

ἐὰν ἔλθω] 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 (ἐλπίζω γενέσθαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς). They are equally well explained by the expectation expressed in ver. 14 of this letter. The writer perhaps speaks somewhat less confidently (ἐάν) of his coming than he does of the arrival of false teachers in the Church to which 2 Jn. is addressed (εἴ τις ἔρχεται). But the difference between the two constructions cannot be pressed.

ὑπομνήσω] Cf. Joh 14:26, ὑπομνήσει ὑμᾶς πάντα ἃ εἶπον ὑμῖν ἐγώ. The Elder will recall to them the whole conduct of their leader and show it in its true light.

τὰ ἔργα] Cf. Joh 3:19 ff (ἵνα μὴ ἐλεγχθῇ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ… ἵνα φανερωθῇ αὐτοῦ τὰ ἔργα). The writer is confident that the conduct of Diotrephes will not stand the light of truth, and that the Church will recognize the fact.

λόγοις πονηροῖς κ.τ.λ.] 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.φλυαρῶν] Cf. 1Ti 5:13, οὐ μόνον δὲ ἀργαὶ ἀλλὰ καὶ φλύαροι (uerbosae, vg.) καὶ περίεργοι, λαλοῦσαι τὰ μὴ δέοντα. Oecumenius interprets ἀντὶ τοῦ λοιδορῶν, κακολογῶν. 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.

μὴ ἀρκεσθεὶς ἐπὶ τούτοις] Cf. 1Ti 6:8, τούτοις ἀρκεσθησόμεθα: Heb 13:5, ἀρκούμενοι τοῖς παροῦσιν. The construction with ἐπί is not found elsewhere in the N.T. The nearest parallel to this passage is, perhaps, 2 Mac. 5:15, οὐκ ἀρκεσθεὶς δὲ τούτοις κατετόλμησεν εἰς τὸ… ἱερὸν εἰσελθεῖν.

οὔτε. . καί] For the construction, cf. Joh 4:11, οὔτε ἄντλημα ἔχεις καὶ τὸ φρέαρ ἐστὶν βαθύ.

ἐπιδέχεται τοὺς ἀδελφούς] 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 ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος was an important one at the time, and probably for some time afterwards. Cf. Didache 12:1, πᾶς δὲ ὁ ἐρχόμενοσἐν ὀνόματι Κυρίου δεχθήτω ἔπειτα δὲ δοκιμάσαντες αὐτὸν γνώσεσθε, and the whole chapter, esp. 5, εἰ δʼ οὐ θέλει οὕτω ποιεῖν, χριστέμπορός ἐστιν· προσέχετε ἀπὸ τῶν τοιούτων.

τοὺς βουλομένους] sc. ἐπιδέχεσθαι. 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.ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐκβάλλει] Joh 9:34 f. is rightly quoted in illustration. But the difference in tense should also be noticed (καὶ ἐξέβαλον αὐτὸν ἔξω). 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 τοὺσἀδελφούς the object of ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐκβάλλει, involves a construction which is intolerably harsh. The writer’s love of parenthesis, even if ὁ εἰπών 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?

υπομνησω] ελεγξωO46 (154) | εργα] + mala boh-cod. | πονηροις λογοιςIa δ180 (1319) | ημας] pr. ειςC vg.: υμαςH162 (61) Ia 158 (395) Ib 62 (498) Ic 258 (56) | επι] om. H162 (61) | επιδεχεται] υποδεχεταιIc 208, 174 (307): + uos neque accipit sahw | βουλομενους א A B K L P al. pler. cat. am. fu. cop. syrp txt aeth. Thphyl. Oec.] επιδεχομενους C 5. 7. 27. 29. 66** vg. demid. tol. sah. syrbodl et p mg arm.: + suscipere boh. | εκ—εκβαλλει] εκβαλλει και κωλυει τησεκκλησιας4 | εκ A B C K L P al. plu. Thphyl. Oec.] om. א2. 3. 15. 25. 26. 36. 43. 95*. 98. 99. 100 bscr hscr.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Prating [φλυαρων] . From fluw to bubble up or boil over. Hence of talk which is both fluent and empty. Compare the kindred adjective fluaroi tattlers, 1Ti 5:13.

Them that would. Those who were disposed to receive the strangers. Casteth them out. By excommunication, which, through his influence, he had power to bring about.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

10, διὰ τοῦτο... St John implies that his personal presence will be decisive. By using the form ἐὰν ἔλθω there is no doubt thrown on the main fact of his coming (x. 14). Comp. 1 John ii. 28.

ὑπομν. aur. τ. €.] commoneam ejus opera V., I will call to remembrance his works, 1 will bring them to his notice and to the notice of others. ὋὙπομιμνήσκειν is used with the acc. of the person (2 Pet. i. 12) and of the thing (2 Tim. ii. 14), and of both (John xiv. 26).

A. πον. Ha. ἡ.] verbis malignis garriens in nos V., prating of us with

Brooke Foss Westcott (1825–1901), The Epistle to the Hebrews (1889) and The Epistles of St John (1883) — public domain (pre-1929). Text recovered from Internet Archive / Google Books OCR scans. Westcott’s Gospel of John commentary is not included (its OCR lost the chapter running-heads required for reliable verse-keying). Some Greek quoted in the Hebrews volume is imperfectly rendered by the OCR.