3 John 1:5

3Jn_1:5-6

Thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers.

Allegiance to the faith

In these few words the sum and substance of the Christian life are placed before us. They convey to us that he who was addressed was simply loyal to truth and loyal to duty, whilst this, the loyalty of his being, flowed forth in act from a fountain of the purest love. These, in the Christian, cannot be disjoined. The mere philosopher may present us with a state of loyalty to truth, as truth is found in the regions of science. If he descends into the bowels of the earth, and tries to read the marvellous structure of mens temporal habitation, he is supposed to be loyal to fact or to truth as he finds it. Or, if his business lies on the surface of the world, and he questions the trees of the forests, the flowers of the field, or the grass of the earth, he ever holds his intellect in allegiance, and utters the thing as it is. Or, if rising from the earth, and traversing the starry firmament, he tries to measure, and weigh, and count the number of the stars, he stands the minister of truth, the interpreter of the works and ways of the Omnipotent Creator. All this, so far as it is an attitude of human reason, is right and well. But all this, however effective in giving strength and enlargement to mans intellect, does not achieve the full loyalty to truth commended in the sacred writings. The truth therein revealed contains the knowledge of Jesus, the Saviour of the world. It displays to the human understanding the only pathway leading out of sin into piety, out of misery into happiness, out of death into life. But whilst, with childlike simplicity, the message of the Divine love is to be received into the understanding, with the same simplicity the law of the Divine love is to be received into the heart. The conscience of the genuine Christian is to be ruled by the commandments of Jesus. Our Lord is King in Zion. Alone He legislates, and alone demands the indefeasible allegiance of the conscience of man. It is not pretended that men do not know in any thing right from wrong till they have opened the Bible. Men in all ages, in all lands, have gone into the market of the world attempting to maintain a standard of truth. To this lawgiver, legislating for the conscience and the heart, the disciple of Jesus becomes immediately and uninterruptedly liege. Loyalty to Him who spake as never man spake arises out of confidence in Him who died as never man died. Fidelity to Jesus as our rightful Lord is essentially interwoven with fidelity to Jesus as the Lord our righteousness. And this was the state of Gaius: a Christian doing whatever he did to the brethren, and to strangers, in the faith that so God had taught him, and under the conviction of his conscience that so his Lord had commanded. But this is not all; there is another element still, the ever-living, ever-moving impulse that urges onward the whole. It is love--the end of the commandment--out of a pure heart, a good conscience, and faith unfeigned. Over and above the marvellous signature of the kindness and love of God our Saviour written in the blood of the Cross, the Spirit of love proceeding from the Father and the Son comes to enkindle this Divine flame in every follower of Jesus. In every Christian He is the Spirit of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. No religion found among men, and invented by men, ever pretends to the indwelling of this infinite agent--the moral renovator, of the soul. His presence in man is the presence of holy love. In this we behold the living power that moves the heart of the kingdom of God; the life that reanimates every soul loyal to the Messiah, and binds for ever, beneath the perfect bond, the subjects of the eternal King. Such, then, are the three essential elements which form the Christian life and the Christian character the spirit of allegiance to whatever the Word of God reveals; the spirit of allegiance to whatever the Word of God commands; and lastly, the spirit of love animating and urging onward the whole. What Divine simplicity. (J. Paterson, D. D.)

Bring forward on their Journey after a godly sort.

Noble deeds

I. The standard of noble deeds, worthily of God.

1. Gaius was animated by the purest motive. To be charitable is praiseworthy, but to serve God is better. He received not the glory of men.

2. He did the best he could. The question was not whether the deed was worthy of Gaius, but whether it would be acceptable of God.

3. He had the best end in view. It was the glory of God. He treated well the servants for the Masters sake.

II. The inspiration of noble deeds, Who bare witness to thy love before the Church.

1. Deeds worthy to be rehearsed. Christians need not indulge in useless conversation while so much valuable history waits to be told.

2. Deeds worthy of imitation. The life of Gaius may fail us in some particulars; if so, look at the life of Jesus. (The Weekly Pulpit.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3Jn 1:5-8. Beloved, thou doest faithfully — Uprightly and sincerely; or, as πιστον ποιεις is more accurately rendered, thou dost a faithful thing; or a thing becoming a faithful person, or one who is a real believer; whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers — To thy fellow- Christians, known to thee, and to those with whom thou hast had no acquaintance. Who have born witness of thy charity before the church — The congregation with whom I now reside; whom — Which brethren or Christian strangers; if thou bring forward on their journey — Supplied with what is needful; after a godly sort — In a manner worthy of God, or from a principle of divine love, and correspondent to the relation in which you and they stand to him; thou shalt do well — How tenderly does the apostle enjoin this! Because that for his name’s sake — Out of zeal for his honour and interest; they went forth — To preach the gospel, abandoning their habitations, possessions, and callings; taking nothing of the Gentiles — Among whom they laboured, toward their support, that they might take off all suspicion of their being influenced by mercenary motives. We, therefore — Who do not undertake expensive journeys for the sake of preaching the gospel, and who have any habitation of our own; ought to receive such — Hospitably and respectfully; that — If Divine Providence do not give us opportunities of laying ourselves out, as they do, in the exercise of the ministerial office; we might — Though in a lower degree; be fellow-helpers to the truth — Which they preach, and may be entitled, through divine grace, to a share in their reward.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES

3Jn_1:5. Faithfully.—Not impulsively, not selfishly, but with a due sense of duty and obligation, and with an earnest care to do well. Perhaps the precise meaning is “Christianly,” in a manner true to thy Christian profession and character. R.V. “Thou doest a faithful work in whatsoever thou doest.” Westcott: “Thou makest sure whatsoever thou workest,” i.e. “Such an act will not be lost, will not fail of its due issue and reward.” To strangers.—Precisely, “to the brethren, and that strangers.” The point is, that Gaius had been specially trustful and kind in dealing with Christian brethren who, in their journeyings, had visited the Church with which he was connected. These brethren were often “strangers,” personally unknown; and it was only too easy to be suspicious of their integrity, and so to neglect them. “The duty of entertaining Christians on their travels was of peculiar importance in early times:

(1) from the length of time which travelling required;

(2) from the poverty of the Christians;

(3) from the kind of society they would meet in public inns. The duty is enforced in Rom_12:13; 1Ti_3:2; Tit_1:8; Heb_13:2; 1Pe_4:9” (Sinclair).

3Jn_1:6. Charity.—Distinguished from love as a feeling or sentiment. Charity is Christian love (love for Christ’s sake), finding expression in deeds of kindly service. In this sense of the term it is well to retain the word “charity” used in the A.V. of the New Testament. No intelligent reader confuses “charity” with “almsgiving.” Before the Church.—That Church with which the apostle John was, at the time, closely associated. It is suggested that certain persons had been sent from St. John’s Church on some Christian mission to other Churches. On their journey they had visited the Church of which Gaius was a member. They were strangers, and some regarded them with suspicion, but Gaius had not only trusted them, and given them hospitality, but had interested himself in their mission, and furthered them in their plans. Bring forward.—This implies that there was yet some service to the missionaries which Gaius could render.

3Jn_1:7. His name’s sake.—The more precise rendering is, “for the sake of the name.’ Compare Act_5:41. Taking nothing of the Gentiles.—Not seeking help from them, but fully trusting the Christian love of the Christian brethren.

3Jn_1:9. Wrote unto the Church.—Evidently to introduce the coming missionaries, and to prepare the way for them. Read, “I wrote somewhat,” i.e. a short letter. It was evidently a brief request that kindness might be shown to the visitors. Diotrephes.—The name can be of no Christian significance, for it only means, “love-nourished.” He was a prominent member of the Church, and probably a man of wealth and influence. We need not think he was an insincere or bad man. He was undisciplined in character, and his natural dispositions were unlovely. The root of evil was probably jealousy of the confidential relations of Gaius and St. John. That spirit would lead him to oppose whatever Gaius wished. Pre-eminence.—Note how opposed to the spirit of Christ, who was among us as “He that serveth,” and to the teachings of Christ, “If any among you wishes to be chief, let him be your minister.” The desire for pre-eminence in a Christian community is the fruitful occasion of trouble. He who wants pre-eminence is likely to be unscrupulous in his methods of striving for it. Receiveth us not.—Will not recognise our authority, or give our wishes due consideration.

3Jn_1:10. Prating against us.—Painful reports of what had been said and done in the Christian assemblies had reached St. John, and the supreme mischief was that a party bad been formed which gathered round the masterful Diotrephes. He had evidently acted in a very unreasonable and violent way. He actually went so far as not only to refuse hospitality to the missionaries, but also to eject from the local congregation those who were willing to entertain them.

3Jn_1:11. That which is evil.—Notice the Christian carefulness which avoids saying, “him who is evil.” Possibly there was some danger of Gaius yielding for the sake of peace. St. John reminds him that if a thing is manifestly wrong from the Christian standpoint, he must stand against it, whatever may be the cost. He must not give way from any good-natured pliability. Good is of God.—A familiar Johannine teaching. See 1Jn_2:16; 1Jn_2:29; 1Jn_3:8-9; 1Jn_4:4; 1Jn_4:6-7. Not seen God.—1Jn_3:6.

3Jn_1:12. Demetrius.—Either the principal man of the missionaries, whose genuineness Diotrephes refused to recognise, or the person sent to Gaius with this letter. The former is the better suggestion. It is then a strong assurance of the trustworthiness of Demetrius, so that Gaius might confidently persist in his kindly treatment of him and his fellow-messengers. There is no good reason for identifying the person with the Demetrius of Act_19:24. Of the truth itself.—Or, “of the spirit of truth.” It may, however, mean, “judged by the Christian standard.” For a similar double witness, see Joh_15:26-27. Record.—Or, “testimony.”

3Jn_1:14. Our friends.—Precisely, “the friends.”

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—3Jn_1:5-14

Sanctified and Unsanctified Natural Dispositions.—There are three men introduced by name to us in this epistle. They are in many things very unlike each other. They are alike in this—that in each case the new Christian life has come into a natural disposition, proposing to alter, or strengthen, or tone that natural disposition as need may be. To use an illustration: Three very different branches, each with its own capabilities, strength, or weakness, or bias, have been grafted into the same living tree. The life of the tree flows freely into each branch, but it has to deal with, it has to be affected by, the condition and bias of each grafted branch, and the fruitage of each branch is found to differ. The same life in each, differing results according to the peculiarities of each. Gaius, Diotrephes, and Demetrius have the life in Christ, but one of them has a natural disposition which even that new life cannot easily tone aright, or cannot tone save with the help of long years of severest discipline.

I. Gaius had a naturally hospitable disposition.—The grace of God could fit well to that—could raise the tone of it, dignify it as the expression of high and holy principles, and sanctify the man through the new forms in which he found exercise for it.

II. Diotrephes had a naturally masterful disposition.—He would be nowhere if he could not be first. He allowed no resistance of his will. His spirit has been at once described and satirised, when it is said of such men, “They would rather reign in hell than serve in heaven.” Men with such dispositions can be Christians; but in them the Christian spirit and life have a long and fearful struggle ere the self-will is brought into subjection. And they make heaps of misery before the good work is accomplished in them.

III. Demetrius had a naturally amiable disposition.—There was no one unusual virtue, as in the case of Gaius, but a generally amiable tone and character. He was a gentleman. And it is in such natures that the new life has the freest, fullest sphere for its highest and noblest work.

SUGGESTIVE NOTES AND SERMON SKETCHES

3Jn_1:7. For the Name’s Sake.—In all the older manuscripts the phrase is, “For the Name’s sake.” There is no need to put the personal pronoun, or the proper name. There is but one Name known among men, for the sake of which, and to tell the virtue and power of which, men will leave their homes, and wander up and down among the countries and through the cities, taking cheerfully whatever fortunes may come. The men spoken of were evidently Jewish believers, who went out among the Gentiles to tell the glad news. These men were very thankful for any hospitality they might receive from Christian motives, and the well-beloved Gaius was famous for his kindness to the saints. St. John bids him, and those with him, still welcome the stranger in the Name of the Master whom he serves, and for whose Name’s sake alone he came to them.

I. For the Name’s sake is the availing plea in acceptable prayer.—Prayer is not the rising up of the intellectual soul of man to Divinity. That is merely speculative thought, tinged, it may be, with devoutness, but lacking the simplicity, the earnestness, the energy, of real prayer. Real prayer is prayer in the name of Christ. That means that God has revealed Himself in Christ. The name is the character: the name of God is the character of God as manifested among men, as displayed in human history. To pray in the name of Christ is to recognise God in Him, in His whole personality, in His whole history, in what He has done and suffered on our behalf.

II. For the Name’s sake is also, in a pre-eminent degree, the spring and motive-power of holy obedience.—This is the meaning of the text in its own connection. These men went forth, these first missionaries, in a spirit of self-consecration that asked no questions, that fixed no limits, that reserved no retreat; they went forth to tell the world the news. And they lived upon the news they told. The gospel was meat and drink to them, and clothing, and house, and home. “Taking nothing of the Gentiles.” The gospel would be benefited by their self-denial—that settled the question in a moment. “Nothing, nothing from you. If you believe the message, if you feel its constraining force, and yield yourselves to Christ, and live through Him to God, then open your door, and spread your table, and light your lamp of welcome, and we will come in. But so long as you are only listeners—undeclared and undecided—nothing.” And this was no transient impulse. The whole secret of the loyalty, endurance, unselfishness, of the Christian witnesses and martyrs, lay in this—“For the Name’s sake.” What essentially is this Christian service? It means the consecration of the redeemed self in wholeness to the glory of Christ, and to the service of our fellow-men under Him. We say from the heart, “For the Name’s sake,” and then all is easy. The love of Christ has this perfectly unique peculiarity—that it is the love of God and the love of man in one; and when, “for the Name’s sake,” we give ourselves to God, and live to God, then we are swayed by the all-comprehending love. Of what importance, then, must it be to a Christian to be full of love—full of the love of Christ to him, shed abroad by the Holy Ghost—full of quick-answering love to Christ—full of the power of “the Name”!—A. Raleigh, D.D.

For the Sake of the Name.—The R.V. gives the true force of these words by omitting the “His,” and reading merely, “for the sake of the Name.” There is no need to say whose name. There is only one which could evoke the heroism and self-sacrifice of which the apostle is speaking. The expression, however, is a remarkable one. The Name seems almost, as it were, to be personified.

I. The pre-eminence implied in the Name.—The name means substantially the same thing as the Person of Jesus. The distinction between “the Name” and “the Person” is simply that the former puts more stress on the qualities and characteristics as known to us. Thus “the Name” means the whole Christ as we know Him, or as we may know Him, from the book, in the dignity of His Messiahship, in the mystery of His Divinity, in the sweetness of His life, in the depth of His words, in the gentleness of His heart, in the patience and propitiation of His sacrifice, in the might of His resurrection, in the glory of His ascension, in the energy of His present life and reigning work for us at the right hand of God. All these, the central facts of the gospel, are gathered together into that expression, the Name, which is the summing up in one mighty word, so to speak, which it is not possible for a man to utter except in fragments, of all that Jesus Christ is in Himself, and of all that He is and does for us. It is but a picturesque and condensed way of saying that Jesus Christ, in the depth of His nature and the width of His work, stands alone, and is the single, because the all-sufficient, Object of love, and trust, and obedience. There is no need for a forest of little pillars—as, in some great chapter-house,—one central shaft, graceful as strong, bears the groined roof, and makes all other supports unnecessary and impertinent. There is one Name, and one alone, because in the depths of that wondrous nature, in the circumference of that mighty work, there is all that a human heart, or that all human hearts, can need for peace, for nobleness, for holiness, for the satisfaction of all desires, for the direction of efforts, for the stability of its being. The Name stands alone, and it will be the only Name that, at last, shall blaze upon the page of the world’s history when the ages are ended, and the chronicles of earth, with the brief “immortality” which they gave to other names of illustrious men, are mouldered into dust. “The Name is above every name,” and will outlast them all, for it is the all-sufficient and encyclopædical embodiment of everything that a single heart or the whole race can require, desire, conceive, or attain. So then, brethren, the uniqueness and solitariness of the Name demand an equal and corresponding exclusiveness of devotion and trust in us. “Hear, O Israel! The Lord thy God is one Lord. Therefore thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind.” And, in like manner, we may argue—There is one Christ, and there is none other but He. Therefore all the current of my being is to set to Him, and on Him alone am I to repose my undivided weight, casting all my cares and putting all my trust only on Him. Lean on none other. You cannot lean too heavily on that strong arm. Love none other except in Him; for His heart is wide enough, and deep enough, for all mankind. Obey none other, for only His voice has the right to command. And lifting up our eyes, let us see “no man any more save Jesus only”—the Name that stands alone! Involved in this, but worthy of briefly putting separately, is this other thought—that pre-eminent and exclusive mention of the Name carries with it, in fair inference, the declaration of His Divine nature. It seems to me that we have here a clear case in which the Old Testament usage is transferred to Jesus Christ, only, instead of the Name being Jehovah, it is Jesus. It seems to me impossible that a man saturated as this apostle was with Old Testament teaching, and familiar as he was with the usage which runs through it as to the sanctity of “the Name of the Lord,” should have used such language as this of my text unless he had felt, as he has told us himself, that “the Word was God.” And the very incidental character of the allusion gives it the more force as a witness to the commonplaceness which the thought of the Divinity of Jesus Christ had assumed to the consciousness of the Christian Church.

II. The power of the Name to sway the life.—The preposition seems to me to cover both the ground of, “on account of,” or “by reason of,” and “on behalf of.” Taking the word in the former of these two senses, note how this phrase, “for the sake of the Name,” carries with it this principle—that in that Name lie all the forces that are needed for the guidance and the impulses of life. In Him, in the whole fulness of His being, in the wonders of the story of His character and historical manifestation, there lies all guidance for men. He is the pattern of their conduct. He is the companion for us in our sorrow. He is the quickener for us in all our tasks. And to set Him before us as our pattern, and to walk in the paths that He dictates, is to attain to perfection. Whosoever makes “for the sake of the Name” the motto of his life shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. And not only is there guidance, but there is impulse, and that is better than guidance. For what men most of all want is a power that shall help or make them do the things that they see plainly enough to be right. Where is there such a force to quicken, to ennoble, to lead men to higher selves than their dead past selves, as lies in the grand sweep of that historical manifestation which we understand by the Name of Jesus? There is nothing else that will go so deep down into the heart, and unseal the fountains of power and obedience, as that Name. Our whole life ought to be filled with His Name. You can write it anywhere. It does not need a gold plate to carve His Name upon. It does not need to be set in jewels and diamonds. The poorest scrap of brown paper, and the bluntest little bit of pencil, and the shakiest hand, will do to write the name of Christ; and all life, the trivialities as well as the crises, may be flashing and bright with the sacred syllables. Mohammedans decorate their palaces and mosques with no pictures, but with the name of Allah, in gilded arabesques. Everywhere, on walls and roof, and windows and cornices, and pillars and furniture, the name is written. There is no such decoration for a life as that Christ’s Name should be stamped thereon.

III. The service that even we can do to the Name.—That, as I said, is the direct idea of the apostle here. He is speaking about a very small matter. There were some anonymous Christian people who had gone out on a little missionary tour, and in the course of it, penniless and homeless, they had come to a city the name of which we do not know, and had been taken in and kindly entertained by a Christian brother, whose name has been preserved to us in this one letter. And, says John, these humble men went out “on behalf of the Name”—to do something to further it, to advantage it! Jesus Christ, the bearer of the Name, was in some sense helped and benefited, if I may use the word, by the work of these lowly and unknown brethren. Now there are one or two other instances in the New Testament where this same idea of the benefit accruing to the Name of Jesus from His servants on earth is stated, and I just point to them in a sentence, in order that you may have all the evidence before you. There is the passage to which I have already referred, recording the disciples’ joy that they were “accounted worthy to suffer shame on behalf of the Name.” There are the words of Christ Himself in reference to Paul at his conversion, “I will show him how great things he must suffer for My Name’s sake.” There is the Church’s eulogium on Barnabas and Paul, as “men that have hazarded their lives for the Name of our Lord Jesus.” There is Paul’s declaration that he is “ready, not only to be bound, but to die, on behalf of the Name of the Lord Jesus.” And in the introduction of the epistle to the Romans he connects his apostleship with the benefit that thereby accrued to the Name of Christ. If we put all these together, they just come to this—that, wonderful as it is, and unworthy as we are to take that great Name upon our lips, yet, in God’s infinite mercy and Christ’s fraternal and imperial love, He has appointed that His Name should be furthered by the sufferings, the service, the life, and the death of His followers. “He was extolled with my tongue,” says the psalmist, in a rapture of wonder that any words of his could exalt God’s Name. So to you Christians is committed the charge of magnifying the Name of Jesus Christ. You can do it by your lives, and you can do it by your words, and you are sent to do both. We can “adorn the doctrine”—paint the lily and gild the refined gold, and make men think more highly of our Lord by our example of faithfulness and obedience. We can do it by our definite proclamation of His Name, which is laid upon us all to do, and for which facilities of varying degrees are granted. The inconsistencies of the professing followers of Christ are the strongest barriers to the world’s belief in the glory of His Name. The Church, as it is, is the hindrance rather than the help to the world’s becoming a Church. If from us sounded out the Name, and over all that we did it was written blazing, conspicuous, the world would look and listen, and men would believe that there was something in the gospel. If you are a Christian professor, either Christ is glorified or put to shame in you, His saint, and either it is true of you that you do all things in the Name of the Lord Jesus and so glorify His Name, or that through you the Name of Christ is “blasphemed among the nations.” Choose which of the two it shall be!—A. Maclaren, D.D.

3Jn_1:9-10. Diotrephes.—The vain, irritable, and loquacious Diotrephes, whose religion seems to have been quite compatible with a slippery morality. What exactly it was at which Diotrephes took offence, whether in the letter of St. John or in the conduct of Demetrius, we are not told; but it is not difficult to offend a man who has an undue sense of his own importance, and whose self-love may be set on fire by any match, however innocently it may be struck. The offence was some wound to his love of pre-eminence, his determination to stand first, and to exact a homage he did not deserve. Possibly Gaius had “received” Demetrius without consulting Diotrephes, or even after he had declined to receive him. Whatever the prick which his vanity had received, the character of the man comes out in his wholly disproportionate and extravagant resentment of the offence. In his resentment he sets himself against men far wiser and better than himself; he imperils the peace of the Church; he diminishes its numbers and strength. His wounded vanity landed him, as it often does land men, in the most bitter animosity and intolerance. He must have won over a majority of his fellow-members to his side. And he must have taken a by-path to his end. He may long have cherished a factious spirit in the inferior members of the Church, the less wise and less good, by opposing whatever Gaius and his friends proposed, and finding plausible reasons for opposing them. And, indeed, a man of inferior gifts and of a spirit less informed by the grace of Christ, who will stand first, will put himself forward and attempt to rule a free Christian congregation, must take this course. He must play on the ignorance, and even on the piety, of those who follow him,—must affect a superior wisdom, or a superior orthodoxy, or a superior devotion to the claims of its poorer and less-instructed members; must, in short, wield the common weapons of that loud-mouthed, irrepressible, and unsavoury creature, the religious demagogue. He cannot suffer learning, wisdom, godliness, experience, to exert their natural and beneficent influence, but must at all risks counterwork that influence, and suggest plausible reasons for not yielding to it. How else can he win, and maintain, a pre-eminence he does not deserve, which, in his calmer moments, he may even know that he does not deserve? There is nothing in the epistle to suggest that Diotrephes held unsound doctrinal views, or that he fell into what are called gross and open sins. All that he is blamed for is the conceit and self-assurance which rendered him impatient of rivalry or resistance, and set him on seeking power rather than usefulness. How did Diotrephes induce his fellow-members to follow his lead, since they must, most of them at least, have been good men, who were not likely to excommunicate their fellows either for an excess of charity, or for wounding his self-conceit? St. John says, “He receiveth not us … prating against us with wicked [or malicious] words.” No doubt he questioned the authority of St. John in an indirect way. He may have pitted Paul against John, contrasting their teachings, and unduly exalting Paul. We are told two things about Diotrephes. We are told not only that he loved to have the pre-eminence, but also that he was cursed with a voluble tongue, that he would “still be speaking”: for how often does a fluent tongue lead a man whither, in his reasonable moods, he would not go, and betray him into positions which he would not willingly have assumed? And if the itch of speaking is apt to lead on to the prating of idle, and even of malicious, words, the lust of power commonly leads to an abuse of power. No punishment is more unwelcome to such an one than that with which St. John threatened Diotrephes: “I will put him in mind of his words and his works”—bring him to book for them, in his own presence and in that of the Church. Such men dislike nothing so much as being compelled to face their own whispers, and to see how they sound in honest and impartial ears, or even in their own ears, now that their excitement and irritation have subsided. Diotrephes, then, was a man who was not necessarily or wholly bad—a man who may have had many good qualities, and have done some service to the Church; but his good qualities were blended with, and their good effects vitiated by, an exorbitant self-conceit and loquacity. So vain, so bent on influence and supremacy, as to be capable of the most cruel intolerance in asserting his supremacy; so talkative as to be capable of slipping into malicious and wicked words rather than hold his tongue or let the Church defer to other guidance than his own,—he offers a much-needed warning to many a man of “spotless respectability and worrying temper, of pious principles and worldly aims,” of good intentions but a too voluble tongue, who, because he thinks more highly of himself than be ought to think, flatters himself that he is serving the Church when he is only pandering to his self-importance and self-conceit, and is cruelly injuring the Church he professes to love. Let, then, your religion show itself in deeds rather than in words, in a life conformed by the grace of Christ to the will of God, not in loud professions and loquacious speeches, nor in an intolerant temper, and your readiness to sit in judgment on your brethren, and to pass sharp and pungent verdicts upon them.—S. Cox, D.D.

Prating for Pre-eminence.—The verb φιλοπρωτεύειν occurs in Polybius in the sense of to domineer, and Plutarch is cited for the equivalent phrase πάντα πρωτεύειν βουλόμενος. The race of domineering praters is not likely to die out. In all times it has flourished and in all climes. Many prate themselves into pre-eminence with malicious words or otherwise, by dint of pushing without scruple, of prosing without mercy, of self-assertion and self-glorification, and all for love of having pre-eminence, with the profits, real or reputed, thereunto attached, or thence accruing. Some men, as Emerson says, love only to talk where they are masters; they like to go to school-girls or to boys, or into shops where the sauntering people gladly lend an ear to any one. They go rarely to their equals: “listen badly, or do not listen to the comment or the thought by which the company strive to repay them; rather, as soon as their own speech is done, they take their hats.” Swift’s readers could supply the name of the person indicated in that paragraph of his essay on conversation, where he professes to know a man of wit who is never easy but where he can be allowed to dictate and preside, who expects neither to be informed nor entertained, but to display his own talents, whose business is to be good company and not good conversation, and who therefore chooses to frequent those only who are content to listen, and profess themselves his admirers—witlings and suckling Templars, who every sentence raise, and wonder with a foolish face of praise. Dr. Moore’s analysis of the self-conceit of Zeluco includes this characteristic—that, detesting all whom he suspected of having sufficient penetration to see into his real character, he could support the company of those only upon whose understandings he imagined he imposed by giving them a much better idea of his character than it deserved. “This accounts for his constant preference for ignorant society”—a preference tending to the same result as Gay sets forth in the prelude to one of his fables:—

“How fond are men of rule and place,

Who court it from the mean and base!

These cannot bear an equal nigh,

But from superior merit fly.

They love the cellar’s vulgar joke,

And lose their hours in ale and smoke;

There o’er some petty club preside,

So poor, so paltry, is their pride;

Nay, e’en with fools whole nights will sit,

In hopes to be supreme in wit.”

The man of strong intellect and firm will is apt, as Professor Spalding says, to degenerate into dogmatism, and reasons with his fellow-men in the same spirit in which the Jews built the second Temple, where every man worked with one hand and with the other hand held a weapon. What insolent familiar, asks Lamb in his notes on the old Benchers of the Inner Temple, durst have mated Thomas Coventry?—whose person was a quadrate, his step massy and elephantine, his face square as the lion’s, his gait peremptory and path-keeping, indivertible from his way as a moving column, the scarecrow of his inferiors, the brow-beater of equals and superiors. But who does not love to rule, be it over a genius or a dolt?—Francis Jacox.

3Jn_1:12. Demetrius.—This epistle was probably written from Ephesus, toward the close of St. John’s long life and ministry, and addressed to one of the neighbouring Churches of Asia Minor, which St. Paul had founded some thirty or forty years before. Obviously there was a good deal of independence in the Churches when one Church in a province could refuse communion with men who were commended to them by another Church, could excommunicate those who did commune with them, and an unknown Diotrephes could not only set himself, but persuade the majority of his fellowmembers to set themselves, against the request and command of one of the apostles who had seen the Lord, and he the disciple whom Jesus had loved above the rest. But if the Churches had grown in independence, they had not declined in missionary zeal. The Churches under the charge of St. John were sending out evangelists, such as Demetrius, to the Gentiles. The impression which the epistle leaves on our minds is that the members of the primitive and apostolic Church were not, as they have sometimes been drawn, saints who lived together in an unbroken charity and peace, “too good for human nature’s daily use,” but men and women of like passions with ourselves; with much that was good in them, but also with not a little that came of evil; capable of heroic self-sacrifice, but also capable of sinking into selfish ambitions, and envies, and strifes—of falling, in short, into the very errors and faults of which we find some lingering traits even in the Church life of to-day, when we ought to be so much wiser and better than they. Demetrius and his fellows had been called to the evangelic office, and had devoted themselves to preaching the gospel to the Gentiles. St. John knew them, loved them, approved them, gave them letters of commendation to the Churches of Asia Minor, and, among others, to the Church of which both Gaius and Diotrephes were members. Diotrephes, evidently a man of some mark and gifts, declined to have anything to do with them: perhaps because Demetrius did not come first to him, or did not make much of and defer to him; perhaps because he preferred St. Paul’s doctrinal and argumentative method of teaching, and his demand for faith, to St. John’s Divine and deep simplicity, and his eternal insistence on charity, or love. In any case he did not like Demetrius, did not take to him; and doubtless he soon found or imagined abundant reasons for his dislike. Having formed and uttered his hasty opinion, Diotrephes was not the man to draw back from it. Nor was he content to keep it to himself, to hold it alone. He must impose it on the Church. When others would have “received” the evangelists, he forbad them. If they paid no heed to his prohibition, he got them “cast out” of the Church—the motto of this lover of pre-eminence being, apparently, “Better to reign in a small Church than to serve in a large one.” Undeterred by his influence and threats, the hospitable Gaius had welcomed the repulsed and disheartened evangelists to his home, and furthered them in their good work. Whether he also was excommunicated by Diotrephes, or whether he was too wealthy and powerful a man to be attacked, we are not told. But, at all risks, he discharged his duty, having, I suppose, an affectionate reverence for St. John which made the displeasure of a Diotrephes sit lightly upon him. Demetrius was very grateful to him; and when he returned to Ephesus, reported the fidelity of Gaius both to the apostle, and to the Church of which John was pastor or bishop. And now the apostle sends back Demetrius, and writes to Gaius, commending and encouraging him, and promising him a speedy visit, in the course of which he will depose Diotrephes from his pride of place, make him eat his “wicked words,” and restore those whom he had cast out. Demetrius was an evangelist, a travelling evangelist, or missionary. He had devoted himself to the service of the Gentiles (3Jn_1:7), and he was probably also a prophet. But whatever his gifts, and whether few or many, there can be no doubt of the self-sacrificing and disinterested spirit in which be used them. Simply to travel was dangerous in those days, since every stranger was then held to be an enemy. But to go into the schools, market-places, and sanctuaries of strange cities, in order to teach a strange religion, was very like courting death. But Demetrius did not shrink. He would “take nothing of the Gentiles.” Like St. Paul, he knew well enough that, if he seemed to make anything by his message, the sharp, suspicious traders of the Asian harbours and markets would close their minds and hearts, as well as their purses, against him. Hence he would take nothing from them; no, not even if it was offered him, lest he should be placing a stone of stumbling in the way of any whose consciences had been touched. If we ask for the motive which inspired this noble and self-sacrificing devotion to the spiritual welfare of men, we are told that it was simply “for the sake of the Name” that Demetrius devoted himself to the service of the Gentiles. The “way” stood for the “way of Christ,” or the Christian way of thought and life. And, in like manner, “the Name” was the Name of the great Saviour of men, and stood for all that was known of Him, all that was summed up in Him. What moved Demetrius and his companions to their great and perilous work was the love they bore to the Name of Jesus Christ their Lord, and the Lord and Saviour of all men. What the “Name” really covers is that Jesus Christ was the Saviour whom God had promised and anointed, and that God was in Him, reconciling the world unto Himself. Demetrius won for himself a threefold testimony:

1. He won the witness of all—the witness of all good men, of all who were capable of appreciating goodness.

2. He won the testimony of the truth itself. He embodied the truth in deeds of love and self-sacrifice of which he would have been incapable but for the truth which animated and sustained him. The truth itself speaks through such a man, and bears witness to him.

3. St. John adds his own testimony: “we also bear witness.” How it nerves a man’s courage, and sustains his devotion, if some great master, or apostle, openly supports him, saying, “I love him; I trust him: receive him as you would receive me”!—S. Cox, D.D.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

1:5-8 John now encourages Gaius to continue supporting the traveling teachers whom John had sent out (1:3).

1:5 Gaius provided hospitality for the traveling teachers (literally the brothers) sent by John from church to church to affirm the apostles’ teaching about Christ (1:7-8). By doing this, Gaius showed that he had received the truth from the apostles and that he was thus faithful to God.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

3Jn 1:5. Πιστὸν ποιεῖς, thou doest faithfully) thou doest something, which I readily promised myself and the brethren from you. Thus whatever harmonises.—ἐργάσῃ, thou shalt do) in the labour of love.—καὶ) and, that which is of the greatest consequence, to strangers in particular.

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

3Jn_1:5-6. Praise of Caius for his φιλοξενία, induced by that which he exhibited towards the brethren (3Jn_1:3).

πιστὸν ποιεῖς ὃ ἐὰν κ.τ.λ.] By πιστόν the conduct (ποιεῖς) of Caius, which he had shown towards the brethren, is described as faithful, i.e. corresponding to the Christian profession. Ebrards view, that πιστὸν ποιεῖν is = the classical πιστὸν (= πίστιν) ποιεῖσθαι in the sense of to give a pledge of faithfulness, a guarantee, cannot be grammatically justified. By ἐάν (= ἄν) the idea is generalized: everything whatever.

εἰς τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς καὶ τοῦτο ξένους] With the construction ἐργάζεσθαι εἰς, comp. Mat_26:10. By καὶ τοῦτο it is brought out that the ἀδελφοί to whom Caius is showing his love are ξένοι; even with the reading καὶ εἰς τοὺς ξένους the thought remains the same: καί, namely, is epexegetically used = and that too; as the ξένοι were Christians, they cannot be distinguished from the ἀδελφοί; Lücke takes καί in a specializing sense: and particularly or especially; but it is not brotherly love in general, but just the φιλοξενία, that is the subject here. That is to say, the apostle in this praise has specially in view what Caius had done to the brethren who had come to him (the Ap.: 3Jn_1:3), and who are also spoken of in 3Jn_1:6-7; these, however, were ξένοι.[18]3Jn_1:6. ΟἻ ἘΜΑΡΤΎΡΗΣΆΝ ΣΟΥ Τῇ ἈΓΆΠῌ ἘΝΏΠΙΟΝ ἘΚΚΛΗΣΊΑς] That ΟἽ dissociates the concrete representation of some from the generic representation of ΞΈΝΟΙ (de Wette) is incorrect; it rather refers directly to the previously-mentioned strange brethren. By ἐνώπιον ἐκκλησίας we are not to think of the Church to which Caius belonged, but of that in which John was sojourning.

ΟὛς ΚΑΛῶς ΠΟΙΉΣΕΙς Κ.Τ.Λ.] The same brethren that had come from Caius to John wanted to return thither again, in order from thence to continue their missionary journey (3Jn_1:7). John now recommends them to the loving care of Caius.

ΟὝς are not others (de Wette), but the same as were spoken of in the preceding sentence. The combination of the future ΠΟΙΉΣΕΙς and the aorist participle ΠΡΟΠΈΜΨΑς is strange, as the two verbs do not denote two different actions, but the ΚΑΛῶς ΠΟΙΕῖΝ consists in the ΠΡΟΈΜΠΕΙΝ; it is different in Mar_13:13, Act_24:25, Rom_15:28, where two different actions are placed in connection with one another, and the aorist participle is used in the sense of the fut. exacti (see Winer, p. 306; VII. p. 321). This has not been properly noticed by the commentators. The explanation of Düsterdieck: The aorist form is to be explained by the fact that the good deed will consist in this, that Caius will have worthily brought the brethren forward, does not solve the difficulty, as the good deed consists in the bringing them forward itself. The apostle may have used the aorist, however, in the feeling that the action of Caius is only completed when he has accomplished the equipment and escort of the brethren (Braune). The same connection is found in Eurip. Orest. 1210 ff.: εὐτυχήσομεν … ἑλόντες, which Matthiae (Ausf. Gramm., 2d ed. p. 1087) translates: if we are so fortunate as to take;[19] in accordance with which we may translate here also: thou shalt act worthily to accompany them. Luther incorrectly: thou hast done well that thou hast sent them on their journey; in the revised ed. 1867 correctly: thou shalt do well if thou sendest them on their journey. Ebrard arbitrarily conjectures: ἐποίησας.

It is quite evident from the connection with the sequel, that by καλῶς ποιήσεις John wants to encourage Caius to the προπέμπειν. The reading ποιήσας προπέμψεις means: whom thou, after thou hast treated them well, shalt bring forward on their journey.

With καλῶς ποιεῖν, comp. Act_10:13, Php_4:14; with προπέμπειν = to fit out for a journey, Rom_15:24, 1Co_16:6; 1Co_16:16, Tit_3:13.

ἀξίως τοῦ Θεοῦ (comp. 1Th_2:12; Col_1:10) does not belong to καλ. ποιήσεις, but to προπέμψας = as worthy of God, with all care and love (Lücke).

[18] The present ποιεῖς is not opposed to this view, as it would seem to be; it is explained by the fact that the apostle regards the single, special case, as an evidence of the φιλοξενία of Caius in general.

[19] The whole passage in Euripides runs:

ἥξει δʼ ἐς οἴκους Ἑρμιόνη τίνος χρόνου;

ὡς τἄλλα γʼ εἶπας, εἴπερ εὐτυχήσομεν,

κάλλισθʼ, ἑλόντες σκύμνον ἀνοσίου δοκῶ.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3Jn 1:5-8 . The Duty of Entertaining Itinerant Preachers. “Beloved, it is a work of faith that thou art doing in thy treatment of the brethren, strangers withal. They testified to thy love before the Church; and thou wilt do well in speeding them on their way worthily of God. For it was for the sake of the Name that they went forth, taking nothing from the Gentiles. We therefore are bound to undertake for such, that we may prove fellow-workers with the Truth.”

A company of reisende Brüder had returned to Ephesus, and in reporting of their mission at a meeting of the Church had made special mention of the hospitality of Gaius. The Apostle commends him and bids him continue his good offices.

3Jn 1:5 . The adjective πιστός is either act., “believing” ( cf. Joh 20:27 ), or passive, “worthy to be believed,” “trustworthy” ( cf. 2Ti 2:2 ). It is passive here, and it is well explained by Œcumenius as equivalent to ἄξιον πιστοῦ ἀνδρός . The peculiarity is that, by a sort of hypallage, the adjective is transferred from the subjective to the objective. Transitive: “Thou makest whatever thou workest on the brethren a believing act, a work of faith”. It was not mere hospitality but a religious service. Westcott’s rendering: “thou makest sure whatsoever thou doest” gives πιστόν an unexampled and indeed impossible meaning. ποιεῖς , aor. of habitual and constant hospitality; ἐργάσῃ , aor. of each particular act. καὶ τοῦτο , “and that to”; more commonly καὶ ταῦτα ( cf. Heb 9:12 ).

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

As becometh a believer and a Christian.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

faithfully--an act becoming a faithful man.

whatsoever thou doest--a distinct Greek word from the former "doest": translate, "workest": whatsoever work, or labor of love, thou dost perform. So Mat 26:10, "She hath wrought a good work upon me."

and to strangers--The oldest manuscripts, "and that (that is, and those brethren) strangers." The fact of the brethren whom thou didst entertain being "strangers," enhances the love manifested in the act.

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 5. Thou doest faithfully] πιστον ποιεις. Kypke thinks that πιστον is put here for πιστιν, and that the phrase signifies to keep or preserve the faith, or to be bound by the faith, or to keep one's engagements. Thou hast acted as the faith-the Christian religion, required thee to act, in all that thou hast done, both to the brethren at home, and to the strangers-the itinerant evangelists, who, in the course of their travels, have called at thy house. There is not a word here about the pilgrims and penitential journeys which the papists contrive to bring out of this text.

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

5–8. Gaius praised for his Hospitality: Its special Value

5. Beloved] The affectionate address marks a new section (comp. 3Jn_1:3; 3Jn_1:11), but here again the fresh subject grows quite naturally out of what precedes, without any abrupt transition. The good report, which caused the Apostle such joy, testified in particular to the Christian hospitality of Gaius.

thou doest faithfully] So the Vulgate; fideliter facis: Wiclif, Tyndale, and other English Versions take the same view. So also Luther: du thust treulich. The Greek is literally, thou doest a faithful (thing), whatsoever thou workest (same verb as is rendered ‘wrought’ in 2Jn_1:8) unto the brethren: which is intolerably clumsy as a piece of English. R.V. makes a compromise; thou doest a faithful work in whatsoever thou doest; which is closer to the Greek than A.V., but not exact. ‘To do a faithful act’ (πιστὸν ποιεῖν) possibly means to do what is worthy of a faithful man or of a believer, ostendens ex operibus fidem (Bede); and ‘to do faithfully’ expresses this fairly well: thou doest faithfully in all thou workest towards the brethren. But this use of πιστὸν ποιεῖν is unsupported by examples, and therefore Westcott would translate Thou makest sure whatsoever thou workest; i.e. ‘such an act will not be lost, will not fail of its due issue and reward’. The change of verb should at any rate be kept, not only on account of 2Jn_1:8, but also of Mat_26:10, where ‘she hath wrought a good work upon Me’ (εἰργάσατο εἰς ἐμέ) is singularly parallel to ‘thou workest toward the brethren’ (ἐργάσῃ εἰς τοὺς ἀδελφούς).

and to the strangers] The true text (אABC) gives, and that strangers (καὶ τοῦτο ξένους); i.e. towards the brethren, and those brethren strangers. Comp. 1Co_6:6; Php_1:28; Eph_2:8. The brethren and the strangers are not two classes, but one and the same. It enhanced the hospitality of Gaius that the Christians whom he entertained were personally unknown to him: Fideliter facis quidquid operaris in fratres, et hoc in peregrinos. Comp. Mat_25:35.

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.

Beloved, thou doest faithfully,.... Or a faithful thing, and as became a faithful man, a believer in Christ; in all his beneficence and charity he acted the upright part; he did not do it in an hypocritical way, to be seen of men, and gain applause from them, but from a principle of love, and with a view to the glory of God:

whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers; which may design either different persons; and by "brethren" may be meant the poor brethren of the church that. Gaius belonged to, and others that were well known to him; and by "the strangers", not unconverted persons, but such of the saints as came from foreign parts, and travelled about to spread the Gospel, and enlarge the interest of Christ: or else the same persons may be intended, for the words may be read, as they are in the Alexandrian copy, and some others, and in the Vulgate Latin version, "what thou doest to the brethren, and this to strangers"; that is, as the Arabic version renders it, "to strange brethren"; or, as the Syriac version, "to the brethren, and especially them that are strangers"; so that Gaius was a very hospitable man, one that entertained and lodged strangers, and used them very civilly and courteously, with great liberality, and with much integrity and sincerity.

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

5 Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers;

Ver. 5. Thou dost faithfully] That is, out of faith, and as beseemeth a faithful Christian. They that give alms, &c., and not out of faith, they do worse than lose their labour, for they commit sin.

And to strangers] Though they be not yet converted to the faith, and made brethren, thy liberality may work upon them, and win them, as Alban.

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.

Beloved, thou doest faithfully - In the previous verses the writer had commended Gaius for his attachment to truth, and his general correctness in his Christian life. He now speaks more particularly of his acts of generous hospitality, and says that he had fully, in that respect, done his duty as a Christian.

Whatsoever thou doest - In all your contact with them, and in all your conduct toward them. The particular thing which led to this remark was his hospitality; but the testimony respecting his general conduct had been such as to justify this commendation.

To the brethren - Probably to Christians who were well known to him - perhaps referring to Christians in his own church.

And to strangers - Such as had gone to the church of which he was a member with a letter of commendation from John. Compare the Rom 12:13 note, and Heb 13:2 note.

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

Charity to Christians is reckoned fidelity to Christ, being shown to them upon the Christian account, which is intimated to have been done by this pious person, who so kindly treated

the brethren, and strangers, i.e. even though they were strangers.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

5. Faithfully—A faithful thing; a thing inspired by a true faith.

Brethren… strangers—In apposition, as both meaning the same persons. The brethren were evangelists of John, but strangers to Gaius. He entertained them, not as old acquaintances, nor from pure hospitality in general; but because they were Christian itinerants authenticated by the apostle.

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

MAIN DIVISION. Exhortation. Having thus stated the circumstances which have led to his writing (comp., (2Jn_1:4) the elder begins the main portion of the letter, which consists of three sections; the hospitality of Gaius, and its value (verses 5-8); the arrogance of Diotrephes, and its results (verses 9, 10); the moral (verses 11, 12). The transition to this central portion of the Epistle is marked by a repetition of the loving address. In all three cases (verses 2, 5, 11), the introductory "beloved" indicates the beginning of a section.

It is by no means easy to translate this verse satisfactorily, piston poieiv o ejash eijv touv ajdelfouv kainouv.

Here we have three difficulties:

(1) to determine the meaning of piston poieiv;

(2) to bring out the meaning of ejrgash;

(3) to translate touto without awkwardness.

The reading eijv touv (K, L) for touto (a, 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.

Vers. 5, 6.

Hospitality.

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," filoxenia, 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 be our 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 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 W.J. (Mat_10:40-42 Mat_25:34-36)

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

Faithfully - Uprightly and sincerely.

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

The hospitality of Gaius:

v. 5. Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren and to strangers,

v. 6. 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,

v. 7. because that for His name’s sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles.

v. 8. We, therefore, ought to receive such, that we might be fellow-helpers to the truth.

The apostle here specifies the virtue in which Gaius excelled: Beloved, thou art acting as a faithful brother in rendering service to the brethren, strangers at that. It was an act of faithfulness agreeing well with the faith Gaius was professing which he performed when he rendered such signal service to the brethren, who were total strangers to him, at that. He had not known them before, he was bound to them by no external ties, but the fact that they were believers with him, as the letters of John showed, was a sufficient incentive to him to receive them with open arms and to do all in his power to make their journey and their stay a pleasant one.

It was from some of these brethren that St. John had received the report which occasioned this letter: Who testified to the love before the congregation; and thou wilt do well in speeding them on their journey in a manner worthy of God. So great was the impression which the cordial hospitality of Gaius made upon the missionaries that they reported it at once upon their return. ; they were effusive in their commendation of their host, of the love which he had shown them. In acknowledging this, the apostle incidentally provides for a future continuance of this charitable endeavor: If Gaius continues this policy of assisting the missionaries by speeding them on their way, and in a manner worthy of their calling of ministers of God, then he will do well. See Act 15:26. For, as John says, it was for the sake of His name that they went out and did not accept anything from the heathen. These missionaries, like all men worthy of the name, did not go out to seek their own glory and advancement. They were concerned only about the Word of the Gospel, about extolling the name of Jesus Christ as the Savior of the world. They were preaching without receiving any compensation from the heathen, probably in order not to bring suspicion upon their office as though they were merely in the business of preaching for the sake of the money they might make that way. This being the case: We, therefore, are under obligation to support such men, that we may prove fellow-workers with the truth. That is the duty of the Christians at all times and in all places, to provide for the bodily necessities of men that are going forth to preach the Gospel. In this way the Christians perform their share with the truth and for the truth of the Gospel, they assist in spreading the glorious news of salvation through the redemption of Jesus Christ.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe here, How our apostle at once commends the great charity of Gaius, and at the same time excites him to the farther practice of it.

Where note, 1. How charity towards Christians is here styled fidelity to Christ, because shown to them upon Christ’s account: Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren. Acts of charity are acts of righteousness and fidelity? he that is uncharitable is unjust.

Note, 2. The extensive nature of Gaius’s charity; it was to brethren but to strangers; that is, not only to the brethren of the church with him, but to strangers in their travels to and fro, as they came near him; but more particularly to such faithful ministers as came out of foreign parts to preach the gospel, whom Gaius had hospitably and charitably entertained.

Note, 3. How he exhorts Gaius farther to furnish and help these ministers in their travels with all things necessary for their journey; because,

1. They preached the gospel freely, taking nothing of the Gentile Christians for their pains.

2. Because it was for Christ’s name sake they went abroad: to preach the gospel, say some; to avoid persecution, say others.

3. Because to entertain such, is to further, as much as in us lies, the propagation of the gospel of Christ: such as contribute towards the maintenance and support of the ministers of Christ for his sake, shall have the present comfort and future reward of co-operating and contributing their parts towards the propagating and spreading of the gospel of Christ.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

5–8. Thou doest a faithful work. In his kindness to brethren and strangers. In those early ages hospitality to the saints sent on evangelistic missions, and especially to persecuted saints driven from home, was a very important duty.

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.

Connecting Statement:

John's purpose in writing this letter is to compliment Gaius in the way he took care of traveling Bible teachers; then he talks about two people, one evil and one good.

General Information:

Here the word "we" refers to John and those with him, and possibly includes all believers. (See: Inclusive "We")

Beloved

Here this is used as a term of endearment for fellow believers.

you practice faithfulness

"you are doing what is faithful to God" or "you are being loyal to God"

work for the brothers and for strangers

"help fellow believers and those you do not know"

strangers who have borne witness of your love in the presence of the church

"strangers who have told the believers in the church about how you have loved them"

You do well to send them

John is thanking Gaius for his normal practice of helping these believers.

because it was for the sake of the name that they went out

Here "the name" refers to Jesus. AT: "for they have gone out to tell people about Jesus" (See: Metonymy)

taking nothing

receiving no gifts or help

the Gentiles

Here "Gentiles" does not just mean people who are not Jewish. It implies people who do not trust in Jesus.

so that we will be fellow workers for the truth

"so that we will cooperate with them in announcing God's truth to people"

translationWords

beloved

faithful

works

brother

testimony

love

church

worthy

God

Gentile

true

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

5–8. GAIUS PRAISED FOR HIS HOSPITALITY: ITS SPECIAL VALUE

5. For εἰς τούς ([952][953]) read τοῦτο ([954][955][956][957] and Versions).

[952] 9th century. All three Epistles.

[953] 9th century. All three Epistles.

[954] 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount Sinai, and now at Petersburg. All three Epistles.

[955] 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.

[956] 4th century. Brought to Rome about 1460. It is entered in the earliest catalogue of the Vatican Library, 1475. All three Epistles.

[957] 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.

5. ἀγαπητέ. The affectionate address marks a new section (comp. 3Jn 1:2; 3Jn 1:11), but here again the fresh subject grows quite naturally out of what precedes, without any abrupt transition. The good report, which caused the Apostle such joy, testified in particular to the Christian hospitality of Gaius.

πιστὸν ποιεῖς. A.V., thou doest faithfully. So the Vulgate; fideliter facis: Wiclif, Tyndale, and other English Versions take the same view. So also Luther: du thust treulich. The Greek is literally, thou doest a faithful (thing), whatsoever thou workest (same verb as is rendered ‘wrought’ in 2Jn 1:8) unto the brethren: which is intolerably clumsy as a piece of English, R.V. makes a compromise; thou doest a faithful work in whatsoever thou doest; which is closer to the Greek than A.V., but not exact. ‘To do a faithful act’ (πιστὸν ποιεῖν) possibly means to do what is worthy of a faithful man or of a believer, ostendens ex operibus fidem (Bede); and ‘to do faithfully’ expresses this fairly well: thou doest faithfully in all thou workest towards the brethren. But this use of πιστὸν ποιεῖν is unsupported by examples, and therefore Westcott would translate Thou makest sure whatsoever thou workest; i.e. ‘such an act will not be lost, will not fail of its due issue and reward.’ The change of verb should at any rate be kept, not only on account of 2Jn 1:8, but also of Mat 26:10, where ‘she hath wrought a good work upon Me’ (εἰργάσατο εἰς ἐμέ) is singularly parallel to ‘thou workest toward the brethren’ (ἐργάσῃ εἰς τοὺς ἀδελφούς). Cod. 80 has the singular reading μισθὸν ποιεῖς for πιστὸν ποιεῖς.

καὶ τοῦτο ξένους. And that strangers; i.e. towards the brethren, and those brethren strangers. Comp. 1Co 6:6; Php 1:28; Eph 2:8. The brethren and the strangers are not two classes, but one and the same. It enhanced the hospitality of Gaius that the Christians whom he entertained were personally unknown to him: Fideliter facis quidquid operaris in fratres, et hoc in peregrinos. Comp. Mat 25:35.

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.

5-8.] Praise of the hospitality shewn by Caius; and reason of that praise. Beloved (beginning again of new address: see above on ver. 2), thou doest a faithful act (ἄξιον πιστοῦ ἀνδρός, as Œc. and most interpreters. De W. and Bengel explain it “fidele facis: facis quiddam quod facile a te pollicebar mihi et fratribus.” But the other is better. In πιστὸς ὁ λόγος, 1Ti 1:15 al., there is possibly the same allusion: not only a saying worthy of credit, but one belonging to those who are of the πίστις) whatsoever thou workest (the aor. betokens these deeds as summed up in one and characterized as πιστόν) towards (so the Lord in Mat 26:10 describes His anointing by Mary thus, καλὸν ἔργον εἰργάσατο εἰς ἐμέ) the brethren, and that (and those brethren), strangers (φιλοξενία is an especial mark of Christian ἀγάπη, Rom 12:13, 1Ti 3:2, Tit 1:8, Heb 13:2, 1Pe 4:9), who (the above-named ξένοι ἀδελφοί) bore testimony to thy love in the presence of the church (viz. where St. John was at the time of writing. They were Evangelists, ver. 7: and thus would naturally give the church an account of their missionary journey, during which they were so hospitably treated by Caius): whom thou wilt do well if thou forward on their way (as Bengel says, the future is a “morata formula hortandi.” The aor. part. presents no difficulty: it will then, and not till then, be a good act, when it is done. And this would only be expressed by the fut. with an aor. part.: οὓς καλῶς ποιήσεις προπέμπων would be liable to be rendered “whom thou wilt benefit by forwarding &c.”—the present part. being, in such a conjunction, timeless, and merely ratiocinative. On προπέμψ., see reff. and Tit 3:13) worthily of God (this qualification belongs to προπέμψας, not as Carpzov., who supplies a καί before ἀξίως, to ποιήσεις,—“well and worthily of God.” The words mean, in a manner worthy of Him whose messengers they are and whose servant thou art). For on behalf of the Name (of Christ: see the second ref., and cf. Ignat. ad Eph_3 and 7, pp. 648 f., and ad Philad. 10, p. 705, δοξάσαι τὸ ὄνομα. Bengel says, “subaudi, Dei. Lev 24:11. Conf. Jac. 2:7.” But neither of these places applies. O. T. usage is naturally no guide for us here; and St. James alludes to the name of Christ) they went forth (on their missionary journey: not, as Beza, Erasm.-Schmidt, Wolf, Carpzov., Bengel, “were driven forth:” see more below), taking nothing (receiving nothing by way of benefaction or hire: even as St. Paul in Achaia, 1Co 9:18, 2Co 11:7 ff., 2Co 11:12:16 ff., 1Th 2:9 ff.: against Huther, who denies the applicability of the comparison, seeing that in St. Paul’s case they were Christian churches: but so must these have been before they would contribute to the support of their missionaries. Notice μηδέν; implying that it was their own deliberate purpose; refusing to take any thing: οὐδέν would have expressed only the fact, which might have arisen from the remissness of the ἐθνικοί, and might have been, considered by themselves as a hardship. This is the force of μηδέν, and not as Dusterd., that οὐδέν would only have stated the fact, but by μηδέν the Apostle presents it for the consideration of his readers) from the heathens (reff. The expositors spoken of above under ἐξῆλθον, take these words as belonging to it, “expulsi sunt a paganis,” and interpret μηδέν λαμβάνοντες, “nihil secum asportantes,” “omnibus rebus spoliati.” Grot., who takes ἐξῆλθον of expulsion, understands it to have been “a Judæa, per Judæos incredulos, ob Christum:” and takes the rest as meaning “potuerant in ista calamitate adjuvari misericordia τῶν ἔξω, sed maluerunt omnia Christianis debere.” But the whole interpretation is forced and unnatural, and the ordinary one obvious, and very suitable, considering the motive put forward in ver. 8, which clearly shews them to have been workers for God’s truth. The pres. part. λαμβάνοντες indicates, not what they did when they ἐξῆλθον, but their habit after their setting out: and is as so often, indicative of norm, without any particular time being pointed out. So that we need not, with Huther and Düsterd., imagine that there is an allusion to a missionary maxim, to take nothing from the heathen, in accordance with which they acted). We therefore (ἡμεῖς, contrast to the ἐθνικοί: οὖν, because they μηδὲν λαμβάνουσιν ἀπὸ τ. ἐθνικῶν) ought to support (see Strabo in reff. Notice the allusion to λαμβάνοντες above. The word does not seem to signify “receive hospitably,” as some have explained it, nor does it imply, as Œc., Thl., appealing to ὑπέλαβόν με ὡσεὶ λέων ἕτοιμος εἰς θήραν, Ps. 16:12, anticipating, not waiting to be asked, in the exercise of good offices) such persons, that we may become fellow-workers (with them) for the truth (this, and not as vulg. “ut cooperatores simus veritatis” (so Luth., Grot., Bengel, al.), is the construction. Those with whom one is συνεργός, are put in the gen., see Rom 16:3, Rom 16:9, Rom 16:21, 1Co 3:9 al. The dat. is commodi: to promote the cause of the truth: so συνεργοὶ εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τ. θεοῦ, Col 4:11,—συνεργὸν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ, 1Th 3:2).

9,

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

5. ἀγαπητέ] Cf. vv. 1, 2.πιστὸν ποιεῖς] 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) ἂν μὲν δέῃ ταῦτα ποιεῖν πιστά, ὁμήρους δοτέον.

ὃ ἐὰν ἐργάσῃ] The judgment is expressed absolutely, the present tense being used. The ὃ ἐὰν ἐργάσῃ 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.

καὶ τοῦτο ξένους] For καὶ τοῦτο, cf. 1Co 6:6, ἀδελφὸς μετὰ ἀδελφοῦ κρίνεται, καὶ τοῦτο ἐπὶ ἀπίστων: Php 1:28, ἔνδειξις… ὑμῶν δὲ σωτηρίας, καὶ τοῦτο ἀπὸ θεοῦ: Eph 2:8, τῇ γὰρ χάριτι ἐστὲ σεσωσμένοι διὰ πίστεως· καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν. Its use in Rom 13:11 is rather different.

The recognition of the duty of φιλοξενία 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, ἐκ δὲ τοῦ ὄρους τοῦ δεκάτου, οὗ ἦσαν δένδρα σκεπάζοντα πρόβατά τινα, οἱ πιστεύσαντες τοιοῦτοί εἰσιν· ἐπίσκοποι φιλόξενοι, οἵτινες ἡδέως εἰς τοὺς οἴκους ἑαυτῶν πάντοτε ὑπεδέξαντο τοὺς δούλους τοῦ θεοῦ ἄτερ ὑποκρίσεως… οὗτοι οὗν πάντες σκεπασθήσονται ὑπὸ τοῦ κυρίου διαπαντός. Justin, Apol. i. 67, αὐτὸς (sc. ὁ προεστὼς) ἐπικουρεῖ… καὶ τοῦς παρεπιδήμοις οὖσι ξένοις.

πιστον] pr. uenim et boh-cod.: πιστωςIa 175 (319) |εργαση א B C K L Pal. omnuid cat. etc.] εργαζη A | τους] om. H δ6 (Ψ) | και τουτοא A B C 17. 27. 29. 33. 66**. 68. 81. 97. 126mg vg. syrbodl et p sah. cop. arm. aeth.] και ταυταIa 200f (83): και εις τους K L P al. pler. dscr (om. τους) cat. Thphyl. Oec.

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

Thou doest faithfully [πιστον ποιεις] . Rev., thou doest a faithful work. A third interpretation is thou givest a pledge or guaranty, and a fourth, akin to this, thou makest sure. The Rev. is best. There is no parallel to justify the third and fourth. 73 Thou doest [εργαση] . Or lit., according to the eymology, workest (ergon work). See on Jas 2:9. The distinction between this verb and others signifying to do, such as poiein, prassein, dran, which last does not occur in the New Testament, is not sharply maintained in Attic Greek. In certain connections the difference between them is great, in others, it is hardly perceptible. On poiein and pra. ssein, see on Joh 3:21. 'Ergazomai, like prassein, contemplates the process rather than the end of action, carrying the ideas of continuity and repetition. It means to labor, to be active, to perform, with the idea of continued exertion, and therefore is used of servants, or of those who have an assigned business or office. See Mt 21:28; Mt 25:26; Luk 13:14; Joh 5:17; Joh 6:27; Joh 9:4; 1Th 2:9. For the phrase ejrgash eijv thou doest toward (Rev.), see Mt 26:10.

And to strangers [και εις τους ξενους] . The best texts read, instead of eijv touv to the (strangers), touto, that; so that the sentence is, literally, "to them that are brethren, and that strangers." For the phrase and that, compare 1Co 6:6; Phi 1:28; Eph 2:8.

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

5. πιστὸν π.] fideliter facis V. The phrase is commonly interpreted : ‘thou doest a faithful work,’ a work which answers to thy faith: so Gicum. ἄξιον πιστοῦ ἀνδρός. No parallel is quoted in support of such a sense of πιστός. The more natural rendering is rather

28; Eph. ii. 8. Viewed rightly the fact that these brethren were strangers gave them a more pressing claim upon the common ties of brotherhood. Comp. Hebr. xiii. 2 note.

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.