Third John is the last of John’s Epistles
and also is the shortest book in the New Testament. The main theme of the book
is walking in truth. It is written in letter format and is one of the few
letters in the New Testament that is addressed to an individual Christian.1
That individual Christian is a man named Gaius (more on this in the next
section). Another individual who received a letter from John is a man named
Diotrephes. This man is the antagonist of the situation described in the church
that Gaius was a member of. The time period during which this letter was
written is c. 85 AD. Even though this book is not very long, there are many
valuable lessons in it that modern day Christians can learn from today.
Associated with Third John:
Modern scholars like to look for
problems within a work of historical literature. This is called higher or lower
criticism. In higher criticism scholars have identified potential problems
associated with the text of Third John. I will list these problems, and my
views on them, that have been stated in the text and also provide a solution to
what I consider to be the main problem of Third John.
1. Authorship: Although
the majority of Christian scholars today attribute the authorship of the
Epistle 3 John to John the Apostle, there is a minority of scholars that
attribute authorship to a person of, “John the Elder”. This view according to
Stephen S. Smalley is one that is unnecessary.2
Being that Smalley attributed this as unnecessary, one could conclude that the
thought, that there was an author other than John the Apostle, is not supported
by enough evidence.
The other view of authorship is that John the
Apostle did in fact write the Book of Third John. This is based on external
evidence in favor of the Second and Third Johannine Epistles.3
The external evidence, which is widely supported in Biblical scholarship,
implies Apostolic Authority.4
Another distinction to be made are from those who wish to say that the first
time the Epistles of John were cited was by a man named Polycarp. Even though
he was the first person to cite John’s Epistles, that we know of, that does not
make this man the author of the work.
Scholarship there are also concerns with the addressee of the Book Third John.
In the Book it is obvious that the author is writing to a man named Gaius, but
what is not obvious is which Gaius the author is referring to. There are four
accounts, in Scripture, of a man named Gaius. The first comes from Acts 19:29
in which a Gaius is named as one of Paul’s travel companions. The second is
given in Acts 20:4, where a Gaius is named from Derbe. Another Gaius is named
in Romans 16:23, and again in 1 Cor. 1:14 who was a Christian in Corinth.5 A
scholar has to be careful in making an assumption on the proposed addressee,
because such a conclusion cannot be drawn from the text and would therefore be
eisegesis. As the famous Dr. Paul R. Fink affirms, as Biblical Scholars we
should be practicing exegesis, not
3. Unity: There is not a question of
unity in the book of Third John. The book was accepted, with the other two
Johannine epistles in the 39th festal letter of Athanasius, the
Synod of Hippo and the Council of Carthage.6
Furthermore, the book was a direct letter to a man named Gaius. The author,
acting as if we do not know who wrote it, was the sole editor of the piece and
there does not seem to be a reason as to why there would be any editing of the
4. Date: The date is something that is
disputed by Biblical Scholars today. There are many different views as to when
this piece was written. The opinions of modern scholarship range from the
mid-first century to the latest part of the first century.7
Something that can be noted with confidence is that the author, supposedly John
the Apostle, was in Ephesus in the late first century and published his Gospel.
The approximate date that John was in Ephesus was 85-90 A.D.8 If
this is the case then it is possible that John, during his time in Ephesus,
also wrote the three epistles in addition to the Gospel of John. The most
likely date for the three epistles is A.D. 90-100, but some still argue
The occasion is not currently disputed, because John states the occasion is
response to the Report of Gaius. It is assumed that there is a report that was
given to John concerning Gaius and John wrote back to Gaius to commend him and
the brothers for their deeds. The
purpose is not currently disputed, because John again states it clearly in his
letter. He tells Gaius of the reason that he is writing, which is to inform
Gaius of Diotrephes’ sins and to inform him that John will be calling out
Diotrephes on his actions shortly.
of Writing: Closely
related to the date of the writing of the letter of Third John, the place of
writing is often something that is disputed. If the scholar is taking John as
the author, then there are few possibilities as to where John could have had
enough time to write the Epistles. If the scholar prefers a later date, c. 95
A.D., then it is likely to conclude that the Third Epistle was written on the
island of Patmos. There are problems with this view because if John was on
Patmos it would be more difficult for him to maintain communication with Gaius’
church. Also, he would have been outside of the Roman jurisdiction. Therefore,
given the two probable places, the most likely location for the writing of
Third John was Ephesus.
Criticism (lower criticism): This
form of Criticism focuses on the issue of proving what we have as being from
Third John. This is often hard to do because we frankly do not know for certain
about certain texts, but what we can do is to look at this text in comparison
to other texts that were written by an author we know about. As stated before
modern scholars think that John wrote the Epistles attributed to his name.
Furthermore, we have strong evidence to attribute the writing of First John to
the Gospel of John. Then by examining Second and Third John we can see that
there are numerous accounts of similar thought processes, syntax, and other
grammatical relations that allow us to conclude that the author of Third John
is the same author who wrote the Gospel of John and the other Epistles that are
traditionally attributed to his name.
The problem that I will address in detail is the problem of
the Date of Third John. Critics of the later date have suggested an earlier
date for the Epistle of Third John. The date that some critics of the
Johnannine writings suggest is as early as c.60-65 A.D. for the Epistles of 1,
2, and 3 John. Citing sources, that the author calls “forgotten” in modern
scholarship, he states that the names that he cites are stating that the
writings of John were written before the fall of Jerusalem. He lists numerous sources,
so this is something that needs careful consideration before moving forward
with the study.9 Largely, these sources did
not take into consideration common authorship of the Gospel of John and then
contributing this authorship to 1, 2, and 3 John.10 So, if it can be shown that the author of the
Gospel of John is also the author of 1, 2, and 3 John then we have a stronger
argument for the later date. In many different works this has been shown to be
the case.11 12
This is not an article fully about the authorship of 3 John,
but the two are connected, date and authorship. When looking at 2 John and 3
John it is easy to point out the similarities in writing. The way that the
authors refer to themselves, as “the elder”, the parallels in thought, also the
same pattern, style and conclusion all point to a common author.13 14Furthermore,
there is little evidence for a second John called John the Presbyter.15
Many want to attribute this character with the Gospel, Johnannine letters, and
the Revelation, but it makes more sense, at least to this reader, to conclude a
common authorship of all three because of the similarities between the writings
and the authority with which each was written.
Support of a later date is in just about
every work that was reviewed regarding this study of the date of the Epistle of
Third John. There is much opposition to the view that the Epistles were written
mid-first century. 16 17 18
If it is agreed upon that the author of the Gospel of John is in fact the
author of 3 John then it follows from this that the author wrote these letters
around the same time as the Gospel, first the Gospel then the letters. It makes
sense that John the Apostle was the one who wrote these in Ephesus because John
was reported being in Ephesus, it was a center of culture in the area which
allowed for easy communication between the different churches, and there wasn’t
a body of water to travel across. Taking all this information into
consideration, the date that seems the most probable is a later date between 90-100
3 Divisions of John’s
Letter to Gaius
Division of John’s Letter (Introduction) –
1: “The Elder unto…Gaius…”
Writer – 1a “The
When the author called himself the elder there is
significance in the article “the”.
The implication that the author makes, that he is the one
and only person who is in charge of the church’s practices, shows the authority
by which the author is expressing his ideas. It is not a coincidence that the
author chose this wordage. This level of authority is seen elsewhere in
Scripture in the two men Timothy and Titus who were both in charge of churches
in the areas that they ministered in.20
πρεσβύτερος - This shows
that the author is known to this church. He did not have to use his name, but
rather the church knew him by his title. This shows that the person writing and
the person receiving the letter are close relationally. The usage of this term
also shows that the author is asserting his authority. Some scholars think that
this is because the author feels his authority is threatened.21
Recipient - 1b “…the well-beloved Gaius whom I love in
– “…the well-beloved…”
When John calls this man the well beloved he is showing,
again, the relationship between the two of them. Another thing to note is how
the beginning sentence “The elder to the beloved Gaius whom I love in truth” is
also a pseudo-outline for the topics that John will be speaking on during the
rest of the letter (love, hospitality, truth, and authority).
Here John shows the level of the relationship between Gaius
and himself. This allows us to conclude as readers that John is discipling this
What this shows is that the man John is writing to is a
person who stands in representation for his whole church.22
What we know about Gaius is limited, because the name Gaius was common in Roman
times, but it is safe to assume that Gaius is a leader in the church that John
is writing to.
for the recipient –
“…whom I love…”
What this shows is that the author, John, cares deeply for
this man. Even though we do not know much about Gaius, it is clear that John
does and they share a strong bond.
of the feeling – “…whom…”
person feeling – “…I…”
feeling itself – “…love…”
of the love – “…in truth.”
There is controversy among scholars as to what is meant by
this verse. Some hold it to mean that John simply loves Gaius truly.23
That the love John has for Gaius is true and that what he is saying is not just
a commonly used expression. This is true only if the article “the” is not
included with the word truth. If it is included then the author is most likely
discussing theological truth. The opposing viewpoint is that John loves Gaius
because he is in Christ and they are both pursuing after the same truth.
Because the article “the” is not included here we can conclude that what
Scripture says here is that John loves Gaius truly.
Division of John’s Letter (Body) – 2-12 “Beloved…”
An interesting point
to make about this is the way that John uses it in division of the text. There
are three times when John says the word “Beloved” in the text. This also pays
tribute to the relationship that John has with Gaius.
Keep in mind the conflict of the situation, which is
described in verses 9-11, and the contrast that John is making here by using
the word “Beloved”. Not only does this show John’s love for Gaius, but helps us
to remember that even though there is conflict in the church we must also
remember that God loves for and cares for Diotrephes.
This next section, 2-8, is common of most Christian letters
that were being written during this time period. 24
It was common for them to have a section of thanksgiving to God, which could be
many pages worth of writing.25
of Gaius – 2-8 “For I rejoiced…the truth that is in
you…walk in truth.”
prayer for Gaius – 2 “I pray…soul prospers.”
Here John is praying for Gaius’ well-being, not only for his
body, but also for his soul. When the author writes, “I pray” it often is of
more worth than “I wish” even though some translations state what John meant is
“I wish” here it would follow the next section of verses because the thought
implied is considered stronger than a wish.
health – 2 a “…prosper and be in health…”
At first glance it would seem that John is just wishing
Gaius well. Upon further consideration it would be appropriate to ask the
question, “Why is John saying this?” A thought is that Gaius could be in poor
health. It could be the case that he is ill and John is aware of this. Another
possibility is that Gaius is healthy and the man is simply just wishing him to
remain in good health. Either way, it is important that we remain aware of the
nuances in the text, which allow us to formulate a story around the book, and
come to a conclusion as to why it was written.
health – 2b “…even as thy soul prospers.”
Foreshadowing the next section, here John reminds Gaius that
he is in constant prayer for his spiritual well-being. The Greek word used
here, εὐοδόω, is translated into English as, “to grant a prosperous and
expeditious journey, to go on well”26
what this adds to the text is that the soul prospering is a journey, it is not
something that is done overnight. This same word is used in Romans 1:10 and
also is used in 1 Corinthians 16:2.27 One
of these occurrences, Romans 1:10, is speaking specifically about having a
prosperous journey. Therefore, John is implying that he is praying for Gaius’
journey, or walk in the truth, for Christ.
If Gaius’ health is bad it is important what John is stating
here. He is encouraging Gaius toward Christ even though his health is poor,
that what is happening to him is not because he is a sinner, but because bad
things happen in a world that sin has corrupted. Some may see this verse as an
indication of a prosperity gospel, but in this text they do not really
conclusively prove the point they are trying to make (that the children of God
are to have health and material wealth in abundance).28
As Paul says we are to be suffering servants (Philippians 1:29), there will still
be times of increased happiness or joy, but rather it is not promised that when
someone becomes a Christian that everything will be great.
of Gaius’– 3 “For I rejoiced greatly…you walk in
The verb that is used here reveals that there was more than
just one visit to John about Gaius’ hospitality. John also provides a reason as to why he
thinks that Gaius is progressing spiritually. Not only does this add
credibility to the preceding passage, as to the truth of the statement, but it
also links us up with John 15, and other books in the Bible, which speaks on
the true Christian bearing fruit. Here there is also a literary element of parallelism
when John communicates that the truth that is in you is the same truth that you
are walking in. This helps to convey the idea that there is both a truth inside
of us, the Holy Spirit, and we are called to walk in “the truth”, follow after
of the Report – 3a “I rejoiced greatly…”
gave the report – 3b “…when the brethren came…”
What are not recorded here are multiple journeys to John
from Gaius’ church. In order for John to receive the information he had to be
told of it either by letter, requiring someone to deliver it, or be told by a
representative of the church. Then there is another journey back to Gaius’
church. Another movement of persons that we can exegete from the text is the
journey of those that Gaius is being hospitable to. Even more, we can surmise
that there was possible movement of persons from John’s residence to Gaius, for
delivery of the letter, and possibly a journey back to John. There is quite a
bit of movement in the book of Third John between the different persons that
are spoken of.
of the report – 3c “…testified of the truth…in thee…”
As alluded to above, John received word of Gaius’ action
from different persons that were called “the brethren”. These men or women spoke of the truth that is
in Gaius and the actions of his church.
progress of Gaius’ – 3d “…you walk in the truth.”
This part of the letter gives reference to the previous two
letters and is also the theme of the book.29 A
theological problem here is when John says “the truth” we are not told what
truth he is talking about. In other books that are written by him, namely the
Gospel of John and 1 John, both reference this truth. In the Gospel of John we
are told what the truth actually is when Christ says, “I am the way, the truth,
and the life…” So when John makes reference to Gaius walking “…in the truth”
what he means is walking in Christ.30
of John – 4 “I have no greater joy…walk in truth.”
Not merely a statement of joy, there is more to this verse
than what can be gleaned at first glance. What also is a model of what
McDermond calls, “Johannine Tradition’s” which stresses both correct doctrine
and correct behavior.31
Overall, it is shown here that John’s goal and purpose is to train up Disciples
for Christ and people who walk in the truth.
of the joy – 4a “…no greater…”
The way that John uses the phrase, “no greater” makes it
clear that he is very passionate about the truth and to see his children walk
in it, but this is possibly also an element of hyperbole. It is possible that
the joy greater than seeing his children walk in truth is John seeing the Truth
face to face.
of the joy – 4b “…my children…”
What John shows here is that often when a Biblical author
called someone “my child” or a group of people “my children” what they mean by
it is that person or group are the converts of the author.32
It is not clear whether he is referencing just Gaius, or his church, but it
should be noted that either could be possible.
which caused joy – 4c
“…walk in truth.”
Love for Brothers – 5, 6
“Beloved, thou doest faithfully…thou shalt do well:”
In this section John makes note of Gaius’ hospitable
behavior and commends him for it. This is also the beginning of the second
section of the body of 3 John which is marked by the word “Beloved”.33
In doing so, it should be noted that these actions are in line with other areas
of the Bible. Hebrews 13:2 speaks of showing hospitality towards strangers
because there is a chance that they could show hospitality to angels and not
know it. Also, in Matthew 10:40-42, 25:38 and 38 Christ speaks of doing works
for the “least of these” that if we show those people love we are really
showing love for Christ Himself. In John 3:18 and 19, Christ tells us to love
in “deed and truth” and by that love we “assure our hearts before Him.”
John also affirms Gaius in his actions and tells him to
continue them. John is perhaps doing this out of urgency because he does not
want Gaius to become dissuaded by Diotrephes and his false teaching.34
Important to this section is the fact that by accepting
these people Gaius is showing them love. This is fulfilling the Command of
Christ and is also provides us with an example of what we should be doing as a
church to show love towards others who are walking in the truth. The Greek word
for charity that is used here, ἀγάπη, shows that there is more than just
doctrinal approval being shown, but that Gaius felt convicted to show these
people hospitality. This type of love is also something that is mentioned in
Johns first Epistle.35
The last statement made at the end of this section, “…, you will do well” is
known in Greek literature as an idiomatic expression which means, “Please”.36
who were shown love – 5 “…to the brethren…strangers;”
described – 6a “Which have borne witness…before the
charity can benefit the Church – 6b “…bring…journey… God.”
John is reminding Gaius to keep accepting them and accept
them in such a way that worthy of God. Basically, act like each person you are
taking into your church is God Himself.37
of their journey – 7 “Because…taking nothing…Gentiles.”
The reason for this is because the Gentiles who they are
helping will not always be receptive to the message that the missionaries are
they went forward in – 7a “…His name’s sake…”
It is shown here that the people Gaius helped were sent out
for a purpose, or mission. The statement here in Third John shows us that the
men who were sent out were missionaries.38
The word name, ὄνομα
, shows that they are going out in Christ’s name and is the same word that is
used in Acts 15:14, 17, and 26 to reference the name of Christ. 39
they went – 7b “forward…taking nothing of the
of John’s commendation – 8 “We therefore…to the truth.”
toward the aforementioned – 8a “We…to receive…”
John is telling Gaius that we should receive these
missionaries because by doing such we can take part in the same mission of
helping to spread the Gospel.
for Action – 8b “…that we might be…to truth.”
Furthermore, John is telling Gaius that through this act of
helping missionaries we can take part in their work. He is stating that if
Gaius’ church cannot become involved themselves in missions work then take part
in helping to send them out and take them in. Through that action they then can
work with the missionaries for the truth. By following through with the action
they then become “fellowhelpers”.
συνεργός: This Greek word means fellow worker or co-laborer.
Condemnation- 9-10 “I wrote…but
Diotrephes…putting them out of the church”
It is important that John mentions this. He is telling us
that he sent out a letter to Diotrephes’ church, but John thinks that the
letter will not be well received by certain people at the church namely
Diotrephes. The reason why John thinks this is because of the way that he
describes Diotrephes, which will be discussed in the next section. It is thought, by at least one scholar, that
the letter that was sent to Diotrephes’ church was Second John, but this is not
confirmed in Third John. 40 We
are not made aware of this letter, but can be sure that it spoke on the subject
of traveling missionaries, a topic that is not in Second John.
This is another example of movement in Third John, the
letter being delivered to Diotrephes and the church he is a part of. Another
movement, that is implied but not mentioned in Third John, would be a returning
of the messenger to John.
of Diotrephes – 9a “…but Diotrephes,…among them…”
- πρωτεύ: This word, translated into English, means the love of being
This is what John describes as the chief problem of Diotrephes. The same word
is used in Colossians 1:18, “And He is the head of the body, the church, who is
the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the
preeminence.” The same attribute that is
used to describe Diotrephes is the word that Paul used to state that Christ
alone should have the preeminence. Furthermore, it says that Christ is the Head
of the Church which stands in contrast to Diotrephes’ attempt at being the head
of his church.
Diotrephes’ fault, and something that we as a church should
worry about today, is putting ourselves, or a single leader, ahead of Christ.
As a church, we should look to Christ, and His Word, as the source of correct
doctrine and correct behavior.
of the Brothers – 9b “…does not receive us.”
To add to his previous problem Diotrephes chooses not to
receive the apostles or to accept their authority. We are not given any reason
why he chose to do this, but it follows that if he rejects Christ’s authority, through
his actions, he will most certainly reject the authority of Christ’s followers.
Diotrephes – 10
actions of Diotrephes stand in stark contrast to everything that was said about
Gaius in the previous section. Gaius was showing loving behavior towards the
missionaries Diotrephes, on the other hand, does not receive them and puts
those who do out of the church. Gaius was walking in the truth; Diotrephes was
walking in darkness, more on this later.
Gaius accepts the Apostle’s authority, Diotrephes does not. This sets up
the next section of the text which shows the contrast between the two men by
showing the truth that can be gleaned from this situation.
verse also shows the authority of the Apostles. It describes how John will call
to mind the things that he does, and then hopefully restore Diotrephes to the
church. This shows us that it is not judgmental to confront one another, in
love, if they are not in line with the Word of God.
mentioned before Gaius was called someone who walks in the truth, and this
truth, as stated in point 2 sub point d, is Christ Himself. Again, there is a
connection here between Third John, First John 1:5-6, and the Gospel of John
8:12 when Christ says, “I am the light of the world. He who follows me shall
not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.” The
verse in First John 1:6 states, “If we say that we have fellowship with Him,
and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.” Gaius is the person who is walking in the
light, according to John 8:12, because he is following after Christ, Diotrephes,
taking what is implied in what Christ is saying in the same verse, is by
contrast not walking in the light so as a result he is walking in darkness,
because he is not following after Christ. The Holy Spirit42,
through John, states in First John that those who walk in the darkness do not
practice the truth and as stated before because Diotrephes is not following
after Christ, he is walking in the darkness.43
Here it is possible John could be telling us that Diotrephes is not a
Christian, or that John is considering Diotrephes’ salvation.44
Words – 10a
“…prating against...the brethren…”
Doesn’t Receive Brothers – 10b “…brethren…putting them out.”
Comparison of Good and Evil- 11-12
“Beloved...evil, but that which is good…”
This is the start of the last section of the body as noted
again by the word “Beloved”.
The text in verse 11 is directly after a section of
comparison between Gaius and Diotrephes in verse 10. It would follow then that
the author is referencing the two people mentioned in verse 10 in the next
In verse 11 John is exhorting Gaius to imitate what is good,
and to not imitate evil. This is the main point of verse 11.
In verse 12 John gives us another example of what is good and
that is Demetrius. Gaius was also mentioned before in contrast to Diotrephes,
but John felt the need to include Demetrius also when speaking of someone who
has a good testimony. It is thought that Demetrius is the person who delivered
the letter to Gaius.
to follow after – 11a “...follow not that which is evil,
relation – 11b “…that which is evil…”
relation – 11c “…that which is good.”
to follow after – 11d “He that doeth good is of God:
person – 11e “He that doeth good is of God…”
It would appear that John is speaking of both Gaius, who
John earlier described as walking in the truth, and the person he introduces in
verse 12, Demetrius.
person – 11f “...he that doeth evil has not seen God…”
There is a contradiction here for those who try to explain
that John was stating that Diotrephes was a Christian. John explicitly states
in verse 11 that those who are practicing evil, Diotrephes, have not seen God.
Marshall, in a seeming change of viewpoints, states now that John is calling
Diotrephes’ “Christian experience” into question.45
Seemingly, it would appear that John, who states that the evil has not seen God,
means simply that. The people who are walking not in the truth, who John states
in Third John as being Diotrephes, are not in fellowship with God.
Demetrius’ Report– 12
John here gives an example of a person who Gaius should be
seeking to be like in his walk towards the truth. It is also suggested that Demetrius
is the bearer of the letter.46
To Peers –
“…hath a good report of all men…we also…”
This shows that Demetrius is someone who’s respected by the
apostles and is someone who respects the authority of the apostles.
truth – “…from the truth…”
III. Third Division of John’s Letter
(Conclusion) – 13- 14 “I
had many things to write…”
– 13 “ I had many
things to write…pen write unto thee:”
Here some scholars suggest that John is frustrated because
he has to communicate through a scribe and is also stating that he did not
write enough information considering the severity of the situation.47
– 14a “…I
trust that I shall see thee, and we shall speak face to face…”
Here John is telling Gaius that he will instruct him further
when he sees the man face to face.
C. Greeting – 14b “Peace be to thee. …
Greet the friends by name.”
It is noted here by Yarbrough that this last convention
translated into English as “peace” is not common of New Testament writers.
Instead of the word peace, often at the closing of letters New Testament
authors would use the word grace.48
On the other hand, Stott thinks that this is an appropriate closing given the
situation of Third John and the conflict involved in the book.49
1 Marshall, I. Howard. The
Epistles of John. p81.
2 Smalley, 317. This view,
according to Smalley, is based on a misinterpretation of the works
of Papias. For further information, see Stephen S.
Smalley, John: Evangelist and Interpreter
(Exeter: The Paternoster Press, 1983).
3 Wood, 16. Critical Concerns regarding the Johannine
5 Kistemaker, 389. New Testament Commentary: James, Epistles of
John, Peter, and Jude, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic (2007).
6 Brown, R. E., 11-12. The Epistles of John.
Anchor Bible, 30. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
7 Wood, 16. Critical Concerns regarding the Johannine
8 Brown, 101. The Epistles of John. Anchor Bible, 30. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
9 Robinson, 307. Redating
the New Testament. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976.
10 Brown, LXXIX-CII. The
Gospel according to John. New York: Doubleday, 1966. This source provides solid
information about the authorship speculation that has arose in modern
scholarship and the interrelation of the supposed authors. It shows, in part,
where the confusion could have arisen in modern scholarship.
11 Brown, 101.
12 Kruse, 9, 36, 42. The
Letters of John. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. ;, 2000.
13 Stott, 28. The Letters of
John: an introduction and commentary. 2nd ed. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity
Press ;, 1988.
14 Kruse, 48.
15 Stott, 42.
16 Kruse, 47.
17 Woods, 16.
18 Kistemaker, 380.
19 Woods, 16, who cites
others in his work.; Kruse, 47; ESV, Study
Bible: Introduction to the NT. 2008.
20 Marshall, I. Howard. The
Epistles of John. p. 13.
21 Akin, Daniel L.. 1, 2,
3 John. p. 238.
22 Stott, 222.
23 Stott, 222; McDermond, J.
E.. Epistles of 1, 2, 3 John. p.
287. Marshall also makes note of both possible interpretations. p. 82.
24 McDermond, 288; Marshall,
25 Marshall, 82.
26 Young, Robert. Young's
Analytical Concordance to the Bible. p. 781.
27 Young, 781; Blue Letter
Bible. "Dictionary and Word Search for euodoō (Strong's 2137)". Blue
Letter Bible. 1996-2013. 25 Apr 2013. < http://
>; MacArthur, John. 1-3 John. p. 245.
28 Stott, 223.
29 McDermond, 288.
30 John 14:6
31 Mcdermond, 288.
32 Marshall, 84;Yarbrough,
33 See note on Main Point II
for further exegesis of “Beloved”.
34 Stott, 225.
35 1 John 3:17-18;
36 Yarbrough, 371; Marshall,
85; MacAruthur, 247.
37 Stott, 225; Yarbrough,
38 Stott, 227; Marshall, 86;
MacArthur, 248; McDermond ,289; Yarbrough, 372.
39 Young, 686.
40 Yarbrough, 377; Marshall,
88; MacDermond, 288; Stott, 229.
41 Young, 769.
42 I recognize that this is
an Appeal to Authority, but it is the truth…and we should remember that
Scripture was written by the Holy Spirit through men.
43 I understand that there
is a difference between walking in darkness and occasionally sinning. I am
positing here that based on Third John and the way it is written Diotrephes is
walking in darkness.
44 This is a part of 3 John
that is debated by scholars in academia.
Stott, 229; Marshall, 90. Stott and Marshall do not
agree with the view that I take.
Robert A. Kraft, and Gerhard Krodel. Orthodoxy and heresy in earliest
Christianity, 93. Agrees with my position, but is criticized by
Margaret M. Mitchell,
"'Diotrephes Does Not Receive Us;: The Lexicographical and Social Context
of 3 John 9-10," Journal of Biblical Literature 117.2
(1998:299-320), with bibliography of the conflict on each possible arena of the
45 Marshall, 92.
46 Marshall, 93; Stott 223;
47 Yarbrough, 385; Stott
48 Yarbrough, 386.
49 Stott, 234.
© LightofMine, People who are in this class now, you know who you are, may use this for reference ONLY. Turn in your own work don't steal mine; On the otherhand if you want to use this for a sermon or teaching go right ahead.