14. And this is the confidence that roe have in him. Marg., concerning. Gr., "Towards him," or in respect to him (ir/oos uvtov). The confidence referred to here is that which relates to the answer to prayer. The apostle does not say that this is the only thing in respect to which there is to be confidence in him, but that is one which is worthy of special consideration. The sense is, that one of the effect! of believing on the Lord Jesus (ver. 13) is that we have the assurance that our prayers will be answered. On the word confidence, see Notes on chap. iii. 21; It; 17. If That if we ask any thing according to his will, he hearcth us. This is the proper and the necessary limitation in all prayer. God has not promised to grant any thing that shall be contrary to his
ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:
15 And if we know a that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know
will, and it could not be right that he should do it. We ought not to wish to receive any thing that would be contrary to what he judges to be best. No man could hope for good who should esteem his own wishes to be a better guide than the will of God; and it is one of the most desirable of all arrangements that the promise of any blessing to be obtained by prayer should be limited and bounded by the will of God. The limitation here, "according to his will," probably implies the following things: (1.) In accordance with what he has declared that he is willing to grant. Here the range is large, for there are many things which we know to be in accordance with his will if they are sought in a proper manner, as the forgiveness of sins, the sanctification of the soul (1 Thess. iv. 3), comfort in trial, the needful supply of our wants, grace that we may do our duty, wisdom to direct and guide us (James i. 5), deliverance from the evils which beset us, the influences of his Spirit to promote the cause of religion in the world, and our final salvation. Here is a range of subjects of petition that may gratify the largest wishes of praj-er. (2.) The expression "according to his will" must limit the answer to prayer to what he sees to be best for us. Of that we are not always good judges. We never perceive it as clearly as our Maker does, and in many things we might be wholly mistaken. Certainly we ought not to desire to be permitted to ask any thing which God would judge not to be for our good. (3.) The expression must limitthe petition to what it will be consistent lor God to bestow upon us. We can not expect that he will work a miracle in answer to our prayers; we can not ask him to bestow blessings in violation of any of the laws which he has ordained, or in any other way than that which he has appointed. It is better that the particular blessing should be withheld from us than that the laws which he has appointed should be disregarded. It is better that an idle man should not have a harvest, though he should pray for it, than that God should violate the laws by which he has determined to bestow such favors as a reward of industry, and work a special miracle in answer to a lazy man's prayers. (4.) The expression "according to his will" must limit the promise to what will be for the good of the whole. God presides over the universe, and though in him there is an infiuite fullness, and he regards the wants of every individual throughout his immense empire, yet the interests of the whole, as well as of the individual, are to be consulted and regarded. In a family, it is conceivable that a child might ask for some favor whose bestowment would interfere materially with the rights of others, or be inconsistent with the good of the whole; and in such a case a just father would of course withhold it. With these necessary limitations^the range of the promise in prayer is ample; and, with these limitations, it is true beyond a question that he does hear and answer prayer.
15. And if we know that he hear us. That is, if we are assured of this as a true doctrine, then, even though we may not see immediately that the prayer is answered, we may have the utmost confidence that it is not disregarded, and that it will be answered in the way best adapted to promote our good. The specific thing that we asked may not indeed be granted (comp. Luke xxii. 42; 2 Cor. xii. 8, 9), but the prayer will not be disregarded, and the thing which is most for our good will be bestowed upon us. The argument here is derived from the faithfulness of God; from the assurance which we feel that, when he has promised to hear us, there will be, sooner or later, a real answer to the prayer. ^ We know that we have the petitions, etc. That is, evidently, we know that we shall have them, or that the prayer will be answered. It can not mean that we already have the precise thing for which we prayed, or that would be a literal answer to the prayer, for (a) the prayer may relate to something future, as protection on a journey, or a harvest, or restoration to health, or the safe return of a son from a voyage at sea, or the salvation of our souls, all of which are future, and which can not be expect-
that we have the petitions that we desired of him. 1G If any man see his brother sin
a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto
ed to be granted at once; and (6) the answer to prayer is sometimes delayed, though ultimately granted. There may be reasons why the answer should be deferred, and the promise is not that it shall be immediate. The delay may arise from such causes as these: (1.) To try our faith and see whether the blessing is earnestly desired. (2.) Perhaps it could not be at once answered without a miracle. (3.) It might not be consistent with the divine arrangements respecting others to grant it to us at once. (4.) Our own condition may not be such that it would be best to answer it at once. We may need further trial, further chastisement, before the affliction, for example, shall be removed, and the answer to the prayer may be delayed for months or years. See Notes on Dan. x. 12, 14. Yet, in the mean time, we may have the firmest assurance that the prayer is heard, and that it icill be answered in the way and at the period when God shall see it to be best. 16. If. any man see 7iis brother sin a sin, etc. From the general assurance that God hears prayer the apostle turns to a particular case in which it may be benevolently and effectually employed in rescuing a brother from death. There has been great diversity of opinion in regard to the meaning of this passage, and the views of expositors of the New Testament are by no means settled as to its true sense. It does not comport with the design of these Notes to examine the opinions which have been held in detail. A bare reference, however, to some of them will show the difficulty of determinfng with certainty what the passage means, and the impropriety of any very great confidence in one's own judgment in the case. Among these opinions are the following: Some have supposed that the sin against the Holy Ghost is intended; some that the phrase denotes any great and enormous sin, as murder, idolatry, adultery; some that it denotes some sin that was punishable by death by the laws of Moses; some that it denotes a sin that subjected the offender to excommunication from the synagogue or the Church; some P2 that it refers to sins which brought fatal disease upon the offender, as in the case of those who abused the Lord's Supper at Corinth (see Notes on 1 Cor. xi. 30); some that it refers to crimes committed against the laws for which the offender was sentenced to death — meaning that when the charge alleged was false, and the condemnation unjust, they ought to pray for the one who was condemned to death, and that he would be spared; but that when the offense was one which had been really committed, and the offender deserved to die, they ought not to pray for him— or, in other words, that by u the sin unto death ' ' offenses against the civil law are referred to, which the magistrate had no power to pardon, and the punishment of which he could not commute; and by the "sin not unto death," offenses are referred to which might be pardoned, and when the punishment might be commuted; some that it refers to sins before and after baptism, the former of which might be pardoned, but the latter of which might not be; and some, and perhaps this is the common opinion among the Roman Catholics, that it refers to sins that might or might not be pardoned after death, thus referring to the doctrine of purgatory. These various opinions may be seen stated more at length in Rosenmiiller, Lucke, Pool (Synopsis), and Clarke, in loc. To go into an examination of all these opinions would require a volume by itself, and all that can be done here is to furnish what seems to me to be the fair exposition of the passage. The word brother may refer either to a member of the Church, whether of the particular church to which one was attached or to another, or it may be' used in the larger sense which is common as denoting a fellow-man, a member of the great family of mankind. There is nothing in the word which necessarily limits it to one in the Church; there is nothing in the connection, or in the reason assigned, why what is said should be limited to such a one. The duty here enjoined would be the same whether the person referred to was in the Church or not, for it is our duty to pray for those who sin, and to seek the salvation of those whom we see to be going astray and to be in danger of ruin, wherever they are, or whoever they may be. At the same time, the correct interpretation of the passage does not depend on determining whether the word brother refer to one who is a professed Christian or not. f i sin which is not unto death. The great question in the interpretation of the whole passage is what is meant by the "sin unto death." The Greek (d/napTia 7r/oos 2rui/a.Tov) would mean properly a sin which tends to death, which would terminate in death, of which death was the penalty or would be the result unless it were arrested; a sin which, if it had its own course, would terminate thus, as we speak of a disease "unto death." Comp. Notes on John xi. 4. The word death is used in three significations in the New Testament, and as employed here might, so far as the word is concerned, be applied in any one of those senses. It is used to denote (a) literally the death of the body; (&) spiritual death, or death u in trespasses and sin " (Eph. ii. 1); (c) the " second death," death in the world of woe and despair. If the sin here mentioned refer to temporal death, it means such a sin that temporal death must inevitably follow, either by the disease which it has produced or by a judicial sentence where there was no hope of pardon or of a commutation of the punishment; if it refer to death in the future world, the second death, then it means such a sin as is unpardonable. That this last is the reference here seems to me to be probable, if not clear, from the following considerations: (1.) There is such a sin referred to in the New Testament, a sin for which there is forgiveness " neither in this life nor the life to come." See Notes on Matt. xii. 31, 32. Comp. Mark iii. 29. If there is such a sin, there is no impropriety in supposing that John would refer to it here. (2.) This is the obvious interpretation. It is that which would occur to the mass of the readers of the New Testament, and which it is presumed they do adopt; and this, in general, is one of the best means of ascertaining the sense of a passage in the Bible. (3.) The other significations attached to the word death would be quite inappropriate here, (a) It can not mean "unto spiritual death," that is, to a continuance in sin; for how could that be known, and if such a case occurred, why would it be improper to pray for it? Besides, the phrase "a sin unto spiritual death," or "unto continuance in sin," is one that is unmeaning, (b) It can not be shown to refer to a disease that would be unto death, miraculously inflicted on account of sin, because, if such cases occurred, they were very rare, and even if a disease came upon a man miraculously in consequence of sin, it could not be certainly known whether it were or were not unto death. All who were visited in this way did not certainly die (comp. 1 Cor. v. 4, 5 with 2 Cor. ii. 6, 7. See also 1 Cor. xi. 30). (c) It can not be shown that it refers to the case of those who were condemned by the civil magistrate to death, and for whom there was no hope of reprieve or pardon; for it is not certain that there were such cases; and if there were, and the person condemned were innocent, there was every reason to pray that God would interpose and save them, even when there was no hope from man; and if they were guilty, and deserved to die, there was no reason why the$ should not pray that the sin might be forgiven, and that they might be prepared to die, unless it were a case where the sin was unpardonable. It, seems probable to me, therefore, that the reference here is to the sin against the Holy Ghost, and that John means here to illustrate the duty and the power of prayer by showing that for any si?i short of that, however aggravated, it was their duty to pray that a brother might be forgiven. Though it might not be easy to determine what was the unpardonable sin, and John does not say that those to whom he wrote could determine that with certainty, yet there were many sins which were manifestly not of that aggravated character, and for those sins it was proper to pray. There was clearly but one sin that was unpardonable — "there is a sin unto death;" there might be many which were not of this description, and in relation to them there was ample scope for the exercise of the prayer of faith. The same thing is true now. It is not easy to define the unpardonable sin, and it is impossible for us to determine in any case with absolute certainty that a man has committed It. But there are multitudes ofsinfl which men commit which on HO proper interpretation of the passages respecting the sin which ilhath never forgiveness" can come under the description of that sin, and for which it is proper, therefore, to pray that they may be pardoned. We know of eases enough where sin may be forgiven, and, without. allowing the mind to be disturbed about the question respecting the unpardonable sin, it is our duty to bear such cases on our hearts before God, and to plead with him that our erring brethren may be saved. M He shall ask. That is, he shall pray that the offender may be brought to true repentance and be saved. If And he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. That is, God shall give life, and he shall be saved from the eternal death to which he was exposed. This, it is said, would be given to "him" who offers the prayer; that is, his prayer would be the means of saving the offending brother. What a motive is this to prayer! -How faithful and constant should we be in pleading for our fellow-sinners, that we may be instrumental in. saving their souls! What joy will await those in heaven who shall see there many who were rescued from ruin in answer to their prayers! Comp. Notes on James v. 15, 19, 20. Tf There is a sin unto death. A sin which is of such a character that it throws the offender beyond the reach of mercy, and which is not to be pardoned. See Mark iii/28, 29. The apostle does not liere say what that sin is, nor how they might know what it is, nor even that in any case they could determine that it had been committed. He merely says that there is such a sin, and that he does not design that his remark about the efficacy of prayer should be understood as extending to that. If I do not say that he shall pray for it. u I do not intend that my remark shall be extended to all sin, or mean to affirm that all possible forms of guilt are the proper subjects of prayer; for I am aware that there is one sin which is an exception, and my remark is not to be applied to that." He docs not say that this sin was of common occurrence, or that they could know when it had been committed, or even
I that a case could ever occur in which i they could determine that; he mere- I ly says that in respect to that sin j he did not say that prayer should be ' offered. It is, indeed, implied in a most delicate way that it would not. be proper to pray for the forgiveness of such a sin; but he does not say that a case would ever happen in which they would know certainly that the sin had been committed. There were instances in the times of the prophets in which the sin of the people became so universal and so aggravated that they were forbidden to pray for them. Isa. xiv. 11: " Then said the Lord unto me, Pray not for this people for their good." Isa. xv. 1: "Then said the Lord unto me, Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my mind could not be toward this people; cast them out of my sight, and let them go forth." Comp. Notes on Isa. i. 15. But these were cases in which the prophets were directly instructed by God not to pray for a people. We have no such instruction, and it may be said now with truth that, as we can never be certain respecting any one that he has committed the unpardonable sin, there is no one for whom we may not with propriety pray. There may be those Avho are so far gone in sin that there may seem to be little or almost no ground of hope. They may have cast off all the restraints of religion, of morality, of decency; they may disregard all the counsels of parents and friends; they may be skeptical, sensual, profane; they may be the companions of infidels and of mockers; they may have forsaken the sanctuary andJearned to despise the Sabbath; they may have been professors of religion, and now may have renounced the faith of the Gospel altogether; but still, while there is life, it is our duty to pray for them," if peradventure God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth." 2 Tim. ii. 25. "All things are possible with God;" and he has reclaimed offenders more hardened, probably, than any that we have known, and has demonstrated that there is no form of depravity which he has not the power to subdue. Let us remember the cases of Manasseh, of Saul of Tarsus, of Augustine, of Bunyan, of Newton, of tens of thousands who have been reclaimed from the vilest forms of in- death. There is a sin unto death: a I do b not say that he shall pray for it. 17 All unrighteousness e is sin: and there d is a sin not unto death.
18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth '■ himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
19 And we know that we are of
iquity, and then let us never despair of the conversion of any, in answer to prayer, who may have gone astray, as long as they are in this world of probation and of hope. Let no parent despair who has an abandoned son; let no wife cease to pray who has a dissipated husband. How many a prodigal son has come back to fill with happiness an aged parent's heart! how many a dissipated husband has been reformed,to give joy again to the wife of his youth, and to make a paradise again of his miserable home!
17. All unrighteousness is sin, etc. This seems to be thrown in to guard what he had just said, that there is one great and enormous sin, a sin which could not be forgiven. But he says also that there are many other forms and degrees of sin, sin for which prayer may be made. Every thing, he says, which is unrighteous (adixia), every thing which does not conform to the holy law of God, and which is not right in the view of that law, is to be regarded as sin; but we are not to suppose that all sin is of such a character that it can not possibly be forgiven. There are many who commit sin who we may hope will be recovered, and for them it is proper to pray. Deeply affected as we may be in view of the fact that there is a sin which can never be pardoned, and much as we may pity one who has been guilty of such a sin, yet we should not hastily conclude in any case that that sin has been committed, and should bear constantly in mind that while there is one such sin there are multitudes which may be pardoned, and that for them it is our duty unceasingly to pray.
18. We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not. Is not habitually and characteristically a sinner; does not ultimately and finally sin and perish; can not, therefore, commit the unpardonable sin. Though he may fall into sin, and grieve his brethren, yet we are never to cease to pray for a true Christian; we are never to feel that he has committed the sin which has never forgiveness, and that he has thrown himself beyond the reach of our prayers. This passage, in its connection, is a full proof that a true Christian will never commit the unpardonable sin, and therefore is a proof that he will never fall from grace. Comp. Notes on Heb. vi. 4-8; x. 26. On the meaning of the assertion here made, that "whosoever is born of God sinneth not," see Notes on chap. iii. 6-9. If Keepeth himself. It is not said that he does it by his own strength; but he will put forth his best efforts to keep himself from sin, and by divine assistance he will be able to accomplish it. Comp. Notes on chap. iii. 3; Jude 21. 1 And that wicked one toucheth him not. The great enemy of all good is repelled in his assaults, and he is kept from falling into his snares. The word toucheth (aTTTBTai) is used here in the sense of harm or injure.
19. And we know that we are of God. We who are Christians. The apostle supposed that true Christians might have so clear evidence on that subject as to leave no doubt on their own minds that they were the children of God. Comp. chap. iii. 14: 2 Tim. i. 12. If And the whole world. The term world here evidently means, not the material world, but the people that dwell on the earth, including all idolaters, and all sinners of every grade and kind. If Lieth in xoickedness. "In the wicked one," or under the power of the wicked one {kv tw irovt]- pw). It is true that the word (irovnpw) may be used here in the neuter gender, as our translators have rendered it, meaning "in that which is evil," or in " wickedness;" but it may be in the masculine gender, meaning "the wicked one;" and then the sense would be that the whole world is under his control or dominion. That this is the meaning of the apostle seems to be clear, because (1) the corresponding phrase (ver. 20) {kv t» a\t}%ivw), " in him that is true," is
God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness. 20 And we know that the Son of
God is come, and hath given us.an understanding, "that we may know him that is true: and we are in him evidently to be construed in the masculine, referring to God the Saviour, and meaning "him that is true," and not that we are "in truth." (2.) It makes better sense to say that the world lies under the control of the wicked one than to say that it lies "in wickedness." (3.) This accords better with the other representations in the Bible, and the usage of the word elsewhere. Comp. 1 John ii. 13, " Ye have overcome the wicked one;" 14, "Ye have overcome the wicked one;" iii. 12, "Who was of that wicked one." See also Notes on 2 Cor. iv. 4, on the expression "the God of this world;" John xii. 31, where he is called "the prince of this world;" and Eph. ii. 2, Where he is called " the prince of the power of the air." In all these passages it is supposed that Satan has control over the world, especially the heathen world. Comp. Eph. vi. 12; 1 Cor. x. 20. In regard to the fact that the heathen world was pervaded by wickedness, see Notes on Rom. i. 21-32. (4.) It may be added that this interpretation is adopted by the most eminent critics and commentators. It is that of Calvin, Beza, Benson, Macknight, Bloomfield, Piscator, Liicke, etc. The word lieth (kIitui) here means, properly, to lie; to be laid; to recline; to be situated, etc. It seems here to refer to the passive and torpid state of a wicked world under the dominion of the prince of evil; as acquiescing in his reign, making no resistance, not even struggling to be free. It lies thus as a beast that is subdued, as a body that is dead, or as any thing that is wholly passive, quiet, and inert. There is no energy; no effort to throw off the reign; no resistance; no struggling. The dominion is complete, and body and soul, individuals and nations, are entirely subject to his will. This striking expression will not unaptly now describe the condition of the heathen world, or of sinners in general. There would seem to be no government under which men are so little restive, and against which they have so little disposition to rebel, as that of Satan. Comp. 2 Tim. ii. 26. 20. And we knoio that the Son of God is come. We know this by the evidence that John had referred to in ■ this Epistle. Chap. i. 1-4; v. 6-8. H And hath given us an understanding. Not an "understanding" considered as a faculty of the mind, for religion gives us no new faculties; but he has so instructed us that we do understand the great truths referred to. Comp. Notes on Luke xxiv. 45. All the correct knowledge which Ave have of God and his government is to be traced directly or indirectly to the Great Prophet whom God has sent into the world. John i. 4,18; viii. 12; ix. 5; Heb. i. 1-3; Matt. xi. 27. H That we may know him that is true. That is, the true God. See Notes on John xvii. 3. 1 And we are in him that is true. That is, we are united to him; we belong to him; we are his friends. This idea is often expressed in the Scriptures by being " in him." It denotes a most intimate union, as if we were one with him— or were apart of him — as the branch is in the vine. John xv. 4, 6. The Greek construction is the same as that applied to "the wicked- one," ver. 19 (kv tw a\i]5ivop). II This is the tnte God* There has been much difference of opinion in regard to this important passage; whether it refer to the Lord Jesus Christ, the immediate antecedent, or to a more remote antecedent —to God, as such. The question is of importance in its bearing on the doctrine of the divinity of the Saviour; for if it refer to him, it furnishes an unequivocal declaration that he is divine. The question is whether John meant that it should be referred to him t Without going into an extended examination of the passage, the following considerations
* Many MSS. here insert the word God — "the true God" (t6v u\t)$iv6v Sedv). This is also found in the Vulgate, Coptic, iEthiopic, and Arabic versions, and in the Complutensian edition of the New Testament. The reading, however, is not so well sustained as to be adopted by Griesbach,Tittman, or Ilahn. That it may be a genuine reading is indeed possible, but the evidence is against it. Liicke (p. 349) supposes that it is genuine, and endeavors to account for the mauner in which it was omitted in the MSS.
seem to me to make it morally certain that by the phrase "this is the true God," etc., he did refer to the Lord Jesus Christ. (1.) The grammatical construction favors it. Christ is the immediate antecedent of the pronoun this (outos). This would be regarded as the obvious and certain construction, so far as the grammar is concerned, unless there were something in the thing affirmed which led us to seek some more remote and less obvious antecedent. No doubt would ever have been entertained on this point if it had not been for the reluctance to admit that the Lord Jesus is the true God. If the assertion had been that "this is the true Messiah," or that " this is the Son of God," or that "this is he who was born of the Virgin Mary," there would have been no difficulty in the construction. I admit that this argument is not absolutely decisive; for cases do occur when a pronoun refers, not to the immediate antecedent, but to one more remote; but cases of that kind depend on the ground of necessity, and can be applied only when it would be a clear violation of the sense of the author to refer it to the immediate antecedent. (2.) This construction seems to be demanded by the adjunct which John has assigned to the phrase "the true God" — "eternal life." This is an expression which John would be likely to apply to the Lord Jesus considered as life and the source of life, and not to God as such. "How familiar is this language with John as applied to Christ! 'In him (i. e., Christ) was life, and the life was the light of men— giving life to the world— the bread of life — my words are spirit and life— I am the way and the truth and the life. This life (Christ) was manifested, and we have seen it, and do testify to you, and declare the eternal life which was with the Father, and was manifested to us.' 1 Jolfn i. 2." — Prof. Stuart, Lettei-s to Dr. Charming, p. 83. There is no instance in the writings of John in which the appellation life and eternal life is bestowed upon the Father to designate him as the author of spiritual and eternal life; and as this occurs so frequently in John's writings as applied to Christ, the laws of exegesis require that both the phrase^" the true God" and "eternal life" should be applied to him. (3.)
If it refer to God as such, or to the word "true" (tov a\i)Siv6v \%zbv]), it would be mere tautology, or a mere truism. The rendering then would be, " That we may know the true God, and we are in the true God; this is the true God and eternal life." Can we believe that an inspired man would affirm gravely, and with so much solemnity, and as if it were a truth of so much magnitude, that the true God is the true God? (4.) This interpretation accords with what we are sure John would affirm respecting the Lord Jesus Christ. Can there be any doubt that he who said, " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;" that he who said, "All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made;" that he who recorded the declaration of the Saviour, " I and my Father are one," and the declaration of Thomas, " My Lord and my God," would apply to him the appellation the true God? (5.) If John did not mean to affirm this, he has made use of an expression which was liable to be misunderstood, and which, as facts have shown, would be misconstrued by the greater portion of those who would read what he had written; and, moreover, an expression that would lead to the very sin against which he endeavors to guard" in the next verse— the sin of substituting a creature in the place of God, and rendering to another the honor due to him. The language which he uses is just such as, according to its natural interpretation, would lead men to worship one as the true God who is not the true God, unless the Lord Jesus be divine. For these reasons it seems to me that the fair interpretation of this passage demands that it should be understood as referring to the Lord Jesus Christ. If so, it is a direct assertion of his divinity, for there could be no higher proof of it than to affirm that he is the true God. Tf And eternal life. Having "life in himself" (John v. 26), and the source and fountain of life to the soul. No more frequent appellation, perhaps, is given to the Saviour by John than that he is life and the source of life. Comp. John i. 4; v. 26, 40; vi. 33, 35, 48, 51, 53, 63; x. 10; xi. 25; xiv. 6; xx. 31; 1 John i. 1, 2; v. 12. 21. Little children. This is a favorite
that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This" is the true God, and eternal life.
21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols.6 Amen.
mode of address with John (see Notes on chap. ii. 1), and it was proper to use it in giving his parting counsel, embracing, in fact, all that he had to say — that they should keep them- Beives from idols, and suffer nothing to alienate their affections from the true God. His great object had been to lead them to the knowledge and love of God, and all his counsels would be practically followed if, amid the temptations of idolatry and the allurements of sin, nothing were allowed to estrange their hearts from him. H Keep yourselves from idols. From worshiping them; from all that would imply communion with them or their devotees. Comp. Notes on 1 Cor. x. 14. The word rendered idols here (ddwXov) means, properly, an image, spectre, shade — as of the dead; then any image or figure which would represent any thing, particularly any thing invisible; and hence any thing designed to represent God, and that was set up with a view to be acknowledged as representing him, or to bring him or his perfections more vividly before the mind. The word is applicable to idol-gods — heathen deities— 1 Cor. viii. 4, 7; x. 19; Rom. ii. 22; 2 Cor. vi. 16; 1 Thess. i. 9; but it would also be applicable to any image designed to represent the true God, and through or by which the true God was to be adored. The essential things in the word seem to be (a) an image or representation of the deity; and (b) the making of that an object of adoration instead of the true God. Since one of these things would be likely to lead to the other, both are forbidden in the prohibitions of idolatry. Exod.xx.4,5. This would forbid all attempts to represent God by paintings or statuary; all idolworship, or worship of heathen gods; all images and pictures that would be substituted in the place of God as objects of devotion, or that might transfer the homage from God to the Image; and all giving of those affections to other beings or objects which are due to God. Why the apostle closed this Epistle with this injunction he has not stated, and it may not be easy to determine. It may have been for such reasons as these: (1.) Those to whom he wrote were surrounded by idolaters, and there was danger that they might fall into the prevailing sin, or in some way so act as to be understood to lend their sanction to idolatry. (2.) In a world full of alluring objects there was danger then, as there is at all times, that the affections would be fixed on other objects than the supreme God, and that what is due to him would be withheld. It may be added, in the conclusion of the exposition of this Epistle, that the same caution is as needful for us as it was to those to wiiom John wrote. We are not in danger, indeed, of bowing down to idols, or of engaging in the grosser forms of idol- worship; but we may be in no less danger than they to whom John wrote were of substituting other things in our affections in the place of the true God, and of devoting to them the time and the affection which are due to him. It is possible to love our children with such an attachment as will effectually exclude the true God from the heart. The world— its wealth and pleasures and honors — we may love with a degree of attachment such as even an idolater would hardly show to his idol-gods; and the time which he would take in performing his devotions in an idol-temple we may devote with equal fervor to the service of the world. There is practical idolatry all over the world: in nominally Christian lands as well as among the heathen; in families that acknowledge no god but wealth and fashion; in the hearts of multitudes of individuals who would scorn the thought of worshiping at a Pagan altar; and it is even to be found in the heart of many a one whD professes to be acquainted with the true God, and to be an heir of heaven. God should have the supreme place in our affections. The love of every thing else should be held in strict subordination to the love of him. He should reign in our hearts; be acknowledged In our closets, in our families, and in the place of public worship; be submitted to at all times as having a right to command and control us; be obeyed in all the expressions of his will— hy his Word, by his Providence, and by his Spirit; be so loved that we shall be willing to part without a murmur with the dearest object of affection when he takes it from us; and so that, with joy and triumph, we shall welcome his messenger, the angel of death, when he shall come to summon us into his presence, To all who may read these illustrations of the Epistle of the " beloved disciple" may God grant this inestimable blessing and honor— Amen.
§ 1. The Authenticity of the Second and Third Epistles of John.
The authenticity of these two Epistles was doubted by many in the early Christian Church, and it was not before a considerable time had elapsed that their canonical authority was fully admitted. The first of the three Epistles was always received as the undoubted production of the apostle John; but, though not positively and absolutely rejected, there were many doubts entertained in regard to the authorship of the second and third. Their exceeding brevity, and the fact that they were addressed to individuals, and seemed not designed for general circulation, made them less frequently referred to by the early Christian writers, and renders it more difficult to establish their genuineness.
The evidence of their genuineness is of two kinds— external and internal. Though, from their brevity, the proof on these points must be less full and clear than it is in regard to the first Epistle, yet it is such as to satisfy the mind, on the whole, that they are the production of the apostle John, and are entitled to a place in the canon of Scripture.
(1.) External. The evidence of this kind, either for or against the authenticity of these Epistles, is found in the following testimonies respecting them in the writings of the fathers, and the following facts in regard to their admission into the canon:
(«) In the church and school at Alexandria they were both well known, and were received as a part of the sacred writings. Clement of Alexandria, and Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, quote them or refer to them as the writings of the apostle John. Lardner, vi., 27i»; Liicke, p. 329. Origen, the successor of Clement, says, "John left behind him an Epistle of very few stichoi; perhaps also a second and third, though some do not consider these genuine. Both these together, however, contain only a hundred stichoi." Uionvsius of Alexandria shows that he was acquainted with all of them, but calls the two last <pep6fitvai — writings alleged to be genuine. For the import of this word as used by Dionysius, see Liicke, p. 330, 331.
(b) These Epistles were known and received in the Western churches in the second and third centuries. Of this fact an important witness is found in Irenams, who, on account of the place where he resided during his youth, and the school in which he was educated, deserves especial regard as a»witness respecting the works of John. — Hug. lie was born at Smyrna, and lived not long after the times of the apostles, lie was a disciple of Polycarp, who was acquainted with the apostle John; and having passed his early years in Asia Minor, must, in the circumstances in which he was placed, have been familiar with the writings of John, and have known well what writings were attributed to him. He quotes the Second Epistle (ver. 11), and with express reference to John as the author, under the name of "John, the disciple of our Lord. " In another place, also, he refers to this Epistle. After quoting from the First Epistle, he continues, "And John, the disciple of Jesus, in the Epistle before mentioned, commanded that they (the heretics) should be shunned, saying," etc. He then quotes, word for word, the seventh and eighth verses of the Epistle.
(c) The African Church, in the third century, regarded the Second Epistle at least as the production of John. At a Synod in Carthage, under Cyprian, Aurelius, bishop of Chullabi, in giving his vote on the question on baptizing heretics, quotes the tenth verse of the Second Epistle as authority, saying, "John, in his Epistle, declares," etc.
(d) There is some doubt in regard to the Syrian Church, whether these Epistles were at first received as genuine or not. The manuscripts of the Peschito, or old Syriac version, at least since the sixth century, do not contain the Epistle of Jude, the Second Epistle of Peter, or the Second and Third of John. Yet Ephrem the Syrian, in the fourth century, quotes the Epistle of Jude, the Second Epistle of Peter, and the Second of John, as genuine and canonical. As this father in the Syrian Church was not acquainted with the Greek language (Liicke), it is clear that he must have read these Epistles in a translation, and, as would seem most probable, in some Syriac version. The probability would seem to be, as these Epistles are not in the oldest Syriac version, that there was some doubt about their authenticity when, that version was made, but that before the time of Ephrem they had come to be regarded as genuine, and were translated by some other persons. Their use in the time of Ephrem would at least show that they were then regarded as genuine. They may have been, indeed, at some period attached to the ancient version, but at a later period, as they did not originally belong to that version, they may have been separated from it. — Liicke. At all events, it is clear that at an early period in the Syrian Church they were regarded as genuine.
(e) Though there were doubts among many of the fathers respecting the genuineness of these Epistles, yet they were admitted in several councils of the Church to be genuine. In the 85th of the apostolic canons (so called), in the 60th canon of the Synod of Laodicea, the council at Hippo (A.D. 393), and the third council of Carthage (A.D. 397), they were reckoned as undoubtedly pertaining to the inspired canon of Scripture.
(/) All doubts on the subject of the genuineness of these Epistles were, however, subsequently removed in the view of Christian writers, and in the Middle Ages they were universally received as the writings of the apostle John. Some of the Reformers, again, had doubts of their genuineness. Erasmus quoted the sentiment of Jerome, that it was not the apostle John who wrote these Epistles, but a presbyter of the same name; and Calvin seems to have entertained some doubt of their genuineness, for he has omitted them in his commentaries; but these doubts have also disappeared, and the conviction has again become general, and indeed almost universal, that they are to be ranked among the genuine writings of the apostle John.
It may be added here that the doubts which have been entertained on the subject, and the investigations to which they have given rise, show the care which has been evinced in forming the canon of the New Testament, and demonstrate that the Christian world has not been disposed to receive books as of sacred authority without evidence of their genuineness.
(2.) There is strong internal evidence that they are genuine. This is found in their style, sentiment, and manner. It is true that one who was familiar with the writings of the apostle John might compose two short Epistles like these that would be mistaken for the real productions of the apostle. There are, even in these brief Epistles, not a few passages which seem to be a mere repetition of what John lias elsewhere said. But there are some things in regard to the internal evidence that they are the writings of the apostle John, and were not designedly forged, which deserve a more particular notice. Tliey are such as these: (a) As already said, the style, sentiment, and manner are such as are appropriate to John. There is nothing in the Epistles which we might not suppose he would write; there is much that accords with what he has written; there is much in the style which would not be likely to be found in the writings of another man; and there is nothing in the sentiments which would lead us to suppose that the manner of the apostle John had been assumed for the purpose of palming upon the world productions which were not his. Kesemblances between these Epistles will strike every reader, and it is unnecessary to specify them. The following passages, however, are so decidedly in the manner of John that it may be presumed that they were either written by him or by one who designed to copy from him: Second Epistle, vs. 5, G, 7, 9; Third "Epistle, vs. 11, 12. (b) The fact that the name of the writer is not affixed to the Epistles is much in the manner of John. Paul, in eveiy case except in the Epistle to the Hebrews, affixed his name to his Epistles; Peter, James, and Jude did the same thing. John, however, has never done it in any of his writings except the Apocalypse. He seems to have supposed that there was something about his style and manner which would commend his writings as genuine, or that in some other way they would be so well understood to be his that it was not necessary to specify it. Yet the omission of his name, or of something that would lay claim to his authority as an apostle, would not be likely to occur if these Epistles were fabricated with a design of palming them upon the world as his. The artifice would be too refined, and would be too likely to defeat itself, to be adopted by one who should form such a plan, (c) The apparently severe and harsh remarks made in the Epistle in regard to heretics may be adverted to as an evidence that these Epistles are the genuine writings of John the apostle. Thus, in the Second Epistle, ver. 10, he says, "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God-speed." So in the Third Epistle, ver. 10: " If I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words," etc. It has been made an objection to the genuineness of these Epistles that this is not in the spirit of the mild and amiable "disciple whom Jesus loved;" that it breathes a temper of uncharitableness and severity which could not have existed in him at any time, and especially when, as an old man, he is said to have preached nothing but "Love one another." But two circumstances will show that this, so far from being an objection, is rather a proof of their genuineness. One is that in fact these expressions accord with what we know to have been the character of John. They are not inappropriate to one who was named by the Master himself " Boanerges — a son of thunder " (Mark iii. 17); or to one who was disposed to call down fire from heaven on the Samaritan who would not receive the Lord Jesus (Luke ix. 54); or to one who, when he saw another casting out devils in the name of Jesus, took upon himself the authority to forbid him (Mark ix. 38). The truth is that there was a remarkable mixture of gentleness and severity in the character of John, and though the former was the most prominent, and may be supposed to have increased as he grew old, yet the other also often manifested itself. There was that in the character of John which under some circumstances, and under other teaching than that of the Lord Jesus, might have been developed in the form of great exclusiveness, bigotry, and sternness — perhaps in the form of open persecution. Under the teaching of the Saviour, and through his example, his milder and better nature prevailed, and so decidedly acquired the ascendency that we scarcely ever think of the harsher traits of his character. The other circumstance is that it would never have occurred to one who should have attempted to forge an Epistle in the name of John to have introduced a passage of this kind. The artifice would have been too little likely to have accomplished the end to have occurred to the mind or to have been adopted. The public character of John was so amiable, he was so uniformly spoken of as the "disciple whom Jesus loved," gentleness and kindness seemed to be such pervading traits in his nature, that no one would have thought of introducing sentiments which seemed to be at variance with these traits, even though, on a close analysis, it could be made out that they were not contrary to his natural character, (d) Perhaps, also, the appellation which the writer gives himself in these two Epistles (6 Trptofivrtpog), the elder, may be regarded as some evidence that they are the writings of the apostle John; that is, it is more probable that he would use this appellation than that any other writer would. It has, indeed, been made a ground of objection that the use of this term proves that they are not the productions of Johu. See Liicke, p. 340. But, as we have seen, John was not accustomed to prefix his own name to his writings, and if these Epistles were written by him when he was at Ephesus, nothing is more probable than that he should use this term. It can hardly be regarded as an appellation pertaining to office, for as there were many elders or presbyters in the Church (Acts xx. 17), the use of the term " the elder " would not be sufficiently distinctive to designate the writer. It may be presumed, therefore, to have a particular respect to age; and, under the circumstances supposed, it would apply to no one with so much propriety as to the apostle John — one who would be well known as the aged and venerable disciple of the Saviour. Comp., however, Liicke on the use of this word, p. 340-343.
§ 2. Of the Person to whom John addressed his Second Epistle.
This Epistle purports to be addressed, as it is in our translation, to "the elect lady " (k\«Krj/ Kvpia). There has been a great diversity of opinion in regard to the person here referred to, and there are questions respecting it which it is impossible to determine with absolute certainty. The different opinions which have been entertained are the following: («) Some have supposed that a Christian matron is referred to, a friend of John, whose name was either 'EicXtKTfj (Eclecte), or Kvpia (Cyria). CEcumenius and Theophyluct supposed that the proper name of the female referred to was Eclecte; others have adopted the other opinion, that the name was Cyria. (b) Others among the ancients, and particularly Clement, supposed that the Church was denoted by this name, under the delicate image of an elect lady: either some particular church to whom the Epistle was sent, or to the Church at large. This opinion has been held by some of the modern writers also, (c) Others have supposed, as is implied in our common version, that it was addressed to some Christian matron whose name is not mentioned, but who was well known to John, and perhaps to many others, for her piety and her acts of kindness to Christians. The reason why her name was suppressed, it has been supposed, was that if it had been mentioned it might have exposed her to trouble in some way, perhaps to persecution, (d) Recently, Knauer (Studien und Kritik., 1833, Heft 2, S. 452, ff.) has endeavored to show that it was addressed to the Virgin Mary, who is supposed to have then resided in Galilee. The improbability of this opinion is shown by Liicke, p. 352, 353.
These questions are not very important to be determined, even if they could be with accuracy; and at this period of time, and with the few data which we have for forming a correct judgment on the subject, it is not possible to settle them with entire certainty. The probable truth in regard to this point, and all which it seems now possible to ascertain with any degree of certainty, may be expressed in the following specifications:
(1.) The letter was addressed to an individual, and not to a church. If it had been to a particular church, it would have been specified, for this is the uniform mode in the New Testament. If it were addressed to the Church at large, it is in the highest degree improbable that John would have departed from the style of address in his First Epistle; improbable in every way that he would have adopted another style so mystical and.unusual in a plain prose composition. It is only in poetry, in prophecy, in compositions where figurative language abounds, that the Church is represented as a female at all; and it is wholly improbable that John, at the outset of a brief Epistle, would have adopted this appellation. The fact that it was addressed to an individual female is further apparent from the mention of her children, vs. 1, 4: " Unto the elect lady and her children;" "I found of thy children walking in truth." This is not such language as one would use in addressing a Church.
(2.) It is probable that the name of this lady was designed to be specified, and that it was Cyria (Kvpia). This, indeed, is not absolutely certain; but the Greek will readily bear this, and it accords best with apostolic usage to suppose that the name of the person to whom the letter was addressed would be designated. This occurs in the Third Epistle of John, the Epistles of Paul to Philemon, to Timothy, and to Titus, and, so far as appears, there is no reason why it should not have been done in the case before us. The Syriac and Arabic translators so understand it, for both have retained the name Cyria. It may do something to confirm this view to remark that the name Cyria was not uncommon, in subsequent times at least, among Christian females. See Corp. Inscript. Gruter, p. 1127, Numb. xi. <&kvnnroc, Kai r} yvvi) avrov Kvpia. Comp. Lex. Hagiologic., Lips., 1710, p. 448, where two female martyrs of that name are mentioned. See also other instances referred to in Liicke, Comm., p. 351. If these views are correct, then the true rendering of the passage would be, "The presbyter unto the elect Cyria."
(3.) Of this pious female, however, nothing more is known than what is mentioned in this Epistle. From that we learn that John was warmly attached to her, ver. 5; that she was a mother, and that her children were pious, vs. 1, 4; and that she was of a hospitable character, and would be likely to entertain those who came professedly as religious teachers, vs. 10, 11. Where or when she lived, or when she died, we have no information whatever. At the time of writing this Epistle John had strong hopes that he would be permitted to come soon and see her, but whether he ever did so we are not informed, ver. 12.
§ 3. The Canonical Authority of the Second and Third Epistles.
The canonical authority of these Epistles depends on the following things:
(I.) On the evidence that they are the writings of the apostle John. In proportion as that evidence is clear, their canonical authority is of course established.
(2.) Though brief, and though addressed to individuals, they are admitted into the canon of Scripture with the same propriety as the Epistles to Timothy, to Titus, and to Philemon, for those were also addressed to individuals.
(3.) Like those Epistles, also, these contain things of general interest to the Church. There is nothing in either that is inconsistent with what John has elsewhere written, or that conflicts with any other part of the New Testament; there is much in them that is in the manner of John, and that breathes his spirit; there is enough in them to tell us of the way of salvation.
Of the time when these Epistles were written, and the place where, nothing is known, and conjecture would be useless, as there are no marks of time or place in either, and there is no historical statement that gives the information. It has been the common opinion that they were written at Ephesus, and when John was old. The appellation v.hich he gives of himself, " the elder" accords with this supposition, though it does not make it absolutely certain.
THE elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth; 2 For the truth's sake, which
The points embraced In this Epistle are these: A salutation to the female to whom it is addressed, and an expression of warm attachment to her family. Vcr. 1-3. An expression of joy and gratitude that he had been permitted to learn that her children had embraced the truth, and were walking in it. Ver. 4. An exhortation to live in the exercise of mutual love, in obedience to the great commandment of the Saviour. Vs. 5, 6. The fact that many deceivers had gone out into the world, and an exhortation to be on the guard against their arts. Vs. 7, 8. A test by which they might be known, and their true character ascertained. Ver. 9. An exhortation to show them no countenance whatever; not to treat them in any such way, even in the rites of hospitality, as to give occasion to the charge that she was friendly to their doctrines. Vs. 10, 11. A statement that, as he hoped to see her soon, he would not write more to her. Ver. 12. The salutation of the children of some one who is spoken of as her elect sister. Ver. 13.
1. The elder. See the Introd., § 1 (2) (d). H Unto the elect lady. The elect or chosen Cyria. See Introd., § 2. He addresses her as one chosen of God to salvation in the use of a term often applied to Christians in the New Testament. T] And her children. The word here rendered children (rtKva) would include in itself both sons and daughters, but, as the apostle immediately uses a masculine pronoun (ous), it would seem more probable that sons only were intended. At all events, the use of such a pronoun proves that a part at least of her children were sons. Of their number and character we have no information, except that (Notes on ver. 4) a part of them were Christians. H Whom 1 love in the truth. See Notes on 1 John iii. 18. The meaning here is that he truly or sincerely loved them. The introduction of the article. Vie here, which is not in the original (kv a\»j- S-eta), somewhat obscures the sense, as if the meaning were that he loved them so far as they embraced the truth. The meaning, however, is that he was sincerely attached to them. The word "whom" (ous) here embraces both- the mother and her children, though.the pronoun is in the masculine gender, in accordance with the usage of the Greek language. No mention is made of her husband, and it may thence be inferred that she was a widow. Had he been living, though he might not have been a Christian, it is to be presumed that some allusion would have been made to him as well as to the children, especially as there is reason to believe that only a part of her children were pious. See Notes on ver. 4. "f[ And not I only, but also all they that have known the truth. That is, all those Christians who had had an opportunity of knowing them were sincerely attached to them. It would seem from a subsequent part of the Epistle (ver. 10) that this female was of a hospitable character, and was accustomed to entertain at her house the professed friends of religion, especially religious teachers, and it is probable that she was the more extensively known from this fact. The commendation of the apostle here shows that it is possible that a family shall be extensively known as one of order, peace, and religion, so that all who know it or hear of it shall regard it with interest, respect, and love.
2. Mr the truth's sake. They love this family because they love the truth, and see it so cordially embraced and so happily exemplified. They who love the Gospel itself will rejoice in all the effects which it produces in society, on individuals, families, and neighborhoods, and their hearts will be drawn with warm affection to the places where its influence is most
dwelleth in us, and shall be with us forever.
3 Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and
from the Lord Jesus Christ, the
Son of the Father, in truth and
4 I rejoiced greatly that I found
fully seen. 1" Which dwelleth in us. In us who are Christians; that is, the truths of the Gospel which we have embraced. Truth may be said to have taken up a permanent abode in the hearts of all who love religion. U And shall be ivith us forever. Its abode with us is not for a night or a day; not for a month or a year; not for the few years that make up mortal life— it is not a passing stranger that finds a lodging like the weary traveler for a night, and in the morning is gone, to be seen no more; it has come to us to make our hearts its permanent home, and it is to be with us in all worlds, and while ceaseless ages shall roll away.
3. Grace be unto you, etc. See Notes on Kom. 1. 7. This salutation does not differ from those commonly employed by the sacred writers, except in the emphasis which is placed on the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ is " the Son of the Father." This is much in the style of John, in all of whose writings he dwells much on the fact that the Lord Jesus is the Son of God, and on the importance of recognizing that fact in order to the ]X)ssession of true religion. Comp. 1 John ii. 22, 23; iv. 15; v. 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 20. H In truth and love. This phrase is not to be connected with the expression " the Son of the Father," as if it meant that he was his Son " in truth and love," but is rather to be connected with the "grace, mercy, and peace" referred to, as a prayer that they might be manifested to this family in promoting truth and love.
4. 1 rejoiced greatly that I found, etc. That I learned this fact respecting some of thy children. The apostle does not say how he had learned this. It may have been that he had become personally acquainted with them when they were away from their home, or that he had learned it from others. The word used OfynjKct) would apply to either method. Grotius supposed that some of the sons had come on business to Ephesus, and that John had become acquainted with them there. If Of thy children walking in truth. That is, true Christians; living in accordance with the truth, for this constitutes the essence of religion. The expression used here, " of thy children" (Ik twv TtKvow), means some of thy children; implying that he knew of a part of them who were true Christians. This is clear from the Greek construction, because (a) if he had meant to say that- he had found them all to be of this description, the sentiment would have been directly expressed, "thy children;" but as it is, some word is necessary to be understood to complete the sense; and (b) the same thing is required by the fact that the participle used (walking— 7rfpi7raTouj/Tas) is in the accusative case. If he had referred to them all, the participle would have been in the genitive, agreeing with the word children (twv iripnraTowTwv). — Liicke. Whether the apostle mean to say that only a part of them had in fact embraced the Gospel, or that he had only known that a part of them had done it, though the others might have done it without his knowledge, is not quite clear, though the former supposition appears to be the correct one; for if they had all become Christians, it is to be presumed that he would have been informed of it. The probability seems to be that a part of her children only were truly pious, though there is no evidence that the others were otherwise than correct in their moral conduct. If there had been improper conduct in any of her other children, John was too courteous and too delicate in his feelings to allude to so disagreeable a circumstance. But "if that pious lady," to use the language of Benson, "had some wicked children, her lot was not peculiar. Her consolation was that she had some who were truly good. John commended those who were good, in order to excite them in the most agreeable manner to persevere." If As we have received a commandment from the Father. That is, as he has commanded us to live; in accordance with the truth which he has revealed. The Father in the Scriptures is every where represented as the source of law.
of thy children walking in* troth, as we have received a commandment from the Father.
5 And now I beseech thee, lady, not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that" we love one another.
6 And this b is love, that we walk
after his commandments. This is the commandment, That as ye have heard from the beginning ye should walk in it.
7 For • mauy deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
5. And now I beseech thee, lady. Or, "And now I entreat thee, Cyria" (kupia). See Introd., § 2. If this were her proper name, there is no impropriety in supposing that he would address her in this familiar style. John was probably then a very old man; the female to whom the Epistle was addressed was doubtless much younger. 1 Not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee. John presumed that the command to love one another was understood as far as the Gospel was known; and he might well presume it, for true Christianity never prevails any where without prompting to the observance of this law. See Notes on 1 Thess. iv. 9. IT But that which ice had from the beginning. From the time when the Gospel was first made known to us. See Notes on 1 John ii. 7; iii. 11. IF That we love one another. That is, that there be among the disciples of Christ mutual love; or that in all circumstances and relations they should love one another. John xv. 12, 17. This general command, addressed to all the disciples of the Saviour, John doubtless means to say was as applicable to him and to the pious female to whom he wrote as to any others, and ought to be exercised by them toward all true Christians, and he exhorts her, as he did all Christians, to exercise it. It was a command on which, in his old age, he loved to dwell; and he had little more to say to her than this, to exhort her to obey this injunction of the Saviour.
6. And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the proper expression or evidence of love to God. See Notes on John xiv. 15, 21. IF This is the commandment. That is, this is his great and peculiar commandment; the one by which his disciples are to be peculiarly characterized, and by which they are to be distinguished in the world. See Notes on John xiii. 84.
7. For (oti). This word for is not here to be regarded as connected with the previous verse, and as giving a reason why there should be the exercise of mutual love, but is rather to be understood as connected with the following verse (8), and as giving a reason for the caution there expressed: " Because it is a truth that many deceivers have appeared, or since it has occurred that many such are abroad, look to yourselves lest you be betrayed and ruined." The fact that there were many such deceivers was a good reason for being constantly on their guard, lest they should be so far drawn away as not to receive a full reward. IF Many deceivers are entered into the world. Are abroad in the world, or have appeared among men. Several MSS. read here '■'■have gone out into the world "(f£- i]\2rov), instead of "have entered, into " (tioiiXSov). The common reading is the correct one, and the other one was originated, probably, from the unusual "form of the expression "have come into the world," as if they had come from another abode. That, however, is not necessarily implied, the language being such as would be properly used to denote the idea that there were such deceivers in the world. *ftWho confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. Who maintain that he assumed the appearance only of a man, and was not really incarnate. See Notes on 1 John iv. 2, 3. IF This is a deceiver. Every one who maintains this is to be regarded as a deceiver. ^ And an Antichrist. See Notes on 1 John ii. 18; iv.3.
8. Look to yourselves. This 6eems to be addressed to the lady to whom he wrote, and to her children. The idea is that they should be particu-
8 Look « to yourselves, that b we lose not those things which we have wrought,1 but that we receive a full reward.
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not c in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God: He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ,
larly on their guard, and that their first care should be to secure their own hearts, so that they would not be exposed to the dangerous attacks of error. When error abounds in the world, our first duty is not to attack it and make war upon it; it is to look to the citadel of our own souls, and see that all is well guarded there. When an enemy invades a land, the first thing will not be to go out against him, regardless of our own strength, or of the security of our own fortunes, but it will be to see that our forts are well manned, and that we are secure there from his assaults. If that is so, we may then go forth with confidence to meet him on the open field. In relation to an error that is in the world, the first thing for a Christian to do is to take care of his own heart. Tf That we lose not those things which we have wrought. Marg., "Or, gained. Some copies read, which ye have gained, but that ye." The reading here referred to in the margin is found in several manuscripts, and in the Vulgate, Syriac, and ^Ethiopic versions. It is not, however, adopted in the late critical editions of the New Testament, and the common reading is probably genuine. The sense is not materially varied, and the common reading is not unnatural. John was exhorting the family to whom this Epistle was written to take good heed to themselves while so many artful errorists were around them, lest they should be drawn away from the truth, and lose a part of the full reward which they might hope to receive in heaven. In doing this, nothing was more natural than that he, as a Christian friend, should group himself with them, and speak of himself as having the same need of caution, and express the feeling that he ought to strive also to obtain the full reward, thus showing that he was not disposed to address an exhortation to them which he was not willing to regard as applicable to himself. The truth which is taught here is one of interest to all Christians — that it is possible for even genuine Christians, by suffering themselves to be led into error, or by failure in duty, to lose a part of the reward which they might have obtained. The crown which they will wear in heaven will be less bright than that which they might have worn, and the throne winch they will occupy will be less elevated. The rewards of heaven will be in accordance with the services rendered to the Redeemer, and it would not be right that they who turn aside or falter in their course should have the same exalted honors which they might have received if they had devoted themselves to God with ever increasing fidelity. It is painful to think how many there are who begin the Christian careerwith burningzeal, as if they would strike for the highest rewards in heaven, but who soon waver in their course, and fall into some paralyzing error, until at last they receive, perhaps, not half the reward which they might have obtained. TI But that we receive a full reward. Such as will be granted to a life uniformly consistent and faithful; all that God has to bestow on his people when most faithful and true. But who can estimate the "full reward" of heaven? the unspeakable glory of those who make it the grand business of their lives to obtain all they can of its bliss? And who is there "that does not feel that he ought to strive for a crown in which not one gem shall be wanting that might have sparkled there forever?
9. Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. In the doctrine which Christ taught, or the true doctrine respecting him. The language is somewhat ambiguous, like the phrase "the love of Christ," which may mean either his love to us or our love to him. Comp. John xv. 9. It is difficult to determine here which is the true sense— whether it mean the doctrine which he taught or the true doctrine respecting him. Macknight understands by it the doctrine taught by Christ and his apostles. It would seem most probable that this is the sense of the passage; but then it would he hath both the Father and the Son. 10 If "there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God-speed:
include, of course, all that Christ taught respecting himself, as well as his other instructions. The essential idea is that the truth must be held respecting the precepts,thc character, and the work of the Saviour. Probably the immediate allusion here is to those to whom John so frequently referred as "Antichrist," who denied that Jesus had come in the flesh. Ver. 7. At the same time, however, he makes the remark general, that if any one did not hold the true doctrine respecting the Saviour he had no real knowledge of God. See John i. 18; v. 23; xv. 23; xvii. 3; 1 John ii. 23. 1 Hath not God. Has no true knowledge of God. The truth taught here is that it is essential to piety to hold the true doctrine respecting Christ, f He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ. In the true doctrine respecting Christ, or in the doctrine which he taught. H He hath both the Father and the Son. There is such an intimate union between the Father and the Son that he who has just views of the one has also of the other. Comp. Notes on John xiv. 7,9, 10, 11, and 1 John ii. 23. 10. If there come any unto you. Any professed teacher of religion. There can be no doubt that she to whom this Epistle was written was accustomed to entertain such teachers. U And bring not this doctrine. This doctrine which Christ taught, or the true doctrine respecting him and his religion. 1[ Receive him not into your house. This can not mean that no acts of kindness, in any circumstances, were to be shown to such persons; but that there was to be nothing done which could be fairly construed as encouraging or countenancing them as religious teachers. The true rule would seem to be, in regard to such persons, that, so far as we have intercourse with them as neighbors or strangers, we are to be honest, true, kind, and just, but we are to do nothing that will countenance them as religious teachers. We are not to attend on their instruction (Prov. xix. 27); we are not to receive them into our houses, or to entertain them as religious teachers; we are not to commend them to others, or to give them any reason to use our names or influence in propagating error. It would not be difficultto practice this rule, and yet to show to others all the kindness and all the attention in circumstances of want which religion demands. A man who is truly consistent is never suspected of countenancing error, even when he is distinguished for liberality, and is ready, like the good Samaritan, to pour oil and wine into the wounds of any waylaid traveler. The command not to "receive such a one into the house," in such circumstances as those referred to by John, would be probably understood literally, as he doubtless designed that it should be. To do that, to meet such persons with a friendly greeting, would be construed as countenancing their doctrine, and as commending them to others, and hence it was forbidden that they should be entertained as such. This treatment would not be demanded where no such interpretation could be put on receiving a friend or relative who held different and even erroneous views, or in showing kindness to a stranger who differed from us, but it would apply to the receiving and entertaining a professed teacher of religion, as such; and the rule is as applicable now as it was then. 1 Neithei' bid him God- speed. Kal xaiPilv ««tw /*?; XtysT£ — "and do not say to \\\m~Hail, or Jo?/." Do not wish him joy; do not hail or salute him. The word used expresses the common form of salutation, as when we wish one health, success, prosperity. Matt.xxvi. 49; Acts xv. 23; xxiii. 26; James i. 1. It would be understood as expressing a wish for success in the enterprise in which they were embarked; and though we should love all men, and desire" their welfare, and sincerely seek their happiness, yet we can properly wish no one success in a career of sin and error.
11. For he that biddcth him God-speed, is partaker of his evil deeds. Shows that he countenances and approves of the doctrine which is taught.. Comp. Notes on 1 Tim. v. 2:3.
12. Having many thhigs to write unto you. That I would wish to say. This language is such as wrould be used by
11 For he that biddeth him Godspeed, is partaker8 of his evil deeds.
12 Having many things to write unto you,, I would not write with
paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, a*d speak face l to face, that 2 our joy h may be full.
13 The children of thy elect sister greet thee. Amen.
one who was hurried, or who was in feeble health, or who hoped soon to see the person written to. In such a case, only the points would be selected which were of most immediate and pressing importance, and the remainder would be reserved for a more free personal interview. ^ I would not write with paper. The word paper here conveys an idea which is not strictly correct. Paper, as. that term is now understood, was not invented until long after this period. The material designated by the word used by John (x«/ot??s) was the Egyptian papyrus, and the particular thing denoted was made out of that plant. The sheets were made from membranes of the plant closely pressed together. This plant was found also in Syria and Babylon, but it was produced in greater abundance in Egypt, and that was the plant which was commonly used. It was so comparatively cheap that it in a great measure superseded the earlier materials for writing — plates of lead or stone, or the skins of animals. It is probable that the books of the New Testament were written on this species of paper. Compare Hug, Introd., chap, iii., § 1L T[ And ink. The ink which was commonly employed in writing was made of soot and water, with a mixture of some species of gum to five it consistency and durability. — dlcke. The instrument or pen was made of a reed. \ But I trust to come unto you, and speak face to face. Marg., as in Greek, mouth to mouth. The phrase is a common one to denote conversation, especially free and confidential conversation. Comp. Numb, xii. 8; Jer. xxxii. 4. H That our joy may be full. Marg., your. The marginal reading has arisen from a variation in the Greek copies. The word our is best sustained, and accords best with the connection. John would be likely, to express the hope that he would find pleasure from such an interview. See Notes on 1 John i. 4. Comp. Rom. i. 11, 12. 13. The children of thy elect sister greet thee. Of this "elect sister" nothing more is known. It would seem probable, from the fact that she is not mentioned as sendiug her salutations, that she was either dead or that she was absent. John mentions her, however, as a Christian— as one of the elect or chosen of God.
In view of the exposition of this Epistle, we may make the following remarks:
1. It is desirable for a family to have a character for piety so consistent and well understood that all who know the family shall know that it is conducted on Christian principles. Ver. 1. In the case of this lady and her household, it would seem that, as far as they were known, they were known as a well-ordered Christian household. Such a family John said he loved; and he said that it was beloved by all who had any knowledge of it. What is more lovely to the view than such a household? What is better fitted to make an impression on the world favorable to religion?
2. It is a matter of great rejoicing when any part of a family become truly religious. Ver. 4. We should rejoice with our friends, and should render unfeigned thanks to God if any of their children are converted and walk in the truth. No greater blessing can descend on a family than the early conversion of children, and as angels rejoice over one sinner that is converted, we should rejoice when the children of our friends are brought to a knowledge of the truth, and devote themselves, to God in early life.
3. It is our duty to be on our guard against the arts of the teachers of error. Ver. 7. They abound in every age. They are often learned, eloquent, and profound. They study and understand the arts of persuasion. They adapt their instructions to the capacity of those whom they would lead astray. They flatter their vanity, accommodate themselves to their pe- j culiar views and tastes, court their society, and seek their friendship. They often appear to be eminently meek, serious, devout, and prayerful; for they know that no others can succeed Who profess to inculcate the principles of religion. There are few arts more profound than that of leading men into error; few that are studied more, or with greater success. Every Christian, therefore, should be on his guard against such arts; and while he should on all subjects be open to conviction, and be ready to yield his own opinions when convinced that they are wrong, yet he should yield to truth, not to men; to argument, not to the influence of the personal character of the professed religious teacher.
4. We may see that it is possible for us to lose a portion of the reward which we might enjoy in heaven. Ver. 8. The rewards of heaven will be apportioned to our character, and to our services in the cause of religion in this life, and they who u sow sparingly shall also reap sparingly." Christians often begin their course with great zeal, and as if they were determined to reap the highest rewards of the heavenly world. If they should persevere in the course which they have commenced, they would indeed shine as the stars in the firmament. But, alas! their zeal soon dies away. They relax their efforts and lose their watchfulness; they engage in some pursuit that absorbs their time and interferes with their habits of devotion; they connive at error and sin; begin to love the comforts of this life; seek the honors or the riches of this world; and, though they may be saved at last, yet they lose half their reward. It should be a fixed purpose with all Christians, and especially with such as are just entering on the Christian life, to wear in heaven a crown as bright and studded with as many jewels as can possibly be obtained.
5. We may learn from this Epistle how to regard and treat the teachers of error, ver. 10. We are not to do any thing that can be fairly co?istrued as countenancing their doctrines. This simple rule would guide us to a course that is right. We are to have minds open to conviction. We are to love the truth, and be ever ready to follow it. We are not to be prejudiced against any thing. We are to treat all men with kindness; to be true and just and faithful in our intercourse with all; to be hospitable, and ever ready to do good to all who are needy, whatever their name, color, rank, or opinions; we are not to cut the ties which bind us to our friends and kindred, though they embrace opinions which we deem erroneous or dangerous; but we are in no way to become the patrons of error, or to leave the impression that we are indifferent as to what is believed. The friends of truth and piety we should receive cordially to our dwellings, and should account ourselves honored by their presence (Psa. ci. 6, 7); strangers we should not forget to entertain, for thereby we may entertain angels unawares (Heb. xiii. 2); but the open advocate of what we regard as dangerous error we are not to receive in any such sense or way as to have our treatment of him fairly construed as patronizing his errors, or commending him as a teacher to the favorable regards of our fellow-men. Neither by our influence, our names, our money, our personal friendship, are we to give him increased facilities for spreading pernicious error through the world. As men, as fellow-sufferers, as citizens, as neighbors, as the friends of the prisoner, of the widow, of the orphan, and of the slave, and as the patrons of learning, we may be united with them in promoting objects dear to our hearts; but as religious teachers we are to show them no countenance — not so much as would be implied in the common form of salutation wishing them success. In all this there is no breach of charity, and no want of true love; for we are to love the truth more than the persons of men. To the man himself we should be ever ready to do good. Him we should never injure in any way — in his person, property, nor feelings. We should never attempt to deprive him of the right of cherishing his own opinions, and of spreading them in his own way, answerable not to us, but to God. We should impose no pains or penalties on him for the opinions which he holds. But we should do nothing to give him increased power to propagate them, and should never place ourselves by any alliance of friendship, family, or business in such a position that we shall not be perfectly free to maintain our own sentiments, and to oppose what we deem to be error, whoever may advocate it.
This brief Epistle, written to a Christian whose name was Gaius, of whom nothing more is known (cotnp. Notes on.ver. 1), and in respect to which the time and place of writing it are equally unknown, embraces the following subjects: I. The address, with an expression of tender attachment, and an earnest wish for his welfare and happiness. Vs. 1, 2. II. A commendation of his character and doings, as the writer had learned it from some brethren who had visited him, particularly (a) for his attachment to the truth, and (b) for his kindness shown to the members of his.own Church, and to strangers who had gone forth to some work of charity. Vs. 3-8. III. The writer then adverts to the fact that he had written on this subject to the Church, commending these strangers to their attention, but that Diotrephes would not acknowledge his authority, or receive those whom he introduced to them. This conduct, he said, demanded rebuke, and he says that when he himself should come he would take proper measures to assert his own authority, and sIioav to him and to the Church the duty of receiving Christian brethren recommended to them from abroad. Vs. 9, 10. IV. He exhorts Gaius to persevere in that which was good — in a life of love and kindness—in an imitation of the benevolent God. Ver. 11. V. Of another person — Demetrius— who, it would seem, had been associated with Gaius in the honorable course which he had pursued in opposition to what the Church had done, he also speaks in terms of commendation, and says that the same honorable testimony had been borne of him which had been of Gaius. Ver. 12. VI. As in the Second Epistle, he says in the close of this that there were many things which he would be glad to say to him, but there were reasons why they should not be set down "in black and white," but he honed soon to confer with him freely on those subjects face to face; and the Epistle is closed by kind salutations. Vs. 13, 14.
The occasion on which the Epistle was written is no farther known than appears from the Epistle itself. From this the following facts are all that can now be ascertained: (1.) That Gains was a Christian man, and evidently a member of the Church, but of what church is unknown. (2.) That there were certain persons known to the writer of the Epistle, and who either lived where he did or who had beeu commended tohim by others, who proposed to travel to the place where Gaius lived. Their particular object is not known, further than that it is said (ver. 7) that they " went for his name's sake;" that is, in the cause of religion. It further appears that they had resolved not to be dependent on the heathen for their support, but wished the^avor and friendship of the Church— perhaps designing to preach to the heathen, and yet apprehending that if they desired their maintenance from them it would be charged on them that they were mercenary in their ends. (3.) In these circumstances, and with this view, the author of this Epistle wrote to the Church, commending these brethren to their kind and fraternal regards. (4.) This recommendation, so faras appears, would have been successful had it not been for one man, Diotrephes, who had so much influence, and who made such violent opposition, that the Church refused to receive them, and they became dependent on private charity. The ground of the opposition of Diotrephes is not fully stated, but it seems to have arisen from two sources: (a) a desire to rule in the Church; and (6) a particular opposition to the writer of this Epistle, and a denial of any obligation to recognize his instructions or commendations as binding. The idea seems to have been that the Church was entirely independent, and might receive or reject any whom it pleased, though they were commended to them
THE elder unto the well-beloved Gaius, whom I love ■ in the truth.
2 Beloved, I wish 2 above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soulprospereth.
by an apostle. (5.) In these circumstances, Gaius, as an individual, and against the action of the Church, received and hospitably entertained these strangers, and aided them in the prosecution of their work. In this office of hospitality another member of the Church, Demetrius, also shared; and to commend them for this work —particularly Gaius, at whose house, probably, they were entertained— is the design of this Epistle. (6.) After having returned to the writer of this Epistle, who had formerly commended them to the Church, and having borne honorable testimony to the hospitality of Gaius, it would seem that they resolved to repeat their journey for the same purpose, and that the writer of the Epistle commended them now to the renewed hospitality of Gaius. On this occasion, probably, they bore this Epistle to him. See Notes on vs. 6, 7. Of Dio-' trephes nothing more is known than is here specified. Erasmus and Bede supposed that he was the author of a new sect, but of this there is no evidence— and if he had been it is probable that John would have cautioned Gaius against his influence. Many have supposed that he was a bishop or pastor in the Church where he resided; but there is no evidence of this, and as John wrote to "the Church," commending the strangers to them, this would seem to be hardly probable. Comp. Kev. ii. 1, 8, 12, 18; iii. 1, 7, 14. Others have supposed that he was a deacon, and had charge of the funds of the Church, and that he refused to furnish to these strangers the aid out of the public treasury which they needed, and that by so doing he hindered them in the prosecution of their object. But all this is mere conjecture, and it is now impossible to ascertain what office he held, if he held any. That he was a man of influence is apparent; that he was proud, ambitious, and desirous of ruling, is equally clear; and that he prevailed on the Church not to receive the strangers commended to them by the apostle is equally manifest. Of the rank and standing of Demetrius nothing more is known. Benson supposes that he was the bearer of this letter, and that he had gone with the brethren referred to to preach to the Gentiles. But it seems more probable that he was a member of the Church to which Gaius belonged, and that he had concurred with him in rendering aid to the strangers who had been rejected by the influence of Diotrephes. If he had gone with these strangers, and had carried this letter, it would have been noticed, and it would have been in accordance with the apostolic custom that he should have been commended to the favorable attentions of Gaius. In regard to the authenticity and the canonical authority of this Epistle, see the Introduction to the Second Epistle of John.
1. The elder. See Notes on the Second Epistle, ver. 1. T[ Unto the well-, beloved Gaius. Three persons of this name are elsewhere mentioned in the New Testament: Gaius, whom Paul, in Rom. xvi. 23, calls "his host," and whom he says (1 Cor. i. 15) he baptized, residing at Corinth (see Notes on Rom. xvi. 23); Gaius of Macedonia, one of Paul's companions in travel, who was arrested b*y an excited mob at Ephesus (Acts xix. 29); and Gaius of Derbe, who went with Paul and Timothy into Asia (Acts xx. 4). Whether either of these persons is referred to here can not with certainty be determined. If it were any of them, it was probably the last mentioned— Gaius of Derbe. There is no objection to the supposition that he was the one, unless it be from the fact that this Epistle was probably written many years after the transaction mentioned in Acts xx. 4, and the probability that Gaius might not have lived so long. The name was not an uncommon one, and it can not be determined now who he was or where he lived. Whether he had any office in the Church is unknown, but he seems to have been a man of wealth and influence. The word translated "well-beloved" means simply beloved. It shows that he was a personal friend of the writer of this Epistle. H Whom I love in the truth. Marg., "or, truly." See Notes on the Second Epistle, ver. 1.
3 For I rejoiced greatly when the brethren came and testified of the
truth that is in thee, even as thou walkest a in the truth.
2. Beloved, I wish above all things. Marg., pray. The word used here commonly means in the New Testament to pray; but it is also employed to express a strong and earnest desire for any thing. Acts xxvii.:2(.); Rom. ix. 3; 2 Cor. xiii. 9. This is probably all that is implied here. The phrase rendered "above all things" (Trtpl iravTwv) would be more correctly rendered here "concerning, or in respect to all things;" and the idea is that John wished earnestly that in all respects he might have the same kind of prosperity which his soul had. The common translation "above all things" would seem to mean that John valued health and outward prosperity more than he did any thing else; that he wished that more than his usefulness or salvation. This can not be the meaning, and is not demanded by the proper interpretation of the original. See this shown in Liicke, in loc. The sense is," In every respect I wish that it may go as well with you as it does with your soul; that in your worldly prosperity, your comfort, and your bodily health, you may be as prosperous as you are in your religion." This is the reverse of the wish which we are commonly constrained to express for our friends, for such is usually the comparative want of prosperity and advancement in their spiritual interests that it is an expression of benevolence to desire that they might prosper in that respect as much as they do in others. K That thou mayest prosper (svodowSai). This word occurs in the New Testament only in the following places: Rom. i. 10, rendered have a prosperous journey; 1 Cor. xvi. 2, rendered hath prospered; and in the passage before us. It means, properly, to lead in a good way; to prosper one1 s journey; and then to make prosperous; to give success to; to be prospered. It would apply here to any plan or purpose entertained. It would include success in business, happiness in domestic relations, or prosperity in any of the engagements and transactions in which a Christian might lawfully engage. It shows that it is right to wish that our friends may have success in the works of their hands and Q2 their plans of life. U And be in health. To enjoy bodily health. It is not necessary to suppose, in order to a correct interpretation of this, that Gaius was at that time suffering from bodily indisposition, though perhaps it is most natural to suppose that, as John makes the wish for his health so prominent. But it is common in all circumstances to wish for the health and prosperity of our friends; and it is as proper as it is common, if we do not give that a degree of prominence above the welfare of the soul. H Even as thy soul -prospereih. John had learned, it would seem, from the "brethren" who had come to him (ver. 3), that Gaius was living as became a Christian; that he was advancing in the knowledge of the truth,' and was exemplary in the duties of the Christian life; and he prays that in all other respects he might be prospered as much as he was in that. It is not very common that a man is more prospered in his spiritual interests than he is in his other interests, or that we can, in our wishes for the welfare of our friends, make the prosperity of the soul and the practice and enjoyment of religion the standard of our wishes in regard to other things. It argues a high state of piety when, as the expression of our highest desire for the welfare of our friends, we can express the hope that they may be in all respects as much prospered as they are in their spiritual concerns.
3. For I rejoiced greatly when the brethren came. Who these were is not certainly known. They may have been members of the same Church with Gaius, who, for some reason, had visited the writer of this Epistle; or they may have been the "brethren" who had gone from him with a letter of commendation to the Church (ver. 9), and had been rejected by the Church through the influence of Diotrephes, and who, after having been hospitably entertained by Gains, had again returned to the writer of this Epistle. In that case, they would, of course, bear honorable testimony to the kindness which they had received from Gaius, and to his Christian character. H And testified of the truth that is in
4 I have no greater joy a than to hear that my children walk in truth.
5 Beloved, thou dost * faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren and to strangers;
6 Which have borne witness of thy charity before the clmrch: whom if thou bring c forward on their journey 1 after a godly sort, thou shalt do well:
thee. That you adhere steadfastly to the truth, notwithstanding the fact that errors abound and that there are many false teachers in the world. If Even as thou walkest in the truth. Livest in accordance with the truth. The writer had made the same remark of the children of Cyria, to whom the Second Epistle was directed. See Notes on ver. 4 of that Epistle.
4. / have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth. That they adhere steadfastly to the truth, and that they live in accordance with it. This is such language as would be used by an aged apostle when speaking of those who hadjaeen converted by his instrumentality, and who looked- up to him as a father; and we may therefore infer that Gaius had been converted under the ministry of John, and that he was probably a much younger man than he was. John, the aged apostle, says that he had no higher happiness than to learn respecting those who regarded him as their spiritual father that they were steadfast in their adherence to the doctrines of religion. The same thing may be said now (a) of all the ministers of the Gospel, that their highest comfort is found in the fact that those to whom they minister, whether still under their care or removed from them, persevere in a steadfast attachment to the true doctrines of religion, and live accordingly; and (6) of all Christian parents respecting their own children. The highest joy that a Christian parent can have is to know that his children, whether at home or abroad, adhere to the truths of religion, and live in accordance with the requirements of the Gospel of Christ. If a child wished to confer the highest possible happiness on his parents when with them, it would be by becoming a decided Christian; if, when abroad in foreign lands or his own, he wished to convej' intelligence to them that would most thrill their hearts with joy, it would be to announce to them that he had given his heart to God. There is no joy in a family like that when children are converted; there is no news that comes from abroad that diffuses so much happiness through the domestic circle as the intelligence that a child is truly converted to the Saviour. There is nothing that would give more peace to the dying pillow of the Christian parent than to be able to leave the world with the assurance that his children would always walk in truth.
5. Beloved, thou dost faithfully. In the previous verses the writer had commended Gaius for his attachment to truth and his general correctness in the 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. 1 Whatsoever thou doest. In all your intercourse 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 aslo justify this commendation. 1 To the brethren. Probably to Christians who were well known to him—perhaps referring to Christians in his own Church. H And to strangers. Such as had gone to the Church of which he was a member with a letter of commendation from John. Comp. Notes on Rom. xii. 13, and Heb. xiii. 2.