Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 3 John 1:12 - 1:12
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
3Jn_1:12. As the apostle, by μὴ μιμοῦ τὸ κακόν , has warned Caius against imitation of Diotrephes, so he now puts Demetrius before him as an example for imitation—corresponding to ἀλλὰ τὸ ἀγαθόν . Who this Demetrius was, however, and where he had his abode, is not stated. Ebrard thinks that he had been one of the βουλόμενοι (3Jn_1:10) in the Church of Diotrephes, and had perhaps been excommunicated by him; but in that case Caius must have known him, so that he did not require this strong testimony of the apostle in his favour; the view that he was the bearer of the Epistle (Düsterdieck. Lücke, etc.) is more probable.
μεμαρτύρηται refers—in accordance with John’s usage of the perfect—not merely to a past, but also to a present record. μαρτυρεῖσθαι frequently appears in the same absolute way as here, especially in the Acts; comp. chap. Act_6:3; Act_10:22, and passim.
πάντων is not to be extended to the heathen, with Oecumenius and Theophylact, but refers to the Church to which Demetrius belonged; Ebrard incorrectly understands by it “the brethren,” 3Jn_1:10; 3Jn_1:7; 3Jn_1:5; the apostle would have distinctly mentioned them, and besides, the πάντων , which is clearly used emphatically, would be unsuitable in reference to them.
καὶ ὑπʼ αὐτῆς τῆς ἀληθείας ] Whilst the commentators are agreed in this, that the truth is here personified, they deviate widely from one another in their more particular definition of the idea; most of them understand by it the life of Demetrius as that which testifies for him, whether they interpret ἀλήθεια = reality (Hornejus: ipsa rei veritas; Grotius: res ipsae) or as the life itself, in so far as it is a testimony to his virtue (Beausobre: c’est à dire, que sa conduite est un témoin réel de sa vertu). This, however, is incorrect, as both the expression itself ( αὐτὴ ἡ ἀλήθεια ) and also its position (between πάντες and ἡμεῖς ) indicate that the apostle meant by ἡ ἀλήθεια something objectively contrasted with Demetrius. Düsterdieck (with whom Braune agrees) has rightly perceived this; but as he at the same time retains the reference to the life, he finds the testimony of the objective Christian truth in the fact that it gives commandments to man, and that inasmuch as Demetrius fulfils them, it is by these commandments that the truth bears a good testimony to him. But apart from the fact that this introduction of the commandments cannot be justified, the whole interpretation has something too artificial to permit of its being regarded as correct. The hypothetical interpretation of Lücke: “if the infallible Christian truth, comp. 3Jn_1:3, itself were asked, it would give him a good testimony” (similarly Schlichting), does not suit the positive μεμαρτύρηται . It is too far-fetched, with Baumgarten-Crusius, to regard the result of the Christian activity of Demetrius as the testimony of the truth to him. A simple, clear idea would be brought out if, with Sander, we could regard it as “a special testimony which John had received through the Holy Ghost in reference to Demetrius;” but there is no justification for this. The correct way will be to interpret ὑπʼ αὐτῆς τῆς ἀληθείας in close connection with ὑπὸ πάντων , and to conclude that the apostle adds the former in order to bring out the fact that the good report of all has its origin not merely in their human judgment, but in the testimony of the ἀλήθεια which dwells in them (so also Brückner); and that the expression αὐτὴ ἡ ἀλήθεια is not merely a personification, but is a description of the Holy Ghost (comp. 1Jn_5:6 : τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἡ ἀλήθεια ). The opinion that αὐτὴ ἡ ἀλήθεια , in contrast with πάντες , cannot be the truth that produces their testimony, and that testifies for Demetrius (Ebrard,[23] Braune), is refuted by Joh_15:26-27, as here, in a quite similar way, the testimony of the Spirit of truth is conjoined with the testimony of the disciples, the latter being produced and confirmed by the former.
To the testimony of all the apostle further specially adds his own: καὶ ἡμεῖς δὲ μαρτυροῦμεν ] By καὶ … δέ a stronger emphasis is laid on ἡμεῖς .
With καὶ οἶδας κ . τ . λ ., comp. Joh_19:35; Joh_21:24.
By the reading: οἴδατε , Caius and his friends are addressed together.
[23] Ebrard’s view—that we are here “to consider the truth as a power and might showing itself in the life of Demetrius; the truth which mightily showed itself in him in those days in the relations with Diotrephes, without doubt (!) in the fact that for the sake of the ἀλήθεια he endured serious ill-treatment or suffering”—is clearly affected, apart from other defects, by arbitrary importations.