Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.
Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church. John details Diotrephes' offenses and promises apostolic discipline. "If I come" (ἐὰν ἔλθω, ean elthō) indicates John's intended visit, when he will "remember" (ὑπομνήσω, hupomēsō)—bring to public attention, call to account—Diotrephes' actions. This isn't vindictive but pastoral: addressing sin that harms Christ's church.
First offense: "prating against us with malicious words" (λόγοις πονηροῖς φλυαρῶν ἡμᾶς, logois ponērois phluarōn hēmas). The verb φλυαρέω (phuareō) means to talk nonsense, gossip, or slander—spreading false accusations. The adjective πονηρός (ponēros, "malicious/evil") characterizes these words as wicked, not merely mistaken. Diotrephes engaged in character assassination against apostolic authority, poisoning the congregation's attitude through lies and distortions.
Second: "not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren" (μὴ ἀρκούμενος ἐπὶ τούτοις οὔτε αὐτὸς ἐπιδέχεται τοὺς ἀδελφούς, mē arkoumenos epi toutois oute autos epidechetai tous adelphous)—he refused hospitality to traveling ministers. Third: "forbiddeth them that would" (τοὺς βουλομένους κωλύει, tous boulomenous kōluei)—he prevented others from welcoming these workers. Fourth: "casteth them out of the church" (ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐκβάλλει, ek tēs ekklēsias ekballei)—he expelled members who defied his prohibition. This escalating tyranny shows power-hungry control, not godly leadership.
Historical Context
Church discipline in the apostolic era followed Christ's teaching (Matthew 18:15-17) and apostolic practice (1 Corinthians 5:1-13, 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15). It aimed at restoration through confronting sin, protecting the congregation from false teaching or destructive behavior, and maintaining the church's witness. Discipline was communal—the congregation participated in decisions—and remedial rather than merely punitive. Diotrephes perverted this process, using "discipline" (casting people out) to consolidate personal power rather than promote holiness.
The practice of excommunication (casting out of the church) was serious action reserved for unrepentant sin or heresy. It involved removing someone from fellowship, excluding them from the Lord's Table, and treating them as an unbeliever until repentance occurred. This powerful tool could be abused, as Diotrephes demonstrated, to punish opponents and eliminate dissent. The church needed clear criteria (Scripture-based), proper procedure (involving witnesses and multiple confrontations), and right motivation (seeking restoration, not revenge) to exercise discipline faithfully.
John's promise to personally address Diotrephes upon visiting demonstrates apostolic authority's weight. Despite having no official institutional power (no denominational structure to enforce decisions), John's spiritual authority as Christ's apostle carried immense weight. His public confrontation would expose Diotrephes' behavior, vindicate expelled members, and restore proper order. This illustrates that ultimate authority in the church rests with Christ, exercised through Scripture and legitimate spiritual leaders, not with whoever accumulates most human power.
Questions for Reflection
Have you witnessed or experienced church discipline exercised biblically (for restoration) versus abusively (for control)?
How should Christians respond when leaders exhibit Diotrephes-like behaviors: slander, refusing accountability, or abusive control?
Do you practice biblical confrontation of sin in your own relationships, or do you avoid necessary correction?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church. John details Diotrephes' offenses and promises apostolic discipline. "If I come" (ἐὰν ἔλθω, ean elthō) indicates John's intended visit, when he will "remember" (ὑπομνήσω, hupomēsō)—bring to public attention, call to account—Diotrephes' actions. This isn't vindictive but pastoral: addressing sin that harms Christ's church.
First offense: "prating against us with malicious words" (λόγοις πονηροῖς φλυαρῶν ἡμᾶς, logois ponērois phluarōn hēmas). The verb φλυαρέω (phuareō) means to talk nonsense, gossip, or slander—spreading false accusations. The adjective πονηρός (ponēros, "malicious/evil") characterizes these words as wicked, not merely mistaken. Diotrephes engaged in character assassination against apostolic authority, poisoning the congregation's attitude through lies and distortions.
Second: "not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren" (μὴ ἀρκούμενος ἐπὶ τούτοις οὔτε αὐτὸς ἐπιδέχεται τοὺς ἀδελφούς, mē arkoumenos epi toutois oute autos epidechetai tous adelphous)—he refused hospitality to traveling ministers. Third: "forbiddeth them that would" (τοὺς βουλομένους κωλύει, tous boulomenous kōluei)—he prevented others from welcoming these workers. Fourth: "casteth them out of the church" (ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐκβάλλει, ek tēs ekklēsias ekballei)—he expelled members who defied his prohibition. This escalating tyranny shows power-hungry control, not godly leadership.