It is understandable that you might read the three epistles of John and conclude that they are pretty much alike, both in style and content. But, if you examine all three, you discover that, despite some similar concerns, there are also significant differences.
For example, 1 John is written probably to a group of churches, while 2 John is written to one church which John the Elder addresses as "the elect lady.” On the other hand, 3 John is written to one person, Gaius.
The first two epistles are concerned with heresy or false teaching, whereas the third epistle is concerned with a local leader, Diotrephes, who is dominating a particular church and resisting the Elder's authority.
In 2 John we are concerned with itinerating teachers who are attempting to sway the local church to adopt doctrines that would pervert its Chirst-centered basis. The Elder appeals to the church not to open the church to their influence.
In 3 John, however, we have a situation, which is quite the obverse: Diotrephes is refusing hospitality to itinerant teachers and the Elder is urging Gaius to provide these teachers with the hospitality that Diotrephes is withholding.
No Longer Christianity
One might conclude that 2 and 3 John have little or nothing to do with current Christian experience. When these letters were written, preachers and teachers itinerating among the various churches was a normal experience of the church. The church profited spiritually from many of these itinerants, There were some of these men, however, whose teaching was so contrary to Christian teaching so that it was no longer Christian.
The latter, who promoted themselves as "advanced Christians," were Gnostics who taught that the created physical world, including the human body, is evil. Therefore Gnostics denied the incarnation and some Docetist Gnostics claimed that Jesus had no physical body, but only appeared to do so.
What do these two epistles have to say to us today? First, even though the Elder regarded these people as dangerously teachers, he did not counsel the church to persecute or attack them. He simply didn't want them permitted to use their facilities. He opposed their teaching and closed the church to them, but he did not respond with violent words or actions. Since then, however, churches have often risen violently against those with whom they disagreed. Today, many of the conflicts within and between denominations are carried on in a rancorous spirit. Violence does not protect the faith; it only harms it.
‘Big Wheels’
Secondly, we find even more relevance in the background to 3 John. Diotrephes is not unlike the "big wheels" many of us have experienced in various congregations. These self-important people can keep a congregations "small," if not in numbers, at least in stature. All churches need leadership and in numerically small churches leadership may be in short supply, but no church ever flourishes under the willful hand of an officious man or woman who glories in the power that he or she can accumulate. Worst of all, these people generally do not see themselves the way others do. They see themselves as exemplary Christians, little realizing how harmful their example can be.
Often this happens in a church where the rest of the membership is unwilling to prevent such a person for taking and maintaining harmful control. These power-driven people gravitate to leadership vacuums which are created by a "Let-George-Do-It" attitude on the part of others. These Diotrephes rise to virtually absolute power only when and where they are permitted to do so.
Reigning in a Dioptrephes is not contrary to the Elder's admonition: "that we love one another. …" (2 John 5,6). Permitting a Diotrephes to dominate a congregation is not love but indifference to the mission and purpose of the church. "Beloved, do not imitate evil but imitate good. He who does good is of God" (3 John 11).
