The second epistle is addressed to one whom the writer calls ea€K7-3)Kupla. This has been differently understood. By some it has been regarded as desig-nating the Church collectively ; by others as designating a particular congregation ; and by others as denoting an individual. The two formel opinions are rendered improbable, partly by the reference in ver. r to the chila'ren, and in ver. to the sister of the party addressed, partly by the want of any authority for such a usage of the term Kuala as would thus be imputed to the apostle. Of those who understand this of an individual, some take both terms appellatively (as in the A. V., elect lady') ; some take the former as a proper name and the latter as appellative, the lady Eclecta ;' and some reverse this, and make the latter the proper name and the former an adjective, the elect Kyria..' On the whole this last seems the preferable explanation. Kyria occurs elsewhere as a proper name ; and that bcXerrii is to be taken in its usual signification is rendered probable by its being applied in ver. 13 to the sister of the party addressed.
The epistle is an affectionate address to an esteemed Christian friend, whom the apostle con gratulates on the piety of her children, exhorts to continue in love to the brethren, and warns to shun erroneous teachers, especially such as denied that Jesus had come in the flesh. At the time of writing this epistle the apostle was with the sister of Kyria, but expresses a hope ere long to see the latter, and converse with her on matters of which he could not then write. From this we may infer either that the apostle was at the time on a journey from which he expected erelong to return, or that Kyria resided not very far from his usual residence, and that he intended soon to pay her a visit. Adopt ing the latter hypothesis as the more probable, and viewing it in connection with the apostle's styling himself irpecrporepog, we may infer that the epistle was written from Ephesus in the later part of the apostle's life.
The third epistle is addressed to Gaius, a Chris tian brother noted for his hospitality to the saints. Whether this be one of those mentioned elsewhere in the N. T. by this name is uncertain ; he nzay have been the Gaius mentioned Acts xix. 28 [Gmus]. The apostle having heard of his kind attentions to those Christians who travelled on the service of the gospel, writes to commend him for this ; and at the same time animadverts on the misconduct of one Diotrephes, who had usurped undue power in the church to which Gaius be longed, and was exercising it in a way opposed to the mind of the apostle, and in opposition to his authority. He mentions especially an epistle which he himself had written to the church, but which Diotrephes apparently had rendered fruitless by his unhallowed influence. This epistle is lost, for it cannot have been either the first or second of those extant. The apostle intimates the probability of his soon personally visiting the church, when he would deal with Diotrephes for his misconduct, and would communicate to Gaius many thin,gs of which he could not thcn write. In the mean time he exhorts him to follow that which is good ; commends one Demetrius, of whom we know nothing further ; and concludes with benediction and salutation. The epistle was probably written about the same time as the second, and at Ephesus.
Commcntaries on John's epistles :—Whiston, Morns, 1786 ; Oertel, 1795 ; Hawkins, iSoS ; Paulus, 1829 ; Sander, 1851 ; Liicke (translated In No. 15 of the Edinburgh Bib. Cabinet); Dus terdieek, 1852 ; Huther, 1855. On the second epistle, Rambonnet, Traj. ISIS. On the third, Ileumaun in .ATov. Syll. i. 276.—W. L. A.