Question 1

What sequence of events does the writer describe in verses 9–10 (what happened first, then what followed)?

Accepted Answer

The writer says he first wrote to the assembly. That earlier attempt at communication did not achieve cooperation because Diotrephes “doesn’t accept what we say.” Then the writer explains what he will do next: if he comes, he intends to call attention to Diotrephes’s “deeds.” After stating that plan, he lists the deeds in escalating form: hostile speech (unjust accusations with wicked words), refusal to receive “the brothers,” interference with others who want to receive them, and finally removing those people from the assembly.

Question 2

According to verse 9, what reason is given for Diotrephes’s refusal to accept the writer’s message?

Accepted Answer

The text explicitly links Diotrephes’s resistance to a desire for prominence: he “loves to be first among them.” The writer presents this as the underlying explanation for why Diotrephes won’t accept what “we” say. The verse does not describe Diotrephes as offering a doctrinal argument or a practical concern; instead it frames the issue in terms of ambition and control within the group. That characterization sets the tone for the list of actions that follows in verse 10.

Question 3

What kinds of wrongdoing are named in verse 10, and how do they relate to each other?

Accepted Answer

Three connected areas are named. First is speech: Diotrephes “unjustly” accuses the writer and associates, using “wicked words.” Second is hospitality: he does not “receive the brothers,” meaning he refuses to welcome them. Third is enforcement: he not only refuses personally but also forbids others who are willing, and he “throws out” those people from the assembly. The progression moves from verbal attack to active refusal to receiving visitors, to using exclusion as a tool to control others’ behavior.

Question 4

What does the repeated emphasis on “receive” suggest is at stake in this conflict?

Accepted Answer

The passage treats “receiving” as more than politeness. Diotrephes’s refusal to receive “the brothers” is presented as part of a larger pattern: rejecting the writer’s message, attacking with accusations, and then blocking the community’s cooperation with visitors. In the wider context of the letter (vv. 5–8), receiving traveling believers is closely connected to supporting shared work. Verse 10 shows that control over hospitality becomes control over who is recognized and supported by the assembly.

Question 5

Who are the “we/us” in “what we say” and “accusing us,” based on the passage?

Accepted Answer

The text itself does not identify the group in detail, but it clearly distinguishes the writer and his associates from Diotrephes and his supporters. “We/us” at minimum includes the writer and others aligned with him—likely those involved in sending messages and connected to the traveling “brothers.” The point in the passage is not the full roster of “we,” but that Diotrephes’s accusations target the writer’s side and are described as unjust, reinforcing that the conflict involves competing influence and credibility.

Question 6

What does the writer mean by “I will call attention to his deeds,” and what does that imply about authority in this setting?

Accepted Answer

The phrase indicates that the writer intends to bring Diotrephes’s behavior into the open and treat it as accountable wrongdoing, not a private disagreement. The passage implies the writer believes he has standing to do this within or toward that assembly, especially since he had already written to them and expects his words to be accepted. It also suggests that the community is not meant to be governed solely by the most forceful local figure; outside relational or recognized authority is assumed.

Question 7

What options are there for interpreting “throws out of the assembly,” and what is constant across those options?

Accepted Answer

One reading is that Diotrephes is formally expelling people—removing them from the group’s gatherings and identity as part of the assembly. Another is that the exclusion is informal but effective: in house-church settings, being barred from the meeting place or from social recognition could amount to being “thrown out.” In both cases, the constant point is Diotrephes’s active use of exclusion to punish those who would welcome the brothers, turning hospitality into a test of loyalty and control.

3 John 1:9-10

Scripture