John now tries to explain the character of the commandments which one who follows Christ has to keep. As in verse 1 he shifts from exposition to direct address.

Beloved, used as an adjective in 3 John 1, functions in all other occurrences in John’s Letters as a noun in the vocative, in the plural (here and 3.2, 21; 4.1, 7, 11), or in the singular (3 John 2, 5, 11). Used thus it is one of the normal forms of direct address in letter writing, equivalent to the English expression ‘my friends,’ ‘(my) dear friends.’ Some corresponding forms in other languages literally mean ‘my people,’ ‘my (dear) children,’ ‘(my) brothers’ (used in the language concerned when one is addressing fellow Christians).

In renderings like those just mentioned, the relation with “love” may become less apparent or may disappear completely. Therefore several translators prefer a more literal rendering such as ‘beloved friends,’ ‘you whom I love,’ ‘my people that I love.’ This seems especially appropriate when beloved is used in passages where love is the topic, as is the case here (see the reference to brotherly love in verse 10) and in 3.2 (see the reference to God’s love in 3.1). But if such more literal renderings are unknown, or very unusual, as forms of addresses in the receptor language, their use is not to be recommended.

I am writing you no new commandment, or ‘the commandment I am writing you is not (a) new (one),’ ‘what I write you now is not a new commandment.’ For I am writing see comments on 2.1.

New commandment, or, where a verb phrase is required, ‘something (only) recently commanded,’ ‘something God has (only) recently told you to do.’ The adjective is used here in the sense of “not previously present/done,” then “unknown,” “strange.” In this context it has a slightly unfavorable connotation.

But an old commandment is elliptic. The ellipsis may have to be filled out, as in ‘no, the commandment I am writing you is (an) old (one).’ The connective but is rather emphatic; hence renderings like ‘on the contrary,’ ‘no, it is not.’ The adjective is the direct opposite of the preceding one, also in that it has a favorable connotation.

Which you had from the beginning, or, as a full sentence, ‘You had it from the beginning.’ Whereas “old” indicated the age and validity of the commandment in general, this relative clause defines how long John’s readers have already known it. The imperfect tense, indicating duration, serves to say that they were having it ever since the beginning.

In this context the verb “to have” has been rendered variously; for example, ‘to receive,’ ‘to know.’ A syntactic shift may lead to ‘which is with you (or is put before you) from the beginning.’

† From the beginning is used here in the sense of “from the beginning of your becoming Christians” and may be rendered ‘since you first became Christians,’ ‘from the day you began to believe,’ ‘since the gospel was first preached to you.’ The phrase occurs also in this sense in 2.24; 3.11 (but compare also the note there); 2 John 5-6. For renderings of the noun see comments on 1.1a.

The old commandment is the word which you have heard serves to specify the preceding clause. The commandment is the word of the gospel, viewed as an obligation. In some cases it is more idiomatic not to repeat “the old commandment” but to say something like ‘(and) it is…’; compare also ‘and with this I mean the message you have heard.’ To combine this and the preceding clause into one sentence, ‘it is the same commandment that you heard from the beginning,’ is not advisable. It neglects the repetitious style of the verse.

The word which you heard, or ‘what you heard us (exclusive) say (to you).’ For similar phrases with comparable meaning, see 2.18, 24; 3.11; 4.3; 2 John 6. These phrases always occur in connection with something that is common knowledge in the Christian congregation. Except in 4.3 the verb is in the aorist tense. This tense serves here to indicate that the action has been completed and is regarded as a whole, irrespective of its duration. What is in focus is the fact heard, rather than the act and means of hearing (as was the case in 1.1, 3, 5; see comments on 1.1). Therefore it may be better to say ‘the word you were told,’ ‘what you have learned.’

Quoted with permission from Haas, C., de Jonge, M. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on The First Letter of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .