Burn the Boats

Sunday, September 4, 2011

History of Apologetics

After the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ, the apostles and their followers were left to evangelize an unwitting and uncaring world. Jesus gave the command, “Go ye therefore into all the world”, so they had no choice. The interesting thing is, when one studies the gospels, Jesus didn’t travel the world preaching and teaching. The creator of the universe didn’t choose to evangelize everyone Himself; but He left it to His disciples. They were the ones tasked with taking this gospel into the world and explaining what and why someone should believe in the Risen Christ; which of course was no small task.

When we look at the gospels themselves, we see different writers giving information to different people groups, largely in styles and languages they would be more likely to understand. The gospel of Matthew is written to the Jews. He starts with Jesus’ genealogy, which is very important to the Jewish people because why else should they ever believe in this Messiah.

The Book of Mark is written to the Romans. It is the shortest of the gospels, which is exactly what the Romans would want; short and to the point. They did not want someone going on and on about one particular subject, just give us the meat.

Luke, being a physician, would write his gospel mainly to the Gentiles. He specifically states that his gospel account is through strict and careful research of the Messiah, making sure what he penned would stand up to scrutiny and would certainly line up historically.

John’s gospel would appeal to all believers and would tell the story of Christ through the eyes of someone who had a deep love relationship with the Lamb of God.

The Apostle Peter would be tasked with taking the Gospel of Christ to unbelieving Jews; and the Apostle Paul would be given very specific orders by Jesus Himself to take the gospel to the gentiles; up to and including Rome, and his execution under Nero.

Presuppositional Apologetics (My Preferred Method)

I have to say that I’ve never really given much thought to my particular method of “witnessing” or apologetics. Obviously in taking this class that changes. In our reading, as I came across the Presuppositional approach, I knew immediately that it is my preferred style. It’s been said that God does not believe in atheists, and neither do I. The Apostle Paul in Romans 1 states that the knowledge of God is manifest in ALL men, and they are without excuse. I believe that to the very bottom of my heart.

I myself am an example of someone who at one time was trying to run from God, and tried to act as if He didn’t exist. Back in the 80’s, I was in the Marine Corps. I was going on a ship with my squadron for six months to the Mediterranean Sea, and knew that I would have a lot of down time while on board. A few guys I knew started to talk to me about going to a bible study they were having in the evenings and invited me to join them. I knew two things; I didn’t have much else to do, and I didn’t like Christians. So I agreed with the idea that I would learn as much about the bible as I could, so I could twist it around and use it against the very same folks who had invited me.

Of course, long story short, here I am writing a paper about Christian Apologetics, so God still has a sense of humor. But the point is, I just wanted to live my life and do what I wanted, so I just tried to ignore the idea that there actually was a God so I wouldn’t have to deal with Him. I truly believe most people are like this. I sincerely do not believe that people walk around every day on this planet and truly feel in their heart that there is no God. Everything in creation screams that there is; I knew that when I was going to the bible study.

With all that said, when it comes to speaking with someone in my realm of influence, I just plow right through with what I believe God wants me to say to that particular person at that particular time. I’m a salesman, and if there’s one thing I know about sales, objections mean the person you’re speaking with is still interested. If your potential client is not saying a word, you’re dead in the water, because they’re no longer interested. I’ve never seen that with a potential convert. They just keep talking and asking questions; objecting and looking for answers. I have to say, when they come up with an objection, I make sure to answer it to the best of my ability; but I do so with the idea that they don’t “really” believe there’s no God.

I truly believe this; everyone knows there is a God. They’re desperate to find out who He is; I know I was, even though I never wanted to admit it. They don’t want to look like fools and they don’t want to get caught believing in fairy tales. They just want to know that it’s true, and they just want to know how to know Him and to know that He’s not going to hurt them like so many others in their life have.

I didn’t know it before reading it this week, but Presuppositional Apologetics is what I have been engaged in most of my Christian life, and is definitely my preferred method.

Apologetics

History of Apologetics

John’s gospel would appeal to all believers and would tell the story of Christ through the eyes of someone who had a deep love relationship with the Lamb of God.

Presuppositional Apologetics (My Preferred Method)

I didn’t know it before reading it this week, but Presuppositional Apologetics is what I have been engaged in most of my Christian life, and is definitely my preferred method.

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Introduction

“After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits—to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.”[1] Much has been made over time about who Jesus actually visited and made proclamation to between the time of His death and resurrection. Some say the imprisoned spirits are the souls of the people who rejected God before Noah’s great flood. Others say they are the demons whom God chained up waiting for the great judgment of God. Many scholars have looked at this question for many years and have still come to no real conclusion. This paper will look at scriptures and writings over hundreds or thousands of years and look at the different viewpoints; but in the end, the only way it will ever be known whom Jesus Christ spoke to in these verses is when the question is finally asked of Him face to face.

The Antediluvian World

In order to understand the first group Jesus may have been speaking to, or the antediluvian human race, we must take a look at their world as they knew it, which in turn developed their world view.

In Genesis chapter one, God creates Adam. It is the start of the human race as we know it. It is a perfect world; God walks and talks with Adam in the cool of the day. According to the biblical account Adam had great intelligence as God brought the animals to Adam and Adam named them one by one; which means that Adam also had a more than adequate vocabulary.

God then created Eve from the side of Adam. Now, the two were one. The man and woman lived there in harmony with nature, and water flowed abundantly, (such a flow of water represented supreme happiness to people who were constantly threatened by aridity and desertification). Their lives were meant to be unending and were lived in joy, and as Isaiah tell us, amid the voice of song.[2] It didn’t take long in the biblical account for mankind to go his own way, and Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden. They bore children, and mankind flourished. Before the flood, it was common for men to live hundreds of years; “At age 65, Enoch became the father of a son whom he named Methuselah, a name which means "when he dies it (the flood) shall come." Enoch went on to walk with God another 300 years and was taken up ("translated") into heaven by God without dying. Methuselah survived to age 969, the oldest man who ever lived. True to prediction, the flood came the year Methuselah died.”[3]

As man’s lifespan was hundreds of years before the flood, it is not a stretch of the imagination to understand how much knowledge would be passed down through the generations, and ultimately how intelligent man would become. In his book, Ur of the Chaldees, Wooley speaks of the artifacts found during his seven year excavation at the site of Biblical Ur in the Euphrates River. He writes: "At the very end of the season, 1926-27, two important discoveries were made. At the bottom of an earth shaft, amongst masses of copper weapons, there was found the famous gold dagger of Ur, a wonderful weapon whose blade was of gold, its hilt of lapis lazuli decorated with gold studs, and its sheath of gold beautifully worked with an open-work pattern derived from platted grass; with it was another object scarcely less remarkable, a cone-shaped reticule of gold ornamented with a spiral pattern and containing a set of little toilet instruments, tweezers, lancet, and pencil, also of gold. Nothing like these things had ever

before come from the soil of Mesopotamia.”[4]

It is not unreasonable to conclude; therefore, that man before the Flood had not only multiplied and become a great people, but had also taken possession of the earth and had reached a high stage of civilization and culture. He had achieved great things. It was the golden age in the history of man, of which the various mythologies of later ages are but a faint and indistinct echo.[5] Man had become proud of himself. At this point, two distinct genealogies develop in man’s lineage; Cain and Seth. Seth’s lineage is called the Sons of God, and Cain’s lineage is referred to as the Sons of Men. The characterization of these two brothers were passed on through the lineage, with the Cainites being wicked and worldly like their father, and the Sethites representing God’s church on the earth and keeping the descendant line open for the birth of the Savior.

As time went on and men began to multiply, these two streams gradually approached each other, and the lines of demarcation which had kept them separated began to blur. The children of God, (Seth), were influenced by their neighbors and began to act like them. We see the manifestation of this in Genesis 6, where the biblical account says: “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.”[6] Seth’s descendants were no longer being guided by God’s Spirit, but gave way to unrestrained freedom. The result was that the children of God became just like the children of men; both carnally and worldly. They were no longer controlled by the will of God, but controlled by the lust of the flesh and the lust of their own eyes. The intermarriage between the two familial bloodlines resulted in general moral decay and corruption and brought about an evil growing more rampant and gradually destroying all that was good in the world. The line of Seth was now completely intertwined with the line of Cain, except for Noah and his family.[7]

God’s heart is obviously broken at this point. Once again in Genesis 6 God is seen grieving over His creation: “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.”[8]

However, in verse 8 we see the redemption; “But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.”[9] Here is seen, as is other times throughout the bible, that God is leaving a remnant; someone to carry on His creation and be master over it.

Christ Preaches Through Noah

One common idea is that Christ Himself preached to this wicked generation through the life of Noah. The bible teaches us that before the flood the earth had never known rain or bad weather, so the idea of someone building a large boat on dry land would be ridiculous. Based on our calculations today, the ark would have been anywhere from 437 feet to 512 feet in length[10]; depending on which calculation of a cubit is used. As the antediluvian crowd would watch this ark being built, they would obviously have questions as to why. Here would be Noah’s opportunity to express to them the coming destruction from the Lord. However, mankind had become corrupt and perverse in all their ways; and as the bible tells us, only a total of eight souls were aboard the ark which means that no one listened. The issue here is that it took Noah by all accounts 120 years to build the ark and get it ready for that tragic day. This means that mankind had 120 years to hear the preaching of Christ through Noah, but to no avail. The flood came; and every living creature except for those on the ark were destroyed.

What about the Law?

The idea that Christ preached to these imprisoned spirits, at least in part, comes from the idea that these people perished before the giving of the law. It does not change their eternal destiny, but seems to be a fairness doctrine, with some saying, “How could they be condemned by the law if they hadn’t been given the law?” The problem with this idea shows up in Romans 1 where Paul states: “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.”[11] Paul is simply making the case here that it doesn’t matter if the law had been given at that time or not; the knowledge of God and His righteousness is manifest in every person so they can never look at a righteous and holy God and say, “I didn’t know.” Moreover, the people of the antediluvian era were only 10 generations away from the creation of man, so they would certainly know who He was and what He expected.

In Matthew Henry’s commentary he states: “God takes exact notice of the means and advantages people in all ages have had. As to the old world, Christ sent his Spirit; gave warning by Noah. But though the patience of God waits long, it will cease at last. And the spirits of disobedient sinners, as soon as they are out of their bodies, are committed to the prison of hell, where those that despised Noah's warning now are, and from whence there is no redemption.”[12] According to Matthew Henry, Christ gave people plenty of chance to repent through the preaching of Noah as he built the ark, but they would not listen; therefore would be the opportunity after His death on the cross to go and tell the antediluvians in hell they had chosen the wrong side; a common theory.

Wayne Grudem has a little different idea: “Some have taken “he went and preached to the spirits in prison” to mean that Christ went into hell and preached to the spirits who were there, either proclaiming the gospel and offering a second chance to repent or just proclaiming that he had triumphed over them and that they were eternally condemned.

But these interpretations fail to explain adequately either the passage itself or its setting in this context. Peter does not say that Christ preached to spirits generally but only to those “who formerly did not obey… during the building of the ark.” Such a limited audience—those who disobeyed during the building of the ark—would be a strange group for Christ to travel to hell and preach to. If Christ proclaimed his triumph, why only to these sinners and not to all? And if he offered a second chance for salvation, why only to these sinners and not to all? Even more difficult for this view is the fact that Scripture elsewhere indicates that there is no chance for repentance after death (Luke 16:26; Heb 10:27).[13]

As can be seen, different people have differing opinions as to Christ preaching to the antediluvians; but there is yet another group that some think He went and preached to between His death and resurrection.

Bound for Destruction

As we see from more than one biblical text, man’s heart is wicked and evil without a doubt; however, even all the way back to the Garden of Eden, man has not been alone in this venture. We know from the bible that a third of God’s originally created angels rebelled along with Satan against God, and are constantly working against Him through mankind. Some of these fallen angels are reputed to be so bad that God bound them up with chains awaiting the judgment day. “And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.”[14] Several commentators have proposed taking “spirits in prison” to mean demonic spirits, the spirits of fallen angels, and have said that Christ proclaimed condemnation to these demons. This (it is claimed) would comfort Peter’s readers by showing them that the demonic forces oppressing them would also be defeated by Christ.”[15]

This to some seems like a viable claim, as Christ certainly has dominion over all, including the spirit world. “Several categories of beings face judgment. Enoch sees seven stars, “which transgressed the commandments of the Lord”, incarcerated in a waste place “until the time of the completion of the punishment for their sins, in ten thousand years.” The identity of these stars is not clear, but they are treated separately from the fallen watchers and their offspring. The watchers have to stay in prison until the great assize, and constitute a second group under judgment.[16]

The story of the “Watchers” stems from Genesis 6:1-4. Although it comes from extra-biblical traditions, the story has its roots in near-eastern mythology. In Genesis, the myth serves to advance the story of the Nephilim, men of gigantic stature. In Enoch, the myth has explicitly become an account of the origins of evil and corruption. However, the basic story is that the Watchers descended to earth because of their lust for the daughters of men. However, the story has been modified to say that they didn’t just descend for the daughters of men, but to teach mankind and instruct him in their ways and bring their source of evil. Associated with this story is two main angelic leaders, Semyaza and Azazel. The story of the Watchers is mentioned in other writings of the same era, particularly Jubilees, and here too the distinction of the myths can be seen.[17]

Apparently, the sinful knowledge with which these Watchers instructed mankind were so heinous, that God at one point decided they were too dangerous to continue to be let loose on the earth. He then bound them up in holy chains awaiting the Day of Judgment in the future. A great number of the angels were not pleased with the stations God allotted to them; pride was the main and direct cause or occasion of their fall. The fallen angels are kept to the judgment of the great day; and shall fallen men escape it? Surely not. Consider this in due time. The destruction of Sodom is a loud warning to all, to take heed of, and flee from fleshly lusts that war against the soul, 1 Peter 2:11. God is the same holy, just, pure being now, as then.[18]

“Those who hold this “preaching to fallen angels” view must assume that Peter’s readers would “read between the lines” and conclude all this from the simple statement that Christ “preached to the spirits in prison who formerly disobeyed.” But does it not seem farfetched to say that Peter knew his readers would read all this into the text? Moreover, Peter emphasizes hostile people, not demons, in the context (vv. 14, 16). And where would Peter’s readers get the idea that angels sinned “during the building of the ark”? There is nothing of that in the Genesis story about the building of the ark. And (in spite of what some have claimed) if we look at all the traditions of Jewish interpretation of the flood story, we find no mention of angels sinning specifically “during the building of the ark.” Therefore the view that Peter is speaking of Christ’s proclamation of judgment to fallen angels is really not persuasive either.”[19]

One Final View

One other semi-popular explanation is that Christ went and proclaimed, after His death to release Old Testament believers who were waiting to enter Paradise through the completion of the redemptive process of Christ’s work on the cross. The problem with this particular view is found in the verse itself. It doesn’t say that Christ went and preached to the faithful believers, but to those “who formerly disobeyed”, so it seems somewhat of a stretch to believe that this theory holds any weight whatsoever. The emphasis here is on disobedience. Moreover, Peter does not specify Old Testament believers in general, but rather focuses on “those who were formerly disobedient, in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark.”

In addition, scripture gives no clear indications that those who had passed away yet were faithful to God were withheld any of the promises of being in God’s presence when leaving earth. Instead, several passages suggest that those who had a faith in the coming Messiah were rewarded by being in the presence of God immediately upon their death.[20]

Conclusion

As stated before in this paper, there’s no clear evidence in the bible that any of the aforementioned theories are the specifically correct ones when it comes to this passage. What we do know is that Christ was crucified and died on the cross. After that he went and preached to the imprisoned spirits somewhere, about something. The only way we’ll ever know for sure about whom and where, is when we get to heaven and ask either Peter, or Christ Himself.

Bibliography

Angels at Qumran: A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch Maxwell J. Davidson Sheffield Academic Press 1992 p. 67

He did not descend into Hell: A Plea for following Scripture Instead of the Apostle’s Creed Wayne Grudem the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 1991

History of Paradise: the Garden of Eden in Myth and Tradition by Jean Delumeau and Matthew O’Connell p. 4 1995 the Continuum Publishing Company

Outside the Old Testament Marinus de Jonge Cambridge University Press 1985 p. 32

The Flood in Light of The Bible, Geology, and Archaeology Alfred M. Rehwinkel Concordia Publishing House St. Louis, MO 1962 p. 27

Ur of the Chaldees: A Record of Seven Years of Excavation C. Leonard Wooley London Press 1929

World Population since Creation Lambert Dolphin 2007 Paper

Christian Information Ministries 2050 N. Collins Blvd. #100 Richardson, TX 75080

Matthew Henry Commentary

King James Version Study Bible

New International Version Study Bible

[1] 1 Peter 3:19-20a NIV

[2] History of Paradise: the Garden of Eden in Myth and Tradition By Jean Delumeau and Matthew O’Connell p. 4 1995 The Continuum Publishing Company

[3] World Population Since Creation Lambert Dolphin 2007 Paper

[4] Ur of the Chaldees: A Record of Seven Years of Excavation C. Leonard Wooley London Press 1929

[5] The Flood in Light of The Bible, Geology, and Archaeology Alfred M. Rehwinkel Concordia Publishing House St. Louis, MO 1962 p. 27

[6] Genesis 6:2 KJV

[7] The Flood in Light of The Bible, Geology, and Archaeology Alfred M. Rehwinkel Concordia Publishing House St. Louis, MO 1962 p. 27

[8] Genesis 6:5-7 KJV

[9] Genesis 6:8 KJV

[10] Christian Information Ministries 2050 N. Collins Blvd. #100 Richardson, TX 75080

[11] Romans 1:18-20 KJV

[12] Matthew Henry Commentary 1 Peter Chapter 3

[13] He did not Descend into Hell: A Plea for following Scripture Instead of the Apostle’s Creed Wayne Grudem The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 1991

[14] Jude v. 6 NIV

[15] He did not Descend into Hell: A Plea for following Scripture Instead of the Apostle’s Creed Wayne Grudem The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 1991

[16] Angels at Qumran: A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch Maxwell J. Davidson Sheffield Academic Press 1992 p. 67

[17] Outside the Old Testament Marinus de Jonge Cambridge University Press 1985 p. 32

[18] Matthew Henry Commentary Jude

[19] He did not Descend into Hell: A Plea for following Scripture Instead of the Apostle’s Creed Wayne Grudem The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 1991

[20] He did not Descend into Hell: A Plea for following Scripture Instead of the Apostle’s Creed Wayne Grudem The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 1991

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Orientation to the Book of 3rd John

Orientation to the Book of 3^rd John

Itinerant Preachers had been sent out by the Apostle John to churches in Asia, of whom some had been rejected by a dictatorial leader, Diotrephes. This letter was written to his friend, Gaius, to praise and encourage him for showing hospitality to John’s messengers, and as a side warning to Diotrephes that he planned to deal with him when he visited.

I. Introductory Elements

A. Authorship

The author of 3^rd John is John, the Apostle, son of Zebedee; also the author of the Gospel of John, and Revelation.

1. Internal Evidence

The author does not specifically identify himself, but simply refers to himself as “The Elder”. Obvious similarities to 1 John, 2^nd John and the Gospel of John suggest the same person wrote all three of those books, so it is widely accepted that the Apostle John did in fact write them. As noted above, in 3^rd John, the writer once again refers to himself as “The Elder” in the introduction to the letter. In addition, phrases such as “love in the truth”, in verse 1 of both 2^nd and 3^rd John, “walking in the truth” in verse 4 of 2^nd and 3^rd John, and similar conclusions all point to John the Apostle as the author of 3^rd John.

2. External Evidence

The common belief among the Church Fathers was that the Apostle John was the author of 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd John. Eusebius listed 2^nd and 3^rd John among the antilegomena. Irenaeus twice quotes from 2^nd John in his Against Heresies. Clement of Alexandria speaks of John’s “longer epistle”, which would probably indicate that he was aware of some shorter epistles that John had written. Tertullian (c. 150-222) and Origen (c. 185-253) both designated the author as the Apostle John as well. As far as can be determined, no one else was suggested by the Church Fathers.

B. Recipients

…to my dear friend Gaius, whom I love in the truth identifies the recipient. As to which Gaius this is, no one is completely sure, as Gaius was a common name in the Roman Empire. Gaius could have been any one of four possible. 1. A Macedonian who accompanied the Apostle Paul on his travels. 2. A man from Derbe who went with Paul from Corinth on his last journey to Jerusalem. 3. A man of Corinth who was his host in his second sojourn in that city. 4. or an unknown Christian.

C. Place and Date of Writing

It is widely accepted that 3^rd John was written about the same time as 1^st and 2^nd John. These letters are difficult to date with precision, but evidence from early Church Fathers (Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria), the early form of Gnosticism reflected in the denunciations of the letter and the advanced age of John suggest the end of the first century, it has therefore been deemed reasonable to date these letters somewhere between A.D. 85 and 95. The letters do not indicate the place of authorship, but some later traditions placed John in the city of Ephesus.

D. Occasion

The Apostle John had sent out itinerant preachers to help start and grow new churches in Asia. Since these men were sent out with the idea that they were to start new churches, but take nothing from the Gentiles of the region, it was important that they got full support from the faithful.

E. Purpose

This letter is written to John’s friend Gaius, whose reputation for helping these men had made it back to John. Also in the letter is a not so veiled threat that John will make sure to confront a man named Diotrephes when John visits the area, because Diotrephes has been speaking poorly of John, has refused to help the itinerant preachers, and has even threatened to excommunicate anyone from the local church who does help them. It also mentions Demetrius, stating that he also has a good reputation among the brethren. Demetrius could have actually been the deliverer of the letter, and his mention in it would serve as an introduction, letting Gaius know he’s to be taken care of.

F. Synopsis

The Apostle John is writing to his good friend, and possible personal convert to Christ, Gaius. In the letter he gives his salutation and expresses his hope that all is well with Gaius. He goes on about the fact that some of the brethren he had sent out to start and train new churches in the region had come back and expressed the hospitality given to them by his good friend.

In addition, John expresses his disdain for a local church dictator named Diotrephes, who refuses to accept any letters from John, will not show any grace or hospitality to the preachers John sends to them, and expresses to the local church members that if they do, he will excommunicate them from the church.

John closes the letter by exhorting Gaius to continue in the way he has been doing, imitating good instead of evil, and by introducing a character named Demetrius, who also has a good report from the church. Demetrius may be just a local member who also shows mercy to traveling preachers; or as some scholars believe, may have been the one delivering the letter to Gaius and this is John’s way of letting him know that Demetrius is one of them and is to be trusted. He then expresses that he has other things to say, but prefers to say them face to face instead of writing them.

G. Literary Genre of the Book

The Book of 3^rd John is categorized as a General or Catholic Epistle.

H. Literary Structure

Vs. 1 Salutation

Vs. 2-4 Godliness of Gaius

Vs. 5-8 Generosity of Gaius

Vs. 9-11 Pride of Diotrephes

Vs. 12 Praise for Demetrius

Vs. 13-14 Benediction

Part One: The Commendation of Gaius (Vs. 1-8)

Part Two: The Condemnation of Diotrephes (Vs. 9-14)

I. Theological Issues

The main theological issue in 3^rd John is “love your brother”. In Mark 12:29-31, Jesus says: "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these."

That theme is visited again by the Apostle John in 1 John 2:10-11, “He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him. But he who hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not wither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.”

Probably Gaius and Diotrephes were teachers or preachers in the same congregation, although they could have had neighboring churches in the same community. At least they were rivals and Diotrephes was far different in character from Gaius. Diotrephes, who loveth to have pre-eminence. To apply some of the tests given in I and II John, Gaius measures up as a true believer: he walks in truth (lives righteously), serves God faithfully and obeys the commands, he demonstrates that the love of God is fulfilled in him as he loves and ministers to others. Diotrephes, on the other hand, measures up as a false teacher, an imposter! He loves himself more than anyone else; the word loveth to have the pre-eminence means literally, “to love first place.” He does not receive the word of the apostles as the Word of God, but instead continues to reject it personally (cf. I Thess 2:13, where a cognate word for receiveth us not appears). His works are evil, and he shows hate rather than love for the missionaries as well as the members who want to help them. (Liberty Bible Commentary, pg. 2645)

J. Christological Purpose

In verse 4 of 3^rd John, we see John say, “I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth”. The word truth here is “alētheia” in the Greek language. One definition of this word is: “the truth as taught in the Christian religion, respecting God and the execution of his purposes through Christ, and respecting the duties of man, opposing alike to the superstitions of the Gentiles and the inventions of the Jews, and the corrupt opinions and precepts of false teachers even among Christians”. As there were a lot of Gnostics and false teachers in John’s day, walking in “the truth” would obviously be very important. When John speaks of the “truth”, he clearly means the way and lifestyle Jesus said would identify us as Christians, i.e. showing Christian love and hospitality to our brothers and sisters; loving your neighbor as yourself, which Gaius clearly has a reputation for. In commending Gaius for his actions, John is not only sending a clear signal of how Christians are supposed to act in his day, but how Jesus would expect Christians to act in the future as well.

K. Theme

The overwhelming theme here is clearly Christian brotherly love. Verse 11 states, “Dear Friend, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good.” The contrast between the two main characters in this letter is clear. Gaius loves the brothers even though they’re strangers to him, so be like Gaius. Diotrephes clearly does not have the love of Christ in him and is a false teacher, so don’t be like Diotrephes.

Emphasis	Salutation			Godliness of Gaius	Generosity of Gaius	Pride of Diotrephes	Praise for Demetrius	Benediction
Reference	Vs. 1			Vs. 2-4	Vs. 5-8	Vs. 9-11	Vs. 12	Vs. 13-14
Geographical	Asia
Chronological		This letter was written about the same time as 1 and 2 John (A.D. 85-95)
Authorship		The Apostle John			In the first verses of both 2 and 3 John the author identifies himself as “the elder”. Note other similarities: “love in truth” (v. 1 of both letters), “walking in truth” (v. 4 of both letters) and the similar conclusions.
Statistics
King James Version Number of Chapters Number of Verses Number of Words			One Fourteen 299
Genre			The Book of 3^rd John is categorized as a General or Catholic Epistle

Expositional Commentary on Third John

I. The Commendation of Gaius – vv. 1-8

A. Greetings to Gaius – v. 1-2

1. John’s Salutation, the writer identifies himself – v. 1a – The elder

The author of 3^rd John does not identify himself specifically, but simply refers to himself as “The Elder”. The word, (Gr. Presbyteros), is synonymous with ‘pastor’ or ‘bishop’ in New Testament literature, and implies that John has a superior position of leadership in the Christian community.[1] An early church leader Eusebius, mentions a John the elder who was a disciple and companion of John the apostle in Ephesus. Although it cannot be said for sure, it may be that the elder is the same elder mentioned in 2^nd and 3^rd John. If so, the he wrote the Gospel of John as well as these three letters, as the style and content are the same.[2]

2. The recipient of the letter – v. 1b – to my dear friend Gaius

a. The name Gaius is found in four other places in the New Testament, and all four of them are associated with the Apostle Paul. In Acts 19:29, Gaius is a traveling companion of the Paul and is probably the same Gaius mentioned in Acts 20:4, described as Gaius from Derbe. Gaius is mentioned as one of the people Paul baptized in 1Cor 1:14, and is probably the same Gaius mentioned in Rom 16:23 who was his host in Corinth. Therefore, it appears that at least two different men are mentioned as associates of Paul’s; however there is no indication that either of these men is to be identified as the Gaius of 3^rd John.[3]

b. Gaius is addressed as my dear friend (agapētos), which is an affectionate term from John. There is no clear indication that Gaius is head of a house church or holds a position of leadership, but definitely appears to be a significant person in the circle of Christian friends.[4]

c. Spirituality – v. 1c – whom I love in the truth..

Love expressed is wont to kindle love. Here seems to be either the sincerity of the apostle's love or the religion of it. The sincerity of it: Whom I love in the truth, for the truth's sake, as abiding and walking in the truth as it is in Jesus. To love our friends for the truth's sake is true love, religious gospel love.[5] John speaks much about Christian love and how, if the truth is in us, we should walk in that truth and love each other as such; and makes reference to that here. He loves Gaius as a brother in Christ, (the truth).

3. John prays for Gaius’ physical health – v. 2a -- I pray that you may enjoy good health

a. John acknowledges in v. 2b that obviously Gaius’ spiritual health is well, and is saying that he hopes his physical health is in line with his spiritual health. This once again falls in line with the idea of Christian brotherly love.[6]

b. John acknowledges the spiritual health of Gaius – v. 2b -- even as your soul prospers

The word prosper (euodoō) which occurs with soul as well as with respect to physical well-being, literally means “getting along well”. John hopes his letter finds Gaius in as good a health physically as spiritually.[7] John knows of the walk that Gaius is walking, and acknowledges that here.

B. John’s joy at Gaius’ godliness – vv. 3-7

1. John’s joy – v. 3a – It gave me great joy

a. When John states here that it gives him great joy, he’s expressing the reason and basis of John’s knowledge of Gaius’ “prosperous soul.” He knows that Gaius is doing well spiritually because of the situation he is about to describe.

b. Testimony of the brethren – v. 3b – when the brethren came and testified

John uses the progressive present tense to describe here that this was not a one-time witness; it implies that from time to time brethren have come back to John and spoken of the faithfulness of Gaius and how he has helped them on their way.[8] This is part of the reason for John writing to Gaius; he knows Gaius’ character and how he’s living the Christian life.

c. Gaius’ continued faith – v. 3c – of the truth that is in thee, even as thou walkest in the truth. Here is further proof of Gaius’ Christian walk. Gaius is not just a hearer of the Word, but a doer. John acknowledges that Gaius has the “truth” in him, which is contrasted even in the words of John’s writings with people who say they believe, but produce no fruit (brotherly love).

2. John’s joy for his spiritual children – v. 4

a. John’s greatest joy – v. 4a – I have no greater joy

John is expressing to Gaius here that there is nothing he loves to hear more than what he’s about to say in the next part of the verse; that his spiritual children are walking in the truth; which of course means that they “get it”, they understand what it means to love the brethren; and that is what makes John happiest.

b. Gaius is one of John’s spiritual children – v. 4b – than to hear that my children walk in truth. As referenced above, Gaius could be anyone of a few different people, and no one is sure which he would be; however, John seems to have a stake here in his conversion as he refers to him as a spiritual child. It wouldn’t make sense for John to reference him as such if he were not. As John Gill says, when he speaks of Gaius as a spiritual child he means: “meaning his spiritual children, those whose conversion he had been the instrument of; and among these it seems Gaius was one.”[9]

C. The Godliness of Gaius – vv. 5 – 8

1. Generosity of Gaius – v. 5a – Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest

a. Gaius is once again referred to as beloved by John, which once again shows how much John cares for him. “In “the beloved Gaius” we see a spiritually-minded saint whose interests were centered in the Lord’s people. In a few brief words the apostle delineates the beautiful Christian graces that marked this brother.”[10] The theme that keeps coming up with Gaius is his undying love for the brothers, which John acknowledges again and again.

b. Gaius’ faithfulness shown to the brethren – v. 5b – to the brethren,

John had dispersed itinerant preachers to minister to the early churches of Asia Minor, who took nothing with them. These itinerant preachers were reliant on the hospitality of Christian brothers and sisters for their very sustenance. Gaius is showing true Christian hospitality by taking these preachers in and caring for them while they are in the area. On the obligation to provide hospitality, please see Rom. 12:13, 1 Tim. 3:2, 5:10, Titus 1:8, Heb. 13:2, 1 Peter 4:9.[11]

c. Gaius’ hospitality to strangers as well – v. 5c – and to strangers;

Gaius’ reputation has made it back to the apostle John that he takes care of the preachers whom John has sent, but that he shows hospitality to strangers. This is a true act of Christian brotherhood. But these are not to be understood as two separate groups; the brethren are the strangers, or those to whom the hospitality is shown. It is important that aspiring bishops show this quality, among others (I Tim 3:2).[12] Once again, Gaius, having the truth and walking in the truth, he acted faithfully towards the brethren and strangers who were wholly devoting their lives to the service of the Lord.[13]

2. Testimony of the brethren – v. 6

a. Made known by the brethren – v. 6a – Which have borne witness of thy charity

These itinerant preachers had obviously come back to John and specifically informed him of Gaius’ hospitality. Gaius was marked not only by his faithfulness, but by his love. It is possible to be faithful, but lacking in love, or, in seeking to show love, fail in faithfulness. In Gaius, faithfulness and love were happily joined. Moreover, we note again that his love, like his walk, was not a matter of boasting on his part, but was borne witness to by others.[14]

b. To the church – v. 6b – before the church:

In the Gospel and Epistles of John, the word church (Ekklesia) is used only in Third John, where it appears three times, vv. 6, 9, and 10. In the first instance, it seems to refer to the Elder’s community. In v. 9, it may be the church in a wider sense or the community of Diotrephes, which is certainly in view in v. 10.[15] This also gives some indication of the conduct of meetings where missionaries gave reports and testified before the group.

c. Sending out missionaries – v. 6c – whom if thou bring forward on their journey

Another indication of the life of the early church is the use of the technical term to denote missionary support, “bring forward, or send forward.”[16] It makes clear the obligations of Christians to support those who are doing the Lord’s work. It is the church’s responsibility to make sure that missionaries have what they need to do the work of Christ, not only in John’s day, but now as well. This is a timeless message for all Christians.

d. Continue what you’re doing – v. 6d – after a godly sort, thou shalt do well:

After a godly sort is an idiom meaning that Gaius’ support is deserved by the missionaries in the Christian system, since they have given themselves to serve as God’s representatives.[17] The use of “do well”, actually “acts well”, in the translation here is somewhat awkward, but is intended to reflect the parallelism of v. 5, where the same Greek verb (poieo) is used. In English, one would typically say “and you will do well.” The verb here is in the future tense and seems to exhort Gaius to future conduct with the same emissaries who had (seemingly) already returned to the community (Ekklesia) of the Elder. This clause frequently occurs in secular letters and introduces the main purpose of the letter.[18]

3. The reason they went – v. 7a – Because that for his name's sake they went forth,

a. These itinerant preachers were sent out by John to help build churches and build up the body of Christ. John is making a point here that they went out for the sake of His name, in direct opposition to false teachers going throughout the region teaching other religions or cult followings; as even Christian love can be counterfeited by people who present the appearance without the reality.[19] John is making a point here of explaining exactly why and by whose name these men went out on their missionary journeys.

b. They asked for no support from non-Christians – v. 7b – taking nothing of the Gentiles. Once again, these itinerant preachers had gone forth in the name of Christ, casting themselves upon God,[20] and taking nothing from the Gentiles. Gentiles, although it usually means Gentiles in contradistinction to Jews, here means non-Christians.[21] The false teachers going throughout the land would sometimes use the goodness of people, staying with them for long periods and really giving nothing in return. John sent his preachers out with instructions to take nothing from the pagans they came in contact with, and relying only on the Lord for their sustenance. John wanted his preachers to instill trust in the surrounding people, and not have them suspicious of the men coming to preach Christ. It would also show them that as these men relied on the one true God, that He would supply their needs; giving an even greater witness for all to see.

c. Our obligation as Christians – v. 8a – We therefore ought to receive such,

This is the proper deduction from the fact that these missionaries go out in behalf of the name of Christ and take or receive nothing. We on our part, all the rest of us Christians, ought to join hands with them in helping.[22] In essence, it is our distinct duty to help the brethren who are preaching the word and spreading the gospel. This basic tenant of Christianity goes back to John’s earlier epistle, “If we say we are in Him, and have no love for the brethren, we make Him a liar”. John makes it very clear here that helping out Christians in need is tantamount to our claim to be in Christ.

d. It involves us in the process – v. 8b – that we might be fellowhelpers to the truth.

Here John is saying that when we help others, we become involved in the task; and not only involved in the task, but involved in Christ’s work. James said, “But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.”[23] It’s one thing to hear preaching and to claim to be a Christian; it’s another thing entirely to actually be involved in the work of Christ and helping others. When James says, be ye doers, this is what he’s talking about. John is reiterating that here. We may not be able to travel from region to region. We may not be the greatest speaker the world has ever heard. We may not be the most knowledgeable student of the Word; but we can all open our hearts and our doors and help those that are doing. We get to share in the rewards of Christ when we do this; and John uses this passage to encourage not only Gaius, but the other hearers of this word, even today.

[3] The Letters of John Colin G. Kruse 2000 Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 255 Jefferson Ave S.E. Grand Rapids, MI 49503 p. 220

[4] The Letters of John Colin G. Kruse 2000 Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 255 Jefferson Ave S.E. Grand Rapids, MI 49503 p. 220

[5] Matthew Henry Commentary Third Epistle of John

[6] 1,2,3 John: Comfort and Council for a Church in Crisis W. Hall Harris Biblical Studies Press, LLC 2001 p. 258

[9] John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible

[10] The Epistles of John Hamilton Smith Publisher 74 Granton Rd. Edinburgh EH5 3RD

[11] 1, 2, and 3 John (Sacra Pagina) By John Painter Liturgical Press 2008 p. 369

[13] The Epistles of John Hamilton Smith Publisher 74 Granton Rd. Edinburgh EH5 3RD

[14] The Epistles of John Hamilton Smith Publisher 74 Granton Rd. Edinburgh EH5 3RD

[15] 1, 2, and 3 John (Sacra Pagina) By John Painter Liturgical Press 2008 p. 369

[18] The Gospel and Letters of John: the Gospel of John By Urban C. Von Wahlde Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 2140 Oak Industrial Dr. Grand Rapids, MI 49505 2010 p. 258

[19] The Epistles of John by I Howard Marshall Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 255 Jefferson Ave, Grand Rapids, MI 49503 1978

[20] The Epistles of John by Hamilton Smith

[22] The Three Epistles of John by Richard C. Lenski Augsburg Fortress Box 1209 Minneapolis, MN 55440 1945

[23] James 1:22 KJV