Why Diotrephes?

Joe R. Price

How does a man like Gaius rise to the level of commendation given him by John the apostle in 3 John 1-8? It is proper to notice and imitate faithful brethren like Gaius, who walked in the way of truth (3 Jno. 11; cf. Phil. 3:17). In sharp contrast to Diotrephes, Gaius genuinely walked in the truth, resulting in a godly reputation and influence (3 Jno. 3). He did not seek preeminence over men. Instead, his humble life of faithfulness spoke for itself. Others witnessed his faithful conduct and bore testimony of him to John. Gaius was worthy of respect, not because he sought it, but because he lived devoutly, respectful of both God and men. Additionally, Gaius served God’s people. Instead of elevating himself above brethren, he helped them, including those unknown to him when they came preaching the pure gospel of Christ. His hospitality and encouragement was a refreshing respite from the hostile rejection these faithful preachers encountered at the hands of Diotrephes (3 Jno. 10). Gaius was in the business of advancing the cause of Christ, not himself. Consequently, he assisted and encouraged these traveling preachers, thereby having fellowship with them in their work. His willingness to receive them and to send them on their journey demonstrated his allegiance to the truth and his unity with those faithfully teaching it (3 Jno. 6-8). He was a fitting counterweight to those who accept and encourage those who teach contrary to the doctrine of Christ (2 Jno. 10-11). It is little wonder why John described him as “beloved” four times in his short epistle (3 Jno. 1, 2, 5, 11). John was confident Gaius’s soul was prospering, and so he prayed that his physical life would be similarly blessed. Truly, there is no greater joy “than to hear that my children walk in truth” (3 Jno. 4). With Gaius as our example, let us “not imitate what is evil, but what is good” (3 Jno. 11). 

Scripture Reading:  Acts 15:1-5

1. Satan does not leave God’s people alone! We have seen that already (Acts 13-14).
2. Judaizing teachers from Jerusalem church came to Antioch, teaching Gentiles must be circumcised and keep LOM to be saved, Acts 15:1.
3. Immediate, large dispute, 15:2; cf. Gal. 2:4-5.

I.   THE JERUSALEM MEETING.

  A. Why Did Brethren Go to Jerusalem? Gal. 2:1-9; cf. Acts 15:4-7.

II. ADDRESSING A DOCTRINAL PROBLEM.

  A. Distinguish between Necessary and Unnecessary Things.
    1. Not Necessary for Salvation: Circumcision and keeping the Law of Moses, Acts 15:1-11.
      a. No justification from sins by LOM, Acts 13:38-39; Gal. 2:16-19; 3:10-14; Gal. 5:1, 4.
      b. All saved through grace of Christ, 15:11.
      c. Salvation of Gentiles w/o LOM, 15:8, 12ff.
      d. How to establish and apply God’s authority, Acts 15:6-19.
    2. Necessary Things: Moral and religious purity, Acts 15:20, 28-29.
  B. Clarify the Record so there is No Doubt, Acts 15:22-33; Eph. 4:1-6 (Amos 3:3).

III. ADDRESSING A PROBLEM OVER PERSONAL JUDGMENT, Acts 15:36-41.

  A. Paul and Barnabas Agreed on Work to be Done, 15:36.
  B. Sharp Disagreement over taking John Mark, 15:37-40.
    1. Back story: Acts 13:13 (Gal. 2:11-13).
    2. Barnabas: Determined to take John Mark.
    3. Paul: Did not consider John Mark fit to go.
    4. Result: Separate arenas of work, 15:39-40.
    5. Not a lasting, irreparable separation, Col. 4:10; 2 Tim. 4:11.
  C. Lesson: Do not Let Personal Judgments Hinder Gospel Work! 15:39-40

Top

These are the words Christ Chumbley told police his wife, Virginia, said to him before he killed her with two shots from his .32 caliber pistol. The Laurel County, Kentucky resident was terminally ill with breast cancer. “Neighbors say the couple had a great marriage that lasted more than 20 years. And one that was very loving between the two. But they say in the last couple of years, the cancer had gotten the best of Virginia Chumbley” (foxlexington.com). “Chumbley pleaded not guilty to murder charges in Laurel District Court. He’s in jail on a $200,000 cash bond…‘I shot her,’ he said from the Laurel County Detention Center. ‘She died from my shots, but it’s not murder.’” (Ibid)

     What, in the eyes of Mr. Chumbley, made the deliberate killing of his wife “not murder”? Was it because his wife asked him to kill her? Or, was it the excruciating pain she experienced? Was it the terminal nature of her disease? Was it having to witness his wife in constant pain and suffering? What mitigating circumstances change killing an innocent person from murder to mercy?

     None of the excuses above justify such a killing in God’s sight. His word upholds the sanctity of life (Psa. 139:14). For all the sorrow and pain of his wife, he had no right to end her life. Giving someone permission to kill you does not change the nature of the crime: “You shall not murder” still applies (Rom. 13:9). Consider inserting these excuses into the crucifixion of Jesus. Why didn’t the Father immediately end Jesus’ life to spare him the great pain of crucifixion? What if Jesus had asked for a “quick, painless death” – would that have justified it? Or, because Jesus was going to die anyway, why not end it sooner rather than later? (Then, the Father would not have to see His Son in such tortuous agony.) No, the sanctity of life must be respected. It is in moments of great trial that great faith helps one endure the suffering (Jas. 1:2-4; Lk. 22:41-44).

     This inevitably draws our attention to another murderous crime: abortion. Unlike what often occurs with euthanasia, abortion is not requested by the unborn child. It deliberately ends innocent life for the sake of the mother and father – not the child. The child is not in pain; its life is extinguished to relieve and/or prevent the parents’ pain. How utterly selfish! What indescribable horror! Life, both at its beginning and near its end, is honorable and deserves respect. Murder cannot be justified. A society that does will not long endure.