AS OTHERS SEE US
The third letter of John is one of the shortest in the New Testament but it has much to say to us. It’s a warm and honest pastoral letter. A straight from the shoulder message from a pastor to his people. Where encouragement and commendation are deserved they are given. Where unspirituality is evident it’s not glossed over.
The writer doesn’t identify himself as John the Apostle but writes only as "the elder". It’s likely that he was so well known, his authority so well recognised that he could use this title without any further explanation. The Apostle John is believed to have lived to a ripe old age in Ephesus. Over the long period of his exercising pastoral care he would become intimately acquainted with the affairs of churches in the province of Asia, and would be acknowledged by the local Christian communities as having spiritual oversight. There were other elders in the church, but because of John’s great age and position as the last of the Apostles, he was in a unique position, he was "the elder".
John is writing a very personal and frank letter. It’s largely made up of an assessment of three people he knew in the church. This kind of personal assessment happens in large organisations where the chief executive can’t possibly know everybody. So a person’s immediate superior writes out an appraisal of both his subordinate’s abilities and shortcomings dealing with his personal qualities and his work. A schoolteacher makes the same sort of assessment when he or she writes out a pupil’s report at the end of term. These reports are usually confidential and only available to the person being assessed. But in this instance John’s assessment is published to the whole world. This is also to be the case at Christ’s judgement seat when Christians will be rewarded or otherwise for their service to Him. At that moment the secrets of all hearts will be disclosed (2 Cor 5:10).
The Apostle Paul writes to the Corinthian believers that all their actions and motives fall into one of two categories the valuable: what he calls "gold, silver, precious stones", and the worthless: "wood, hay, stubble" (1 Cor 3:12). I sometimes wonder how my appraisal will read - it’s a sobering thought! In our earthly life God leaves us to get on with the job of building our lives for His glory. He may influence us through His Spirit, but doesn’t force us against our will. We act under our own responsibility; we are free agents of our destiny. But after life’s short journey is ended, at the Day of Christ each person’s work will become manifest. It will be an examination by fire, the most severe and searching scrutiny that anyone has experienced.
When students are preparing for examinations they are often encouraged to refer to previous examination papers to get an idea of what they can expect and see the standards that are being set. This is what John the elder is showing us in his letter. So let’s take advantage of his assessment of the three people he mentions. It’s our opportunity to notice the qualities that are commended and will survive the fiery trial and go on to be rewarded. It will also warn us away from those character defects that will result in our life’s work being burned up causing us to suffer loss. The first person John assesses is:
GAIUS WHO SERVES OTHERS
Several men named Gaius appear in the pages of the New Testament. There was a Gaius in Corinth. This man acted as host to Paul and it seems that the local church met in his house. And then there was a Gaius in Derbe who accompanied Paul on his last missionary journey through Greece. Both these men were true servants of Christ. But the name Gaius was very common at that time in the Roman Empire, so John’s letter could have been addressed to another person not otherwise mentioned in the New Testament.
From the way that John writes it’s clear that Gaius occupied a position of responsibility and leadership in the local church. But John knew him on a personal level as well. He writes with warmth: "My dear friend Gaius" (1). It’s possible that Gaius might owe his conversion to John because he writes that nothing gives him greater joy than to hear that his children are living by the truth. Gaius presented no problem to John. In fact the Elder is able to repeat a testimonial he had received from Christians who had visited Gaius’ church. On their return to the Elder they had brought back a good report on Gaius. They said:
HE ABOUNDED IN SPIRITUAL HEALTH
Gaius may have been physically unwell and in fact the Elder prays that his friend might enjoy good health. But whatever might have been his physical condition, his spirit was aglow. He may have been poor materially and most Christians in those days were, but his soul was brimming over with spiritual life and vitality. This is the standard that God is looking for, because it is what Jesus has made possible. Our Lord said, "I came that they might have life, and have it abundantly" (John 10:10). It isn’t God’s intention that we should live in a state of spiritual invalidism. The invalid has life, but it’s life endured rather than life enjoyed in fellowship with the Lord. Another plus point for Gaius is that:
HE PRACTISED WHAT HE PREACHED
The testimonial by the visiting Christians refer to Gaius’ consistency in the Christian life. Not only did he believe the truth of the Gospel, but also he lived out what he believed. When Paul wrote to the young minister Titus, he urged him to teach his people to conduct themselves "so that in every respect they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour" (Titus 2:10). He wanted their actions to speak so loudly that even the pagans would have to exclaim "if the Christian religion does this for them, it must be wonderful!"
I came across some lines that really apply to preachers but can be profitably taken note of by all: "I’d rather see a sermon than hear one any day; I’d rather one would walk with me than merely show the way. The eye’s a better pupil and more willing than the ear; Fine counsel is confusing but example’s always clear. And the best of all the preachers are the ones who live their creeds, For to see good put in action is what everybody needs. I soon can learn to do it if you let me see it done. I can watch your hands in action but your tongue too fast may run. And the sermon you deliver may be very wise and true, But I’d rather get my lesson by observing what you do, For I might misunderstand you and the high advice you give, But there’s no misunderstanding how you act and how you live."
We don’t know if Gaius was a preacher but the sermon that his life preached ran true. John’s assessment was that he "walks in the truth" (3). There was no conflict between what he professed and what he practised. Rather there was complete harmony between his creed and conduct. But not only that:
HE USED HIS TIME AND RESOURCES IN CHRISTIAN SERVICE
John singles out a feature of Gaius’ character that was so commendable - it was his Christian service. Gaius was not only saved; he was used in the extension of the Kingdom of God. There’s nothing so sad as Christians who are blessed with abilities and resources but who fail to use them. This couldn’t be said of Gaius: his part in the work was generous hospitality to the Christian ministers, evangelists and teachers who passed through the area. He received them into his home and entertained them at his own expense. His practical ministry was further proof that he was true to his profession of salvation. The truth of the Gospel that he had entered into wasn’t kept hidden but blossomed out into Christian service. Such love in action never goes unrewarded. Think of the fine friendships he would have made, of the rich fellowship he would have had as he heard stories of how the Gospel was being spread to the limits of the Roman Empire. But the reward wasn’t only on the human level: Gaius’ work had been registered in heaven. Jesus told His disciples "He that receives you receives me, and he that receives me receives Him that sent me" (Matt 10:40). When travellers returned to John they spoke appreciatively of what Gaius had done for them. The secret of Gaius’ service was that it was dominated by love.
When John wrote his letter, the Christian church had only a short history behind it but already a clear pattern of respon¬sibility for missionary work had emerged. Just as Jesus sent out the 70 to proclaim the Gospel of His Kingdom, so the early church sent forth missionaries with the news of Christ’s death and resurrection. These itinerant evangelists didn’t receive support from the heathen. It’s because they were on Christ’s work, wrote the Elder, "that we are bound to support them" (7). This should focus our minds on how we should use our resources. There are many good causes that Christians may support, but they must support their brethren to whom the world can’t be expected to support. It’s really a matter of priorities. In supporting those engaged in Christian service we play our part in spreading the truth, and so we become co workers with Christ. Such was Gaius who served others. But now the tone of John’s letter changes as he commences his assessment of:
DIOTREPHES WHO HINDERS OTHERS
Diotrephes was a problem to John. In character and behaviour he’s quite different from Gaius. Diotrephes is seen as loving himself more than others and refusing to welcome the travelling evangelists. Yet both men were members of the same congregation. How could this happen? Jesus taught His disciples that "the kingdom of heaven could be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while men were sleeping the enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat" (Matt 13:24). It wasn’t until the harvest that the weeds were separated from the wheat. Paul warned Timothy of people connected with the Christian church who held the form of religion, its outward trappings, but denied the power of it (2 Tim 3:5). This reminds us that members of the visible church aren’t necessarily part of the true church, the Body of Christ. John’s complaint against Diotrephes was that:
HE WAS PROUD AND SELF-WILLED
Diotrephes is a warning of the characteristics to guard against. The Elder’s words are a pen portrait of a man to be avoided, rather like a poster on a Police Station notice board of a convicted criminal on the run "This man is dangerous!" Diotrephes always wanted to be first. He loved the public eye and was always pushing to the front. Not for him the work behind the scenes no, he had to have the limelight! He was insufferably proud, and this was the root cause of all the trouble.
John had written to the local church with a message for the members but Diotrephes in his arrogance had refused to acknowledge the writer’s authority. He may have refused the read the letter to the church or even destroyed it. Whatever happened, the effect was to reject the instructions issued by John. One can almost hear Diotrephes saying: "I’m not going to be dictated to by John." The name Diotrephes wasn’t often used. It appears it was found only in families of noble blood. If this is the case it may well have been social prestige that lay behind his disgraceful behaviour. Pride is a manifestation of sin. It presents itself in several forms. As someone has said: "There is pride of place, pride of face, and pride of grace". The trouble starts when some perfectly good thing - say, a person’s ability, position or achievement is given an importance entirely out of proportion. Diotrephes had a position of responsibility in the church but he loved it too much and when John the Elder, who had a greater authority, overruled him, the flaw in his character was exposed. But not only was Diotrephes proud and self-willed - one thing led to another:
HE WAS UNDISCIPLINED AND SPITEFUL
The Elder complained that Diotrephes was "gossiping maliciously against us" (10). One can imagine him going around the congregation trying to "knock" John, seeking to belittle him in the eyes of others. This character assassination must have been very harmful to the church fellowship. How the devil must have rejoiced over this friction. The late C. S. Lewis was a most perceptive writer. In his book "The Screwtape Letters", he imagines he is listening to a speech given by a senior devil in Hell itself. The subject is "Religion on Earth". The devil goes on to say "It can still send us the truly delicious sins, the fine flower of unholiness can grow only in the close neighbourhood of the holy. Nowhere do we tempt so successfully as on the very steps of the altar." Diotrephes wasn’t content with a campaign of malicious words against John, but went further for we’re told:
HE REFUSED TO ACCEPT SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY
Diotrephes deliberately defied the Elder by turning others away from the church. For some reason he resented the arrival of travelling preachers. Perhaps he wanted to be a preacher on all occasions. He may have had a secret fear that if his congregation heard another type of ministry his own would be over¬shadowed. Regardless of the possible benefit to the church of hearing more experienced teachers than himself, he was determined to bolster up his position at all costs. He was more concerned with the glory of his own name. The result of this was that he refused to have them in his home or lift a finger to help them. What was even worse was that any of his members who didn’t see eye to eye with him became his enemies. Those who wanted to obey John and welcome the itinerant evangelists, he tried to expel them from the church! It must have given pain to John to write such a dreadful report but now the mood of sorrow gives place to joy as he turns his attention to an assessment of his third subject:
DEMETRIUS WHO ATTRACTS OTHERS
In all probability Demetrius was the bearer of John’s letter. Other people’s opinions of us aren’t always correct, even those who know us best. Only God is all knowing and all seeing. But what the impartial observer thinks can be a good indicator of what we are. Self-assessment is valuable but, let’s be frank, it can be biased! I used to work for an American bank that had the slogan "Quality Loyalty Consistency - QLC". This was drummed into its employees as a means of getting the most out of them. A colleague thought they were too demanding and countered the slogan - in private - with his own interpretation of what QLC stood for: "Quality of Life Counts!" Demetrius, I think, would have been happy to accept the original.
Demetrius lived out his Christian beliefs in his daily work. John was able to give Demetrius a good commendation. He doesn’t give much detail on why Demetrius was commended but what he writes is praise indeed: "Demetrius is well spoken of by everyone" (12). Of course, sometimes it isn’t good when everyone speaks well of us if it means that we merely following the crowd, but in this case it was good. Demetrius’ good testimony didn’t rely only on the words of others. His Christian genuineness was confirmed by his life.
John, the E1der, has completed his frank assessment of three men connected with the early church. They are given as examples of the qualities that please God and the defects that can only cause damage to the person and the church. Two good examples and one bad one. The bad example is Diotrephes he hindered others. He slandered John, cold shouldered the missionaries and excommunicated the loyal believers because he loved himself and wanted to have the pre-eminence. The question must be asked whether he was a true Christian at all. John warns that he will be obliged to take some kind of disciplinary action. History doesn’t record if John visited the church to deal with the matter personally. But one thing we can be sure of is that Diotrephes will have to give an answer at the Last Day when confronted by the Head of the Church, the Lord Jesus Christ, as will all other believers .
But there were two good examples. Gaius who served others. He abounded in spiritual health, his life a visua1 sermon that rang true because he was dominated by the love of Christ. And Demetrius who attracted others. He was commended by all that knew him as a true man of God, a worthy ambassador of the Lord he served.
Most of what we learn in life is by imitating others. It’s natural for us to look up to other people as our model and to copy them. John has made his searching assessment of these men and he leaves us with these words of counsel: "Do not follow bad examples but good ones" (11).
