Deotrephes and Gaius
Reprinted from The Carolina Messenger
David R. Pharr

With the numerous and rapid technological changes in the modern world it may be easy to forget that people who lived 2,000 years ago were the same as ourselves in regard to the real essentials of human nature. In the thirteen verses of his third epistle, John names three members of the church. Two are beautifully commended, while the third is exposed for his selfish and harmful domination.

Gaius, to whom the letter is addressed, is recognized for his spiritual prosperity, for walking in the truth, for his faithfulness in helping others, for his reputation for charity (III John 1-6). It is beautiful to see how John regarded Gaius and his good services. The apostle wrote as Christ's representative when he commended this brother saying, "I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth."

Wisdom tells us that "A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches" (Prov. 22:1). Demetrius had such a good name. After reminding that "He that doeth good is of God" (III John 11), John affirms the best about him. "Demetrius hath good report of all men, and of the truth itself: yea, and we also bear record; and ye know that our record is true" (III John 12).

Sadly, however, there was in that church a mean-spirited and unbridled Diotrephes. His love for preeminence made him a church tyrant. Such men do not acknowledge their selfish ambitions. Their pretense is that they are only doing what duty demands.

John tells us that Diotrephes held his position by attacking good men with "malicious words." Slander was his weapon against those who might threaten his position. By twisting words, or by circulating rumors, or by cunningly framed innuendos, he persuaded his followers against good and faithful brethren. It would be astonishing to imagine how much greater harm Diotrephes might have done if he could have published a paper, or had access to the Internet, or even a telephone!

He exercised his self-appointed authority to excommunicate in order to deny fellowship to any who were not in his clique (III John 9-10). It is reasonable to assume that he did this under the pretense of standing for the truth. We can imagine that he defended his circulation of "malicious words" against good men by saying he was "marking" them in order to keep the church pure. (Much evil has been perpetrated by just such a perversion of Romans 16:17.) He had drawn his own line of fellowship and dared any to cross it. Practically speaking, he had a list of men he approved and a list of those not approved. His admirers let him define the lines of fellowship.

Diotrephes would not "himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church." Those who received the ones he had "marked" were themselves "marked." The only proof required was their kindness toward his enemies. No stronger evidence was needed than that they were guilty by association. After all, he might have reasoned, John himself had said that to receive such would be make one a "partaker of his evil deeds" (II John 11). (Again, it must be admitted that this is another text that has too often been used as little more than a convenient vehicle for self-promotion.)

While the apostle was guided by the Holy Spirit, we cannot imagine that Gaius, Demetrius or Diotrephes had any notion that these significant notes about them would be considered by millions of people for more than twenty centuries. We do not know whether they were buried with tombstones, or whether such tombstones might have had epitaphs etched upon them. If there were such monuments they no doubt have long since weathered away. But in this little epistle each has an eternal epitaph.

What reputations do men leave behind? How shall we be remembered in the short time that one, two, or maybe three generations will still think about us? More importantly, what will be remembered of our lives in the eternal record of heaven? "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God...and the dead were judged . . . according to their works" (Rev. 20:12).

There are yet among us those who are as Diotrephes, leaders who regulate the brethren by presumption and intimidation, or who sway many by "good words and fair speeches" (Rom. 16:18). Some have an agenda to overthrow apostolic authority, just as did Diotrephes of old. These are the liberals who want to remake the church in the world's image. Others use an exaggerated loyalty to the truth as an excuse for `prating against us with malicious words.' These are the radicals, who find fault with anyone who does not recite their "Shibboleth."

But thank God there are also many with the truth and charity of a Gaius and with lovely reputations like Demetrius.

Back to Articles Menu
Carolina Messenger
Spiritual Sword