Free Bible Commentary
“3 John 1:5-8”
Categories: Third John“Beloved, you are acting faithfully in whatever you accomplish for the brethren, and especially when they are strangers; and they have testified to your love before the church. You will do well to send them on their way in a manner worthy of God. For they went out for the sake of the Name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles. Therefore we ought to support such men, so that we may be fellow workers with the truth.”
---End of Scripture verses---
This is now the third of four times that the elder refers to Gaius as “beloved.” It should be obvious at this point that John’s indignation in his earlier life has been tempered by divine love. Gaius was subject of that spiritual fellowship and camaraderie that John so pleasantly enjoins upon his children in the faith.
Just as we need regular encouragement because of the incessant fiery darts of the evil one, so John exhorts Gaius. The influence of Diotrephes has been cancerous to the local group/area and Gaius was no doubt discouraged. Have you ever been in a group of the Lord’s people with a Diotrephes? All possible prospects, all privileges of fellowship, all work is constantly snuffed out by this individual. Any time you get traction, he pulls you and the group back into the rut. It’s frustrating isn’t it? Gaius was frustrated and John knew it. He needed a reminder that he was doing the Lord’s work and it was not in vain. “Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 15:58)
Gaius was a faithful servant and was proving himself pleasing unto the Lord. The witness of those who had seen and experienced the love of Gaius first hand attested all of this to the Apostle. There is little doubt that the ones testifying had been subjects of the hospitality of Gaius and witness to the destructive wake Diotrephes was leaving. Did you know that the work “hospitality” in the New Testament is translated by the Greek word “philoxenia” and means the “love of strangers” (philo means love; xenia means strangers)? So not only was Gaius showing love for “brethren” but also for those whom he had no previous connection too! The New Testament is rife with instructions to be hospitable! (Romans 12:13; 1 Timothy 3:2; 5:10; Titus 1:8; Hebrews 13:2; 1 Peter 4:9; etc.) Gaius was receiving a prophet in the name of a prophet and would receive a prophet’s reward (cf. Matthew 10:40-41). He was welcoming those who should be welcomed (contrast 2 John 1:9-11).
Although opening his home was certainly commendable, John exhorts Gaius further to “send them on their way in a manner worthy of God.” The context and plain sense indicates that this was a financial responsibility. We’ve already established that Gaius was Roman by birth given his name. As a Roman citizen, he had experienced some level of prestige that had placed him ultimately in the position to be hospitable. John is asking Gaius not only to continue doing good, but to excel still more! (compare 1 Thessalonians 4:1, 10). It is right, proper, and worthwhile to support those who have committed their lives to the work of the Lord. As much is defined unequivocally in 1 Corinthians 9, especially verse 14 – “So also the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel.” Inasmuch as we commit ourselves to those who commit their lives to the work, it is through support that we can participate, at least in one way, in those labors. No, this does not end our responsibility nor was it meant to complete the responsibility of Gaius here, but it is one more thing we can do. Not all can or even should commit themselves in the same sense here described, but we can all be wholly devoted disciples in whatever capacities we find ourselves. Let us all be so committed to that “Name”, i.e. that authority, whence all salvation comes! (Acts 4:12) And, interestingly enough, 3rd John is the only book in the New Testament that does not mention “Christ” but this should obviously be viewed as a reference to Him. Gaius, and we, should receive those committed to the work in Christ’s name (compare Mark 9:37).
One last theme to explore, and that has to do with the “restricted support” here stated: “For they went out for the sake of the Name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles.” This begs the question, for what reason would they not accept funds and support from the Gentiles? Well, there are a couple of considerations. First, is the term “Gentile” possibly here being used of those unconverted pagans who these brethren may have had interaction with in their travels. We cannot of course exempt ourselves from interaction among such people, although we can and should limit it. Perhaps the injunctions the Lord had given in the limited commissions of the 12 and 70 are alluded to in principle? Understanding the statement this way is preferable for several reasons. Verbally, the term that is used here is elsewhere understood as impenitent pagans (e.g. Matthew 5:47; 6:7; 18:17). It is also preferable given that asking support of pagans would suggest an inadequacy of the church to care for itself. John R.W. Stott, in his commentary on John’s inspired letters in the Tyndale series, comments on why this would be significant and what it does and does not mean: “The phrase taking nothing need not be pressed into meaning that these Christian missionaries would refuse to accept gifts voluntarily offered to them by the unconverted. There is no prohibition here of taking money from non-Christians who may be well disposed to the Christian cause. Jesus Himself asked for and accepted a glass of water from a Samaritan woman. What is here said is that these itinerant evangelists would not (as a matter of policy) seek their support from the heathen and did not (as a matter of fact) receive their support from them. Christian missionaries were not like many wandering non-Christian teachers of those days (or the begging friars of the Middle Ages), who made a living out of their vagrancy.”
Our second possible consideration, are these converted pagans who are culturally and ethnically Gentiles? These of course would be Christians and certainly had a responsibility to the work of the Lord. Why then were they not an approved source of income? It is possible that circumstances required such. We have several New Testament examples where Christians forewent support, even though they had a right to it (e.g. Paul in 1 Corinthians 9 so as to avoid empty boasting, party alliances, and one-upmanship). All can and should be involved in the work of the Lord, but sometimes certain situations may dictate what level of interaction we may have with a particular work. We must always use discretion so as not to provide a basis for any accusation against the Lord’s work.
Please read 3 John 1:9-10 for tomorrow!
We pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers!
