After urging the faithful personally to depend upon YHWH’s goodness, he then offers a theological meditation on the goodness of YHWH in v. 15-22. I was most intrigued by what David says in v. 19-20:

¹⁹Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but YHWH delivers him out of them all.

²⁰He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken.

In these two verses, David describes the frequency and extent of YHWH’s good deliverance: “Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but YHWH delivers him out of them all” (34:19). The frequency with which YHWH delivers the righteous is 100% of the many times that they undergo afflictions. Then, “He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken” (34:20). YHWH’s deliverance is never a halfway job, as though his many deliverances require him to cut corners here and there. Not at all—YHWH will not allow his righteous to under a single broken bone.

This is the point at which we need to grapple with the larger question in this passage about how David can speak such high, glowing things about the deliverance of YHWH, when we know it to be the case that YHWH’s people do undergo bad things. It isn’t just that tough situations present themselves and then Bang! YHWH delivers us again! Sometimes cancer wins. Sometimes sin takes down long-time, faithful believer. Sometimes believers are forced to choose between their lives and their faith. How, then, can David say that YHWH “delivers them out of all their afflictions”? How can David say that “not one of their bones is broken”? How could he not know the grim reality that believers actually face

Interpreting 34:20 as a direct prophecy concerning Jesus, then, is crucial to a right understanding of the entire passage. John the Evangelist takes it as such:

³¹Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away. ³²So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him. ³³But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. ³⁴But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. ³⁵He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth—that you also may believe. ³⁶For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken.” (John 19:31-36)

Something fascinating is happening in John’s interpretation of the Scriptures here. On one level, there is a direct fulfillment of prophecy: Jesus does not have a single bone broken in his crucifixion. Yet, at another level, we are forced to scratch our heads a little. Isn’t this kind of a technicality here? How helpful is it if you avoid breaking a bone, yet nevertheless undergo a Roman crucifixion and the full brunt of the wrath of God against sinful humanity? Doesn’t that miss the point a little?

We see here, then, a more complicated picture of “goodness” than we might otherwise expect from passages like Psalm 34. Where the prosperity crowd might run with a passage like Psalm 34, insisting that we only need to have enough faith to believe that YHWH will save us out of every last affliction, the Scriptures themselves do not permit such a simplistic interpretation.

In the crucifixion of Jesus, we see all of the following happening at once:

1. YHWH’s perfect servant is not delivered from, but fully given over to, the most horrific punishment that any human has ever known. Not only is Jesus physically tortured, but he is forced to drink to the dregs the full cup of YHWH’s wrath against human sin.
2. In the midst of this torture, however, YHWH preserves the bones of Jesus, so that not one of them is broken. The thinnest of silver linings appear in the darkest of storm clouds.
3. After three days where Jesus was held firmly under the power of death, his heavenly Father raised him up triumphant over the grave.
4. We are told that Jesus was able to endure the cross “for the joy set before him,” and that because of his humility he was exalted to the right hand of his Father and given the name that is above every other name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord to the glory of God the Father.
5. By sending Jesus to the cross for us, YHWH promises that we ourselves will not have to undergo the same punishment for all eternity. Jesus was condemned in our place for our sins so that we could be forgiven.
6. Jesus insists, though, that to follow him we must take up our own cross.
7. Moreover, Jesus promises that just as we have been baptized into his death, so we will be raised up with him to newness of life.
8. We are promised, moreover, that we can share in the glorification to become fellow heirs with Christ, “provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him” (Rom. 8:17).

The picture of God’s goodness toward us, then, does not always look like this:

Threat –> Deliverance –> Glory

But very often rather like this:

Threat –> Suffering –> Element of Preservation within Destruction –> Glory

Spurgeon writes this concerning v. 20:

David had come off with kicks and cuffs, but no broken bones. No substantial injury occurs to the saints. Eternity will heal all their wounds. Their real self is safe; they may have flesh-wounds, but no part of the essential fabric of their being shall be broken. This verse may refer to frequent providential protections vouchsafed to the saints; but as good men have had broken limbs as well as others, it cannot absolutely be applied to bodily preservations; but must, it seems to me, be spiritually applied to great injuries of the soul, which are for ever prevented by divine love. Not a bone of the mystical body of Christ shall be broken, even as his corporeal frame was preserved intact. Divine love watches over every believer as it did over Jesus; no fatal injury shall happen to us, we shall neither be halt nor maimed in the kingdom, but shall be presented after life’s trials are over without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, being preserved in Christ Jesus, and kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation. (Charles Spurgeon, The Treasury of David, vol. I, Psalms 27-57 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1963), 127.)

We will absolutely be preserved in the essential fabric of our being (our bones), yet we will also certainly undergo many flesh-wounds.

Several verses come to mind to give fuller explanation of this truth:

• Romans 8:28: “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.” One of my seminary professors, Dr. Allen Ross, always insisted that the keyword in this verse was “together,” so that we would never imagine that we could look at all the events in our life in isolation. If we did, we might think “This event was for good,” and “That event was for evil.” God does not look upon our lives that way, but rather works the “bad” and the “good” together for genuine, real, lasting good.
• Genesis 50:20: “As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.” Joseph went through a great deal of evil from the hands of his brothers, and yet he evaluated all of it in light of the kind providence of God. What others mean for evil in our lives (or, merely what seems like evil in our lives), God means for good. This is not always as obvious in the middle of the “evil” as it will be in eternity, but it is true.
• 2 Corinthians 4:16-18: “¹⁶So we do not lose heart. Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day. ¹⁷For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, ¹⁸as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.” This light momentary affliction is preparing us for an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison. Where we may see pure suffering and agony (e.g., the cross), God is not only preserving us (e.g., so that not a single bone is broken), but using that suffering to prepare us for an eternal weight of glory. In God’s economy, not a single bit of suffering goes to waste for the glorification of his people.

So, is God good to you? If you are in Christ, then the answer is yes.

Is God always good to you, working all things together for your good? If you love him and are called according to his purpose, then yes–without a doubt. Many will be your afflictions, but YHWH will deliver you out of them all. You will keep all your bones, and not one of them will be broken.

But will his goodness always be manifestly apparent in your life? Absolutely not. Sometimes, God’s goodness will seem as insignificant as the preservation of your skeletal structure while you are pierced through, pouring out your life on the cross that Jesus has appointed for you as you follow him.

Only when we learn to “taste and see that YHWH is good” now will we be able to trust him through the times that he does not seem to be good.

Related posts:

1. Word, Spirit, and Dry Bones
2. Ezekiel’s Dry Bones and the Christian Doctrine of Bodily Resurrection
3. Confessing This Jesus-Christ-Come-In-Flesh Jesus

[7] Tremble, O earth, at the presence of the Lord,
at the presence of the God of Jacob,
[8] who turns the rock into a pool of water,
the flint into a spring of water. (Psalm 114:7-8)

What you might not have noticed up to this point is that v. 7 is the first point at which any kind of name or title for God has actually been mentioned in Psalm 114. V. 2 came the closest, but only used a possessive pronoun: “Judah became his sanctuary, Israel his dominion.”

I like Spurgeon’s take on this:

The pronoun “his” comes in where we should have looked for the name of God; but the poet is so full of thought concerning the Lord that he forgets to mention his name, like the spouse in the Song, who begins, “Let him kiss me,” or Magdalene when she cried, “Tell me where thou hast laid him.” (Charles Spurgeon, The Treasury of David, vol. III [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1963], 41.)

The other result is to heighten the drama of this passage: Who indeed is it who caused the sea to flee? Who did cause the Jordan to turn back? For whom do the hills skip like rams, and the hills like rams?

And then suddenly, in v. 7, the cause of these wonders is suddenly revealed–along with a command: “Tremble, O earth, at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the God of Jacob!” You cannot discover this person without being forced to respond to him personally yourself.

All of creation, then, is commanded to tremble at the presence of the Lord. Don’t miss what is happening here: suddenly all the earth is commanded to obey the God of Jacob. Because God saved Jacob, God is now able to bring all the earth to himself.

But what does the psalmist mean when he writes that we are to “tremble” at the presence of the Lord? Although this doesn’t bear much resemblance to typical kinds of evangelism that we engage in today, a command to tremble before the Lord is a command to embrace the Lord’s salvation. For example, look at a similar sentiment expressed in Psalm 2:

[10]     Now therefore, O kings, be wise;
be warned, O rulers of the earth.
[11]     Serve the LORD with fear,
and rejoice with trembling.
[12]     Kiss the Son,
lest he be angry, and you perish in the way,
for his wrath is quickly kindled.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him. (Psalm 2:10-12)

Although the word for “trembling” in v. 11 is not the same word used in Psalm 114, the ideas are very similar. Where rebellious waters were called to account in Psalm 114:3-6, now rebellious humans are called to repentance. God has provided salvation for all who believe through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ; therefore kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled.

But at this point, someone might raise a major objection about the kind of God pictured in this psalm. Is he just the ultimate bully? Is he only after throwing his weight around and intimidating people?

No. God is not a bully, and for this reason the psalmist closes on v. 8, explaining that this is the God “who turns the rock into a pool of water, the flint into a spring of water.”

The reference here is to the many times where God’s people became very thirsty in the wilderness, and, although they very often asked for water by complaining and doubting God’s ability and/or desire to provide for them, God brought forth water from waterless places, such as from the sides of rocks. The point of v. 8 is that God is not out to dominate and destroy us, but to tenderly meet our needs.

But God does not only meet our physical needs. The Apostle Paul, writing to the Corinthian church, explains that the water that God gave his people from the rock had far more significance than quenching their physical thirst:

[10:1] For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, [2] and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, [3] and all ate the same spiritual food, [4] and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ. (1 Corinthians 10:1-4)

Even before Christ had been born as a human in this earth, God was already giving his Son to his people to quench their spiritual thirst. Jesus Christ is the fountain of living waters, and he is the most precious gift the Father could ever give to us–but he does! God gives us his Son Jesus by the Holy Spirit, and he will do so even when he must turn rock into a pool of water, or flint into a spring of water to do so.

Still, don’t make the mistake of thinking that God somehow owes us all this–forgiving us of our sins, cleansing us of our unrighteousness, clothing us with the righteousness of Christ, conforming us to the image of Christ, counting us as sons and heirs along with Christ, and much more. God gives us all of these things because he is stunningly gracious, and for no other reason.

And so, when God demands repentance, commanding the whole earth to tremble at his presence, this is not a command that we can take lightly.

Don’t be a fool–kiss the Son, lest he be angry and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled.

Related posts:

1. Psalm 114:1-2: Jesus Christ, the Sanctuary and Dominion of God
2. Psalm 114:3-6: Creation’s Response to the Salvation of Jesus Christ
3. Should we pray for Jesus?

[3]     The sea looked and fled;
Jordan turned back.
[4]     The mountains skipped like rams,
the hills like lambs.
[5]     What ails you, O sea, that you flee?
O Jordan, that you turn back?
[6]     O mountains, that you skip like rams?
O hills, like lambs? (Psalm 114:3-6)

Creation responds in two opposite ways: (1) the seas and the Jordan respond in terror, and (2) the mountains respond in joy.

Most directly, the references in these verses to the sea and to the Jordan refer to the stories of when Moses led Israel across the parted Red Sea (Exodus 14), and when Joshua led Israel across the dried up Jordan (Joshua 3). In the former story, Israel escaped the pursuing Egyptian army, and God destroyed that army as they tried to follow Israel through. In the latter, Joshua marched Israel toward claiming their inheritance in the promised land.

But this is no mere magic trick–the psalmist sees much deeper significance in what has happened here.

Rivers and seas in the Bible often symbolize chaos and rebellion against God’s reign. Water is unpredictable, uncontrollable, and unforgiving. Even today, with 3000 years of better technology, we can do almost nothing to stem the destructive floods moving down the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers. It is not insignificant, then, that God causes the sea to flee and the Jordan to turn back:

God is the only figure in the Bible capable of countering the hostile force of rebellious rivers, whose onslaught he repulses with divine weapons (Hab 3:8-15) that send the waters retreating in fright (Ps 114:3-5). (“River,” in The New Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, ed. Leland Ryken, et. al. [Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1998], 731.)

Not only God’s power (his dominion), but his holiness (his sanctuary) are on display here as he routs the forces of evil.

The mountains and hills, however, tell a different story in their response to God’s salvation. Biblically speaking, mountains and hills represent a wide range of values. One the one hand, it was at Mount Sinai that God took Israel to be his people, and it was on Mount Zion that God established his temple. But on the other hand, it was on every hill and high place that Israel prostituted themselves in pagan worship, even offering their own children as sacrifices to demons.

At the most basic, mountains symbolize immensity, strength, and greatness–whether for good or for evil:

In addition to their remoteness and ruggedness, hills and mountains are large and impressive. Their inaccessibility makes them unknown and gives them an aura of mystery. Their visible immensity makes them the benchmark for enormity. (“Mountain,” in The New Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, 573.)

In Psalm 114, the size and power are not meant to suggest rebellion against their creator. Rather, an incredible irony is at work here. These huge, impressive, enormous, immense mountains actually skip like rams, and the great hills like lambs. The word for “skipping” here is a picture of dancing (eg., Ecc. 3:4), or of children playing (Piel, Job 21:11). This is giddy joy, and not even the greatest mountains are able to resist taking part in the celebration.

The divided response of creation is symbolic of the divided response of humanity. Some people will resist the awesome salvation of the Holy One of Israel all the way to the end, when they are chased away into eternal terror. Others, though, will be overjoyed at the salvation that God has worked for his people–so overcome that, unconcerned about being “respectable,” they might dance, leap, play, or even giggle.

But keep in mind that Psalm 114 was written about Jesus. Was not he the one who so thoroughly conquered the raging seas that he could calm them with a word, or walk across them in the fiercest winds? Was not he the one for whom the mountains quaked in anguish as they witnessed him give up his last breath on the cross, but skipped with joy to open up his tomb on the third day. Did not Mount Olivet leap so greatly that it split when he ascended victoriously to his Father?

Why does the sea flee? Why does Jordan turn back? Why do the mountains skip like rams, and the hills like lambs?

Because Jesus Christ has come, he has died, he rose again, and now he has ascended to the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the living and the dead.

Related posts:

1. Psalm 114:7-8: The Repentance Demanded by Jesus Christ
2. Psalm 114:1-2: Jesus Christ, the Sanctuary and Dominion of God
3. Confessing This Jesus-Christ-Come-In-Flesh Jesus

In Psalm 114 we have something much more subtle–but no less direct. Psalm 114 was written chiefly to proclaim the salvation of Christ.

Psalm 114 opens with an observation about God’s salvation in bringing his people Israel out of Egypt:

[1]     When Israel went out from Egypt,
the house of Jacob from a people of strange language,
[2]     Judah became his sanctuary,
Israel his dominion.

(Psalm 114:1-2)

The Exodus is the great salvation of the Old Testament, and it was a shadow of the salvation that Jesus would accomplish at the cross. Just as God led Israel out of Egypt, Jesus led his people out of slavery to sin, the shadow of death, and the condemnation of hell.

But the emphasis of Psalm 114:1-2 is not so much on the salvation itself, but on the results of this salvation: because God saved his people, Judah became his sanctuary, and Israel his dominion.

“Judah became his sanctuary.” A sanctuary is the place where God’s holiness could freely dwell. The word itself is a derivative of the Hebrew word qadosh, meaning “holy.” The sanctuary of God was the tabernacle, and then later on, the temple. The tabernacle was to be a recreation of Eden, a place of such perfection (in design, materials, construction, furniture, sacrifices, etc.) that (1) God’s holiness could dwell there without being polluted; and (2) sinful humans were not allowed access, with certain rare exceptions.

“Israel his dominion.” By dominion, we are speaking about God’s kingdom on earth, where his reign and rule has absolute sway and authority. When Jesus prayed, “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven,” he was praying that God’s reign and rule would command the perfect obedience on earth that it already does in heaven.

Notice what the psalm is declaring about God’s sanctuary and God’s dominion: both the holiness of God and the reign of God were to dwell chiefly in the midst of the people God had saved. The purpose for salvation was not to free the house of Jacob to do anything and everything they pleased, but rather to become God’s tabernacle and his kingdom.

But not so fast–while this idea sounds good at first glance, there are huge problems.

First, Judah cannot be the sanctuary of God. Judah is one of the twelve tribes of Israel, but Judah is not the tribe to whom God granted the privilege of the priesthood. The “certain rare exceptions” concerning those who could approach the holiness of God in the tabernacle do not apply to Judah. Only the sons of Aaron, of the tribe of Levi, could serve as priests. As the author of Hebrews notes, “in connection with that tribe [Judah], Moses said nothing about priests” (Hebrews 7:14).

Some commentators suggest that this statement applies to the temple, which was located in Jerusalem, which is within the territory of Judah. This does not completely solve the problem, but rather raises another. The entire nation of Israel (the tribe/nation of Judah included) eventually became so sinful that God would not even tolerate his temple to stand in their midst, and so God sent the Babylonians to destroy it. How could such a people be considered the sanctuary of God?

Second, Israel did not function as the dominion of God. Israel’s history is not a story of absolute, unreserved obedience to God the King, but the exact opposite. Whether Israel refers to the entire 12 tribes, or merely to the northern 10 tribes, Israel’s story is one of rebellion, apostasy, and idolatry. Yes, God brought Israel out of Egypt; no, Israel did not become God’s dominion.

Yet, this was the goal. The house of Jacob was to become the sanctuary and the dominion of God so that God might reach all the nations through them. God planned to save members from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation, but he was going to deal directly with every people group at the same time.

By taking the house of Jacob as his people, God established a beachhead in this world. Israel was his people, his sanctuary, and his dominion. They were to invite all the nations of the earth into what God was doing first in their midst.

But they failed completely in this mission.

And here is where we see Christ. Where the tribe of Judah failed to be the sanctuary of God, one of their members succeeded. Jesus Christ, the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, actually became the sanctuary of God by tabernacling among us (John 1:14). Where the presence of God had to depart from the temple built by King Solomon, God built his own temple for the fullness of his holiness in the body of Jesus Christ.

Even more, God established his perfect reign and rule on this earth by sending his obedient Son into our midst. Where we fail to obey God, Jesus succeeded. In Jesus, God’s authority held sway on earth as it does in heaven.

Jesus did not, however, became the tabernacle of God’s holiness and the dominion of God’s kingdom for his own sake alone. Jesus became the temple of God so that through him, you and I might become God’s sanctuary. Jesus became the obedient Son so that through him, you and I might be clothed in his righteousness and made members of God’s kingdom.

In this way, Psalm 114 anticipates, pleads, and longs for the coming of Jesus Christ into this world.

Related posts:

1. Psalm 114:7-8: The Repentance Demanded by Jesus Christ
2. Psalm 114:3-6: Creation’s Response to the Salvation of Jesus Christ
3. Confessing This Jesus-Christ-Come-In-Flesh Jesus

[9] I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority. [10] So if I come, I will bring up what he is doing, talking wicked nonsense against us. And not content with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers, and also stops those who want to and puts them out of the church.
[11] Beloved, do not imitate evil but imitate good. Whoever does good is from God; whoever does evil has not seen God. [12] Demetrius has received a good testimony from everyone, and from the truth itself. We also add our testimony, and you know that our testimony is true. (3 John 1:9-12)

The immediate problem in Gaius’s church is a man named Diotrephes. From what John writes, it does not appear to be the case that Diotrephes has any official standing in the church–in other words, he is probably neither a pastor, nor an elder, nor even a deacon. The reason for thinking this (as well as the problem itself) is the way John describes Diotrephes as someone who “likes to put himself first.” The word used suggests something more like a total usurpation of power rather than a misuse of lawfully given power.

We should not read this, however, as just one more power struggle within a church, with John and his cronies on one side, and Diotrephes and his cronies on the other. Diotrephes has been “talking wicked nonsense against” John, but the overall context of the other two epistles of John should lead us to believe that something bigger is at stake than a war of personalities.

Most likely (especially if we follow Lenski’s theory that 2 John and 3 John were written at the same time and sent to the same place), Diotrephes is trying to establish false teachers in the church. Diotrephes is not merely interested in power alone–he is also the deceiver and the antichrist who does not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh (2 John 1:7). For this reason, “he refuses to welcome the brothers [i.e., orthodox missionaries], and also stops those who want to and puts them out of the church.”

But beyond orthodoxy, another key difference separates John from Diotrephes. Namely, John’s authority (which Diotrephes “does not acknowledge”) is rooted in his being under authority; the mark of people such as Diotrephes, however, is that they insist on no one’s authority but their own. A red flag that helps identify false teachers is that they always insist upon their own way, no matter what. Someone with genuine authority within the church, however, recognizes himself first of all to be a man under someone else’s authority.

Even Jesus recognized this principle. When the Roman centurion asked Jesus to heal his servant, Jesus offered to go with him to heal the servant. But the centurion replied, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I too am a man under authority, with soldiers under me” (Matt. 8:8), and Jesus marveled at the man’s faith for saying such a thing.

How could the centurion compare himself with Jesus as being similarly under authority? Because Jesus’ authority was built upon his submission to the Father. In the Roman military system, all power was centered in the emperor; however, that power was represented by those under the authority of the emperor, so that the centurion had to do anything and everything that the emperor ordered. But it was also the case that the centurion’s giving a command to the soldiers under him would have the same authority as if the emperor himself had uttered the command. Similarly, when Jesus spoke, demons, diseases, stormy winds, and even death itself obeyed his commands–but they did so because Jesus was representing the absolute authority of his Father.

Similarly, John’s authority was built upon his submission to Jesus Christ, whose authority was built upon his submission to the Father. When necessary, John behaved as boldly as a lion concerning issues that struck at the heart of Christ’s glory; however, when the glory of Christ was not at stake, John behaved as meekly as a lamb. The difference between John and Diotrephes is that Diotrephes loved to put himself first, but John always wanted to put Christ first.

And so John reminds Gaius not to imitate evil, but to imitate the good. As Christ submitted to his own Father, even to the point of dying on the cross, we should submit to Christ rather than insisting upon putting ourselves first. Demetrius is here commended as an exemplar of imitating the good, as he has probably been the one carrying John’s letter(s) to Gaius’s church.

The issue is not secondary: “Whoever does good is from God; whoever does evil has not seen God.” If we are the children of God, Christ is first; if we put ourselves first, then we can have nothing to do with God.

Related posts:

1. 3 John 1:1-4: No Greater Joy
2. 3 John 1:5-8: Missions For the Sake of the Name
3. He who was Born of God Protects you from the Touch of the Evil One

[5] Beloved, it is a faithful thing you do in all your efforts for these brothers, strangers as they are, [6] who testified to your love before the church. You will do well to send them on their journey in a manner worthy of God. [7] For they have gone out for the sake of the name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles. [8] Therefore we ought to support people like these, that we may be fellow workers for the truth. (3 John 1:5-8)

The backdrop against which John is writing is a time when Christian missionaries went from city to city, preaching and teaching the gospel of Jesus, planting and strengthening churches wherever they went. Yet, this was a time when there restaurants were not readily available, and when clean and safe lodging was not easy to find. So, Christians were expected to open up their homes to provide food and lodging to these traveling missionaries as they performed their ministry.

This is exactly what Gaius had been doing. Though these missionaries (probably missionaries whom John had sent) were strangers, John had made many “efforts” for them, doing whatever he could to support them and to “send them on their journey”–in other words, to provide them with enough food and money to get to the next town and the next church. In doing this, John says that Gaius has become a “fellow worker for the truth.”

Interestingly, John writes that Gaius “will do well to send them on their journey in a manner worthy of God.” The suggestion in this language is that whatever Gaius does for these missionaries, he is actually doing this for God himself!

Of course, this is nothing new in the Bible. Jesus said that, at the final judgment, he will say to the righteous, “Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me” (Matt. 25:40), and to the wicked, “Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me” (Matt. 25:45). Also, when Jesus stopped Saul in his tracks from persecuting more Christians in Damascus, the Lord said, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” (Acts 9:4).

Whatever we do to the people of God–whether for good or for evil–we do to Jesus Christ himself. We should support missionaries in a manner worthy of God because what we do is actually for God!

But don’t ever slip into a joyless, duty-bound obligation in your support of missionaries. John doesn’t want to browbeat us into merely writing a check to the mission board–he wants us to see that supporting missions means involvement with missions for the right Reason.

As mentioned above, John says that Gaius is a “fellow worker for the truth” because of his supporting “people like these.” Gaius is not someone in the bleachers, simply cheering on the team, but an active member of the team staff on the sidelines. He may not take the field himself, but he is actively invested in and working for the success of the team.

The problem, though, is that very often we miss out on the main reason that we should work for the success of the team. We flagellate ourselves as we think about how much money we spend on what we don’t need and how little we spend on “what’s really important.” We show horrific photos representing the poverty of the people whom our missionaries are trying to reach. We imagine the terrors of an eternity in hell for those who do not believe the gospel of Jesus.

Now, none of those reasons is a bad reason for supporting missions; however, none of them is the Reason for missions. John gets it right when he speaks of the missionaries’ going out “for the sake of the name.” They have the privilege of bringing the light of Jesus into the darkness. They get to see the miraculous power of Jesus soften hard, bitter hearts. They have the honor of proclaiming the life, death, and resurrection of the King of Creation to those who have never heard of him.

Those who are given over to the work of missions get to preach Christ–and there can be no greater joy than this. The reason we support and involve ourselves in missions however possible is not to make us feel better about ourselves, or primarily to help other people.

The Reason for missions is the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Related posts:

1. 3 John 1:1-4: No Greater Joy
2. 3 John 1:9-12: Do not Imitate Evil, but Imitate Good
3. 2 John: Loving one another in Truth

Although this letter is called John’s third epistle because it is a trifle shorter than the second, the two letters were probably written on the same day and were sent to the same place, the second to the congregation, the third to one of the members. (R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Epistles of St. Peter, St. John, and St. Jude [Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966], 577.)

Lenski’s theory is that 1 John had been written as a general letter to combat the general problems in a particular church; then, the Apostle wrote 2 John and 3 John to confront a very specific problem, where a man named Diotrephes had been welcoming false teachers into their midst, while turning out faithful believers who opposed him or who merely wanted to welcome itinerant orthodox missionaries as they traveled through the area.

But that’s getting a little ahead of ourselves. More on Diotrephes later.

In 3 John 1:1-4, the Apostle writes:

[1:1] The elder to the beloved Gaius, whom I love in truth. [2] Beloved, I pray that all may go well with you and that you may be in good health, as it goes well with your soul. [3] For I rejoiced greatly when the brothers came and testified to your truth, as indeed you are walking in the truth. [4] I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth. (3 John 1:1-4)

The first person we read of in this letter is Gaius, whom John loves in truth (cf. 2 John 1:1). Gaius is, in fact, the intended recipient of this letter, a man whom John relates to as a special friend and ally at this particular church. Moreover, we should not read over John’s prayer for Gaius’s health too quickly:

The contrast between Gaius’s physical and material condition, on the one hand, and his spiritual condition, on the other, was rather striking. His spiritual prosperity seems to have exceeded his material prosperity. Too often in that day, as well as this, just the reverse was true. (Donald Burdick, The letters of John the Apostle : an in-depth commentary [Chicago: Moody Press, 1985], 460-61.)

Gaius was faithful and beloved not only as a friend of John, but as a child of God. The Apostle is not offering a general wish for good health, but praying that God would raise his level of physical health to the level of his spiritual health.

Would I pray that prayer for myself?

Most importantly, John exclaims his great joy upon hearing that the children of Gaius are walking in the truth (cf. 2 John 1:4). Apparently, John had sent some of his own missionaries to this church, who reported back to John that Gaius had many faithful children who were “walking in the truth.”

This phrase extends the idea of truth beyond mere intellectual assent, but suggests that the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ had permeated every aspect of their lives. Their daily walk in their homes, jobs, recreations, etc., was marked by the full weight of the truth of the gospel.

And so John writes, “I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth.” At first, we might dismiss such a statement as hyperbole. Everyone has some greater joy than simply in hearing that people are living their lives according to the truth, right?

Not so with John. The Apostle is genuinely sold out to seeing people walk in the truth of the gospel. Nothing brings him more joy.

So, what is it about this situation that brings John such great joy?

John finds his greatest joy in seeing Jesus Christ glorified. When sinners repent from their sins, Jesus gets the glory. When repentant sinners embrace the truth for salvation, Jesus is made to look very good. When repentant believers begin to live differently, Jesus is proven to be worthy of all glory, honor and praise.

If you have no greater joy than seeing Jesus glorified, then your greatest thrills in life will come in seeing lives changed by the power of the Jesus’ gospel. Nothing more powerfully demonstrates how glorious our Savior genuinely is.

Related posts:

1. 3 John 1:5-8: Missions For the Sake of the Name
2. 2 John: Loving one another in Truth
3. 2 John: In Jesus, Truth Wins Too

But in Jesus, Truth wins too.

John’s Second Letter does not devolve into something mushy and overly-sentimental because Love is appropriately balanced by Truth. When serious problems arise, Truth does not allow Love simply to overlook them. So, John concludes this short letter with a strict warning:

[7] For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist. [8] Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward. [9] Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. [10] If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, [11] for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
[12] Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink. Instead I hope to come to you and talk face to face, so that our joy may be complete.
[13] The children of your elect sister greet you. (2 John 1:7-13)

John does not want the church to whom he writes to think that they are to embrace every religious teacher who comes into their midst. Love needs boundaries and limits, and she discovers those boundaries with assistance from Truth. Truth rightly recognizes that false teaching is not merely misguided, but destructive, harmful, and deadly, and he keeps Love from too quickly greeting those who represent such dangers.

The Truth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not merely a quirky opinion; Jesus Christ’s coming in the flesh is the only message that brings life itself. Those who cling to this Truth find eternal life, for whoever has the Son has life; those who reject this Truth are left only with death, for whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life.

John’s opposition is directed not at those who have been deceived by false teachers, but rather toward the deceivers themselves. It is a false teacher (not one who is falsely taught) who is the deceiver and the antichrist.

Truth teaches Love that she cannot fully exercise her care and compassion if she tolerates poison and death in her midst. Truth compels Love to guard her children well, lest they lose what we have worked for, in order that they may win a full reward. Truth reminds Love that the only lasting good is found in the doctrine of Christ, through which we are reconciled to both the Father and the Son.

Truth gently points out to Love that deceivers might not be up-front with their deceptions:

The heresy of these teachers was that they confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. We are not told that they categorically denied the incarnation, but that they did not ‘acknowledge it (RSV, NEB). Perhaps they were subtle enough to counterfeit rather than contradict it. Nevertheless, their teaching was tantamount to a contradiction. (John Stott, The Epistles of John [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964], 209.)

Truth even gives courage to Love when false teachers must be turned away without a greeting, knowing that to do so would be to fan the flames of death among her children. In opposing falsehood, Truth and Love form a united front against the deceivers and the antichrists who teach a form of spirituality, yet deny (or simply distract from) the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh.

In Jesus, Truth wins too.

Related posts:

1. 2 John: Loving one another in Truth
2. Because Truth is so much more than just being right
3. 3 John 1:1-4: No Greater Joy

2 John’s unique contribution to the canon of Scripture is to illustrate the connection between truth and love. In 1 John, the main connection John demonstrated was that our becoming children of God (regeneration) is the cause of our faith in the truth and our ability to love the brethren. Because we have become the children of God, we now believe the truth about Jesus (1 John 5:1, 4-5) and love our brothers (1 John 3:10).

But in his Second Letter, John doesn’t focus much on regeneration, but only wants us to see that truth and love are not two unrelated virtues, but rather two sides of the very same coin.

This is the message of 2 John: You cannot genuinely love someone except in truth, and you cannot genuinely embrace the truth except in love.

Even the spiritual blessings (grace, mercy, and peace) that we receive from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Father’s Son come to us “in truth and love” (v. 3). You cannot separate them; if you try to cling only to one and exclude the other, you end up losing both.

Seeing this connection between truth and love in 2 John is kind of like the point at which Emma discovers that Frank Churchill had, all this time, been secretly engaged to Jane Fairfax–certain unexplained details suddenly make sense (e.g., Jane’s mysterious piano gift), but the discovery also raises new questions (e.g., How could Frank have been so misleadingly friendly with Emma? Are the Frank and Jane actually a better match than Frank and Emma would have been?).

So, we now know why John had spent so much time talking about Truth and Love in 1 John (they were secretly engaged!), but how could these two possibly form a harmonious match? Truth demands nothing less than precise, unbending, uncompromising facts; but Love constantly overlooks flaws, failures, and shortcomings. Should Love transform Truth, or should Truth transform Love?

Each should transform the other.

John first addresses how Love has her way with Truth:

[1:1] The elder to the elect lady and her children, whom I love in truth, and not only I, but also all who know the truth, [2] because of the truth that abides in us and will be with us forever:
[3] Grace, mercy, and peace will be with us, from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Father’s Son, in truth and love.
[4] I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we were commanded by the Father. [5] And now I ask you, dear lady—not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning—that we love one another. [6] And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it. (2 John 1:1-6)

Love demands that Truth never content himself to be cold, hard, and calculating–in short, Truth is forbidden from remaining merely cerebral. Rather, Truth should be given to warmth, affection, and delight in others from the heart.

Accordingly, John writes that he (the “elder”) loves the elect lady and her children (symbolic for a church and the church’s members) in truth. Even more, John says that “all who love the truth” love the elect lady and her children in truth.

Why? Because Truth unites people eternally: “the truth that abides in us and will be with us forever.” The children of God, who have been reborn to faith in the truth that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God, are not merely members of the same club (but different chapters), nor citizens of the same city (but different suburbs); rather, we are intimately bound to one another because of our common relationship to the truth.

Truth cannot stand alone, but must be joined and moved and prompted by Love.

And therefore, when John sees the lady’s children walking in truth, his heart rejoices in love for his fellow brothers and sisters. Desirous of their continuing in the truth, John gently encourages them to keep walking in the commandment, which is that we love one another.

Love will have her way with Truth, her beloved, forcing him to embrace those genuinely united to him.

This is, of course, the gospel. Truth could not remain aloof as an absolute being, somewhere out there in the universe, content to wait for someone righteous enough to enter his presence; he was compelled by Love to pursue his own no matter what it would cost him. In fact, Love and Truth are the same person, our Lord Jesus Christ. In him, Love and Truth come together gloriously, so that our Savior did not stand apart from us with a take-me-or-depart-from-me attitude; his love for us drove him even to die on a cross in order to bring us into his truth.

But Truth will also have his way with Love. More on that tomorrow.

Related posts:

1. 2 John: In Jesus, Truth Wins Too
2. Because Truth is so much more than just being right
3. 3 John 1:1-4: No Greater Joy

So central was this emphasis on the Messiahship of Jesus that within a few years ‘Christ’ (the Greek for Messiah) had ceased to designate Jesus’s function and had come to be a sort of surname. Now all this was peculiarly offensive to the Jew. It was not easy to think of a carpenter-teacher as the summit of Israel’s development. It was not easy to think of someone so recent as embodying a wisdom greater than that of Moses long ago. It was not easy to believe that an unordained rabbi who often came into conflict with the official exponents of the Torah could be the divinely authenticated teacher of Israel. This was why in his lifetime so few of the religious leaders had any faith in him. But, after his execution, it was not merely difficult, it was preposterous to think of him as Messiah. By definition the Messiah was a deliverer, a conqueror….sinners would be expelled, pride rebuked, and Israel’s glory enhanced. But the political side of the Messiah’s work was primary. So long as God’s Holy Land languished under the domination of a foreign yoke, God himself was affronted every day. Deliverance must include political independence. And this Jesus manifestly failed to bring. His death upon the cross marked him out as a blatant failure, so far as any claim to Messiahship was concerned. So far from conquering, he was conquered. Why follow such a man?

Worse still, this worship of a crucified Messiah was distinctly blasphemous. the Old Testament made it perfectly plain that anyone hanged on a stake was resting under the curse of God. How could God’s Chosen One possibly have been exposed in the place of cursing? We know this constituted an almost insuperable problem to the Jew. Time and again in the Acts, and again in the letters of both Paul and Peter it is referred to: with good reason. Both of them had found the doctrine of a crucified Messiah a tremendous stumbling-block, until they came to understand its depth of meaning. The problem persisted for most Jews….

It would not have been so bad if Christians had contented themselves with asserting that Jesus was the Messiah. But they went much further. The earliest baptismal confession that we can trace is the short assertion that ‘Jesus is Lord’. It must be remembered that ‘Lord’ was the particular name for God in the Old Testament: in the LXX it translates Adonai. There could be no mistake about the matter….Is it any wonder that the Jews thought Christians were preaching a second God? How could they, in their pure monotheism, have any truck with such a blasphemy?

Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church, p. 33-35.

Related posts:

1. Confessing This Jesus-Christ-Come-In-Flesh Jesus
2. The Fellowship: With the Church, with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ
3. Psalm 114:1-2: Jesus Christ, the Sanctuary and Dominion of God