In order to understand the kind of community that is developing here, we have to see it like the tide coming in and filling up separate tide pools. They look distinct and separate, but they are all part of the same phenomenon. There may be distinct tide pools, but there is only one tide.
The tide pools are things like churches, schools, colleges, publishing houses, studios, and so on. This is the work of God, and we should all rejoice in it. But no work of God has ever gone forward without sharp opposition, and temptations arising, and at some point there will always be a Diotrephes who wants to treat his tide pool as though it were a lake (3 John 9). Paul is careful about boundaries, not because turf battles are important, but rather because they are so destructive (2 Cor. 10:16). Not only so, but he expects opposition to grow up within the church (Acts 20:30).
Whenever something really healthy starts to happen, this will attract people who are ambitious in various unhealthy ways. At some point, a number of them will see the opportunity for a quick personal promotion by going over to the opposition. “I was there. I know.” The turncoat can be used in any number of ways. One is the obvious one of providing additional resources or information to the opposition.
A less obvious one is the argument it provides for those who say the work of God is clearly a breeding ground for treachery or various forms of blatant hypocrisy. “Look at that. He was their disciple, and look what he did . . .”
But of course, this is not a scriptural argument at all. The Bible does teach that when there is spectacular failure in our own ranks, we should expect unbelievers to blaspheme because of it (Rom. 2:24). We should not be surprised at the accusation, but that does not mean it is a sound point. Paul owed no one any apologies because Demas deserted him for the world (2 Tim. 4:10). He was not at fault because everyone in Asia—except for Onesiphorus—ditched him for the sake of respectability (2 Tim. 2:15). Onesiphorus was the one who didn’t care about his name, and his name is the one remembered with honor.
Did Jesus owe us an apology because His disciples all scattered (Matt. 26:31)? Was Jesus at fault because three years of training Peter resulted in a three-fold denial (Matt. 26:34)? And of course the crowning example was Judas (Matt. 10:4). Jesus picked him, trained him, saw the trouble coming (Matt. 26:25), and yet kept him in the program until the moment of betrayal.
The point is not to flatten all sins of disloyalty into one. There is of course a range of culpability. There is the overt treachery of Judas, but there is also the passive/aggressive betrayals of Demas and the nameless stalwarts of Asia.
Another argument is that a work is bogus because droves are leaving. The counter-argument is that a biblical work grows healthier not only because of who comes, but also because of who leaves. “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us” (1 John 2:19).
These mini-sermons are a wonderful thing. thank you for them.
He was not at fault because everyone in Asia—except for Onesiphorus—ditched him for the sake of respectability (2 Tim. 2:15).
Should be 2 Tim 1:15.