The name Gaius is mentioned in five places in the New Testament. Are each of these mentions a different person, are they all the same person, do multiple references point to more than one but fewer than five different Gaius’? Here is what we know about the Gaius’ in the Bible.
The Gaius mentioned in Acts 19:29 was a Macedonian. He was a companion of Paul. He was seized in a riot in Ephesus (Acts 19:21-41) that was incited by Demetrius the silversmith.
The Gaius mentioned in Acts 20:4 was “of Derbe” (which is nowhere near Macedonia) and was accompanying Paul into Asia. Interestingly, though, Paul “purposed to return through Macedonia.” So, perhaps this results in an inference that this Gaius was also Macedonian. Also, note that the references to these two Gaius’ are one chapter apart. It seems noteworthy that Luke referenced the first Gaius as a Macedonian man and the second Gaius “of Derbe.” Since Luke mentioned the names in such close proximity, seems unlikely he would describe one Gaius with two different descriptions as to where he’s from. It’s like both references are introducing the readers to a person.
The Gaius mentioned in Romans 16:23 was Paul’s host. If, as is theorized, the book of Romans was written while Paul was in Corinth, then this Gaius was living in Corinth.
The Gaius mentioned in 1 Cor. 1:14 was baptized by Paul in Corinth.
It seems safe to conclude that the Gaius of Romans 16:23 and 1 Cor. 1:14 are the same. That would mean that “Corinthian Gaius” was likely wealthy if he was able to host the church in Corinth, which may have been large based on Jesus’ statement that He had “much people in this city” in Acts 18:10. Acts 18:7 makes a reference that Paul left the synagogue and stayed with Titus Justus, a Corinthian worshipper of God. Some people have proposed that Titus Justus could actually be Gaius Titus Justus and be the same person as the Gaius mentioned in Romans. There is no Biblical evidence (and apparently no archeological evidence) to support this theory. Either way this Gaius could be the same as either the Gaius of Acts 19:29 or the Gaius of Acts 20:4, but there is also no further evidence to draw such a conclusion.
Now this leads us to the Gaius of 3 John. This Gaius was likely wealthy because he was providing hospitality, which means he probably had a home. We have no idea where the apostle John was when he wrote this letter to Gaius. Some scholars connect John closely with Ephesus. John’s Ephesian brethren could have journeyed from Corinth where they stayed with Gaius. But there is no evidence to suggest that.
The Gaius of 3 John was one of John’s children (3 Jn 4). He seems to have been another leader in contrast with Diotrephes. See additional notes on Gaius within 3 John.
Based on all this, I conclude that
- Gaius of Acts 19:29 is one distinct individual.
- Gaius of Acts 20:4 is one distinct individual.
- Gaius of Rom 16:23 and 1 Cor. 1:14 is the same individual who could be the same as either #1 or #2, but is more likely one distinct individual.
- Gaius of 3 John 1 could be the same as either #1, #2, or #3, but also seems to be one distinct individual.
What are your thoughts on who Gaius was?
Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Navigation
Return to III John Field Notes
Go to my III John Translation