PAUL draws up a roll of honour and of dishonour of his friends.  Some are only names to us; of some, as we read the Acts of the Apostles as well as the Epistles, we get the occasional revealing glimpse. If we are allowed to use our imagination, we can reconstruct some of the stories. ~Barclay commentary

Beginning with verse 10 we see names named.  They are:

Demas [De'mas]
Crescens [Cres'cens]
Titus
Luke
Mark
Tychicus [Ty-chi-cus]
Carpus
Alexander the coppersmith

What you will see in tonight's lesson and those through verse 14 is that they represent a cross-section of what was true in the church then and that same cross-section is still here today.

Now to the rest of the commentaries. As we always do, we will begin with the general and move to the specific

First the Matthew Henry Main and breaking into a long commentary on this section.

Paul wanted Timothy's company and help; and the reason he gives is because several had left him (2 Timothy 4:10); one from an ill principle, namely, Demas, who abides under an ill name for it: Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world. He quitted Paul and his interest, either for fear of suffering (because Paul was now a prisoner, and he was afraid of coming into trouble upon his account) or being called off from his ministry by secular affairs, in which he entangled himself; his first love to Christ and his gospel was forsaken and forgotten, and he fell in love with the world. Note, Love to this present world is often the cause of apostasy from the truths and ways of Jesus Christ. He has gone off, has departed to Thessalonica, called thither perhaps by trade, or by some other worldly business. Crescens had gone one way and Titus another way. Luke however remained with Paul, and was not this enough? Paul did not think it so; he loved the company of his friends. ~Matthew Henry Main

Now the Matthew Henry Concise:

The love of this world, is often the cause of turning back from the truths and ways of Jesus Christ. Paul was guided by Divine inspiration, yet he would have his books. As long as we live, we must still learn. The apostles did not neglect human means, in seeking the necessaries of life, or their own instruction. Let us thank the Divine goodness in having given us so many writings of wise and pious men in all ages; and let us seek that by reading them our profiting may appear to all. ~Matthew Henry Concise

Now notice this from the John Wesley that speaks to who Demas before this was written about him.

Demas - Once my fellowlabourer, Philemon 1:24. Hath forsaken me. Crescens, probably a preacher also, is gone, with my consent, to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia, having now left Crete. These either went with him to Rome, or visited him there. ~John Wesley Explanatory Notes

Quoted verse:
Philemon 1:23-24
23 There salute thee Epaphras, my fellowprisoner in Christ Jesus;
24 Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, Lucas, my fellowlabourers.

Note: So Demas was a fellow laborer in the faith.

Now this from the Alexander MacLaren. This section of verse 9 to 15 mentions several names and you will hear reference to some or all of them in the commentaries we read.

THIS last of Paul’s letters is written, as is generally supposed, in his second imprisonment, and very near his martyrdom. The condition in which it represents him is remarkably contrasted, in several respects, with the conditions of his first imprisonment, as shown in the letters dating from that period. In these - in two of them, at all events - we find him surrounded by troops of friends, among whom the same three names as occur in my text appear as united with him in loyal confidence, and joining with him in greetings to his correspondents. Here they are again, but under what different circumstances! ‘Demas hath forsaken me... Only Luke is with me. Take Mark’ - who is also absent - ‘and bring him with thee.’ The lonely Apostle has none of the Old Guard around him, except the faithful Luke, and he longs, before he dies, to see once more the familiar faces, and to be ministered to once more by accustomed and tender hands. That touch of humanity brings him very near us.

But what I have chosen my texts for is the sharp contrast which the three prominent names in them present in their attitude to the Apostle - Demas the renegade, Mark the restored runaway, Luke, the ever steadfast and faithful companion- Now of course these three men’s relation to Jesus Christ was not identical with their relation to Paul. But at the same time their relation to Paul, one has little doubt, fluctuated with their relation to Jesus. It is scarcely possible to believe that the first of them would have done so base an act as to abandon the Apostle at the very crisis of his fate, unless his attachment to Jesus had become slender, nor that Mark’s love to his Lord had not cooled when he ‘went not with Paul and Barnabas to the work.’ I take these three names as representations of three different types of character and spiritual experience, and I wish to look at the three portraits in succession; only I venture to alter the order in which they appear in the text. First, then -

I. Demas the renegade.
We know nothing of him except that in the letters of the earlier imprisonment his name appears, honoured by Paul with the designation of his ‘fellow-worker,’ evidently admitted into the inner circle, living in amity and close communion with the other members of it, trusted and honoured, a man of some maturity and advancement, and now guilty of the base act of leaving the Apostle. How deeply that wounded Paul’s sensitive heart the language of our text sufficiently shows. It is a sad fate that all the world should know that fact, and only that, about Demas, that he should be cursed and condemned to such an immortality, and go down through the ages branded with ‘ he hath forsaken me, having loved this present world.’ He was not a monster, but just a man like the rest of us; and he came to his bad eminence by a very well-trodden and familiar path. He ‘hath forsaken me, having loved this present world’ - that is to say, he was a religious man who had not religion enough to resist the constant attractions and seductions of this present, and because he loved it, in one or other of its forms - wealth, ease, comfort, a whole skin, reputation, or whatever it may have been - more than he loved Paul’s Master, he turned his back upon principle, friendship, honour, duty, everything noble, and buried himself in the far-off Thessalonica. There are a great many Demases amongst us, and a great many different kinds of Thessalonicas to which we run. But we are all exposed to that same danger, and so we may well look at this one soul that fell under its spell, and was too weak to resist its pertinacious solicitations, and say to ourselves: ‘Lord, is it I?’

For there is nothing in human sin that is alien from any of us, and no depth of lapse and apostasy is so profound but that the tendencies towards it, and the possibilities of it, are in us, even us also. So let me translate into less well-worn words the language of the text which, for all its force, is so familiar that it does not appeal to us as it ought to do.

‘This present world,’ what is that? Well, it is Protean, as I have already hinted, in its shapes, and all manner of solicitations come from it, but we may say in general terms that it is the aggregate of ‘things seen and temporal’ which, subtle, and certainly corresponding to our own weakest sides, appealing to some of us in the shape of wealth, to some of us in the shape of earthly loves, to some of us in the shape of material advantages, to some of us in the form of the ‘hollow wraith of dying fame,’ to some of us in the nobler guise of scientific pursuits, lie confined within the limits of the phenomenal and the material, but to all of us being essentially the presentation of the visible, the material, the transient as the aim to strain after, and the good to count as our treasure.

Let us remember how persistent and how terribly strong the appeal of ‘this present world’ is to us all. Its operation is continual upon us. Here it is, and we are in necessary connection with it, and it is our duty to be occupied with it, and it is cowardice to shirk the duty because of the peril that lies in it. You have to go to your business tomorrow morning, and I have to go to my books or my work; and the task for each of us is - and God knows how hard a task it is - to have our hearts in [The Kingdom] whilst our hands are busy with the things around us. Christianity enjoins no false asceticism [uh-set-uh-siz-uh m] - [attaining a high spiritual state by self-denial]. There is little need to preach that today, but still it is to be remembered that it is duty to be occupied with the world, and fatal sin to love it, And just because it is so difficult to keep upon that knife-edge, so difficult to put all our pith and power into our occupation with material things, and yet never to be tempted into the love of them which fights against all nobleness of life, is it incumbent on me, over and over again, to reiterate to you and to myself the old threadbare commonplace,’ Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world.’ Leave your mark on them, work on them diligently, and with all your heart, bend them to be your servants, and to help you to rise to the things above them, but on your soul’s peril keep clear of that bowing down before them, that trusting in them, that longing for them, that despair if you lose them, which together make up the love of the world, and the lust thereof which passes away. There is an enemy within the fortress who is always ready and eager to fling open the gates to the besiegers. For the things ‘seen and temporal’ correspond with, and have their ally in, the senses by which we are brought into contact with them. And unless there is a very strong religious impulse dominant in our minds, or to put it into more Christian words, unless ‘the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given to us,’ it cannot be but that we shall follow Demas, and run away to our Thessalonica, and leave Paul, and duty, and, Paul’s Master, and duty’s Source, behind us.

For, brethren, if once this love of the world, which is always soliciting each of us, gets a footing in our hearts, it is impossible - as impossible as it is for two bodies to occupy the same place at the same time - for the love of Christ, which is the love of God, to continue dominant there. There cannot be two masters. That is plain common sense. If my head is full of thoughts and schemes, concerned only with the fleeting illusory present, then there is no room in it for His serene, ennobling presence. If my hands are laden with pebbles, I cannot clasp the diamonds that are offered to me.

Unless you fling out the sand-bags the balloon will cleave to the earth, and unless we turn the world out of our hearts, it is no use to say to Him, ‘Come! Lord Jesus.’ There is no room for Him. And though He comes through the narrowest opening of the door of the soul, He will not come unless we have to some extent conquered the world, and the love of the world.

If I could get you to translate for yourselves the threadbare theological terminology of this text into the vital facts that it represents, I should thank God. Only, dear brethren, take this with you, either we forsake Christ because we love the world, or we forsake the world because we love Christ. On the one alternative we choose restlessness and feverish desires unsatisfied, and craving, all the misery of mistaking mist for land and cloud-wrack for solid ground; on the other, we choose all the blessedness of having set our love on that which satisfies, of having loved the worthiest, the best, the most loving. Which of the two shall we choose? It may be that the one choice shall mean, as it did for Paul, a prison cell and a martyrdom, and that the other may mean, as it did for Demas, comfort and safety, and many an unmistakably good thing, in some Thessalonica or other. But are we going to vote with Demas, or is it going to be Paul? Whether is it better to love the world, and get what the renegade presumably got for a time, or is it better to get what Paul speaks of in the words before my text, ‘a crown of righteousness laid up for all them that love’ - not the world - ‘but His appearing.’ like the martyr Apostle. ~Alexander MacLaren

Now to the specific commentaries. We will only have time Barnes Notes.

For Demas hath forsaken me - Demas is honorably mentioned in Colossians 4:14; but nothing more is known of him than what can be gathered from that place and this - that he was at first a friend and fellow-laborer of Paul, but that, under the influence of a desire to live, he afterward forsook him, even in circumstances where he greatly needed the presence of a friend.

Quoted verse:
Colossians 4:14
Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you.

Having loved this present world - This does not mean, necessarily, that he was an avaricious [av-uh-rish-uh s] - [greedy; covetous] man, or that, in itself, he loved the honors or wealth of this world; but it means that he desired to live. He was not willing to stay with Paul, and subject himself to the probabilities of martyrdom; and, in order to secure his life, he departed to a place of safety. The Greek is, ἀγαπὴσας τὸν νὺν αἰῶνα agapēsas ton nun aiōna - having loved the world that now is; that is, this world as it is, with all its cares, and troubles, and comforts; having desired to remain in this world, rather than to go to the other. There is, perhaps, a slight censure here in the language of Paul - “the censure of grief;” but there is no reason why Demas should be held up as an example of a worldly man. That he desired to live longer; that he was unwilling to remain and risk the loss of life, is indeed clear. That Paul was pained by his departure, and that he felt lonely and sad, is quite apparent; but I see no evidence that Demas was influenced by what are commonly called worldly feelings, or that he was led to this course by the desire of wealth, or fame, or pleasure.

And is departed unto Thessalonica - Perhaps his native place. “Calmet.”

Crescens - Nothing more is known of Crescens than is here mentioned. “He is thought by Eusebius [juːˈsiːbiəs/] and others to have preached in Gaul, and to have founded the church in Vienne [vjɛn], in Dauphiny” - Calmet.

To Galatia - See Intro. to the Epistle to the Galatians, Section 1. It is not known to what part of Galatia he had gone, or why he went there.

Titus into Dalmatia - Dalmatia was a part of Illyricum [ih-leer-i-kuh m], on the gulf of Venice, or the Adriatic sea. On the situation of Illyricum [ih-leer-i-kuh m] , see the notes on Romans 15:19. Paul does not mention the reason why Titus had gone there; but it is not improbable that he had gone to preach the gospel, or to visit the churches which Paul had planted in that region. The apostle does not suggest that he was deserving of blame for having gone, and it can hardly be supposed that “Titus” would have left him at this time without his concurrence. Perhaps, when he permitted him to go, he did not know how soon events would come to a crisis with him; and as a letter would more readily reach Timothy at Ephesus, than Titus in Dalmatia, he requested him to come to him, instead of directing Titus to return. ~Barnes Notes

Quoted verse:
Romans 15:19
Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum [ih-leer-i-kuh m], I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.

Understand that some in and around the Body of Christ have a love for this world resulting in backsliding and falling away.  Do not be like Demas.  This is the lesson of verse 10.