A Letter of Recommendation? A Closer look at Third John’s “rhetorical” Argumentation(*) One might wonder how and why the third epistle of John made it into the canon of the New Testament. It certainly does not appear to have any particular theological relevance. Nevertheless, this very short document is an important witness to the difficulty experienced by the first (Johannine) house-churches as they defined and shaped their mutual relations (1). As Houlden suggested, one could imagine that third John …may have survived either because of early association with an apostolic figure, or because of its peculiar value to men in position to preserve it. In the latter case, we may suppose that the quarrel to which it bears witness ate deep into the heart of the Johannine church and that the memory of it was preserved in its annals long enough for the former factor to begin to play an important, if not necessarily undisputed, part (2). The letter, which appears to be a personal one, and not intended to be read before a congregation (3), is sent by “the Elder” to Gaius (v. 1). The fact that the Elder does not need to specify his name probably indicates that Gaius knew him (4). As a common Roman name, Gaius does not need to be identified with any Gaius in the New Testament (5). Since the addressee’s name follows the author’s name, the relationship between the Elder and Gaius seems to be either a patron-client relationship or a relationship between two persons of equal social (*) The author wishes to thank Ryan Wallace for editing and proofreading this article. (1) R.A. CULPEPPER, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John (Knox Preaching Guides; Atlanta, GA 1985) 129. On house-churches see F.V. FILSON, “The Significance of the Early House Churches”, JBL 58 (1939) 105-112; O. CULLMANN, Early Christian Worship (Philadelphia, PA 1953) 9-10. (2) J.L. HOULDEN, The Johannine Epistles (Harper’s New Testament Commentary; New York – Evanston – San Francisco – London 1973) 41-42. (3) D.K. RENSBERGER, The Epistles of John (Westminster Bible Companion; Louisville – London – Leiden 2001) 121. Despite the fact that v. 15 (“greet the friends”) might suggest that the letter was not intended just for Gaius, we need to consider that Phlm 2 has “to Apphia…to Archippus…to the church in your house”, but the very personal character of the letter (v. 21: e[grayav soi, “I wrote to you”) does not imply a public reading of the letter.