220 Luca Marulli parenetical warning is quickly followed by the ultimate dichotomy and implicit argument against Diotrephes: “the one who does good is from God, the one who does evil has not seen God” (v. 11b). Gaius, who was previously praised for “faithfully doing” (v. 5, piston poiei'"), and encouraged to “do well” (v. 6, kalw'" poihvsei") — ; always in reference to extending hospitality to the brethren — is now concretely and unmistakably confronted with the necessity of acknow- ledging that only the one who does good (read: is willing to host the Elder ’s envoys) is from God, while the others (read: Diotrephes and the like) have not seen God. Intentionally or not, the Elder embodies the Isocratic motto: “Consider it …disgraceful to be outdone by your enemies in doing injury…” (Ad Demon. 26). After delivering the final blow to Diotrephes, the Elder manages to facilitate Gaius choice by arousing his desire of emulation: “Demetrius has [a] good report of all [church members?], and of the truth itself, and we [also] bear witness…” (v. 12a). As DeSilva showed(73), oral and written epideictic and deliberative discourses commonly contained ornate descriptions of honored individuals who embodied highly valued — but attainable — virtues, and hence moved the audience to a feeling of emulation: “Let us assume that emulation is a feeling of pain at the evident presence of highly valued goods, which are possible for us to attain, in the possession of those who naturally resemble us — pain not due to the fact that another possess them, but to the fact that we ourselves do not” (Aristotle, Rhet. 2,11,1). However, the mention of Demetrius here transcends a simple appeal to follow a good example. While displaying a triple attestation of Demetrius’ praiseworthiness, the Elder adds “and you know that our testimony is true” (v. 12b). The Elder establishes his own praiseworthiness in Gaius’ eyes by incidentally bringing up his own relationship and that of his entourage — and thus the common values held and embodied — with the virtuous Demetrius (74). As in other ancient writings using some rhetorical tools (Seneca, Sirach, and Paul, for instance), 3 John seems to set before Gaius a positive model for his encouragement and to stimulate emulation. By describing Demetrius as a praiseworthy figure, the Elder also associates himself with the honorable side of the conflict (the disgraceful side being embodied by Diotrephes). Gaius is (73) DESILVA, Honor Discourse, 24-25. On credible models of behavior, see Thucydides, History 2.35. For an example of a list of honorable people, see Sir 44-46, followed by a list of despicable ones (47-49). (74) Cf. Aristotle, Rhet. 1,9,1.