We should become increasingly familiar with the NT, but we should not let that familiarity dull the amazing truth that when we read 3 John, we are reading an actual letter involving real Christians that was written nearly two thousand years ago! Third John documents the names of three Christians from the first century who, along with the author of the note, “the elder,” were involved in an actual situation that exemplifies issues of authority, truth, and love—issues that in their more abstract form fill the pages of 1 and 2 John.
At just under two hundred words in its original Greek, 3 John comes to us as the shortest book of the NT. The autograph would have fit on one sheet of papyrus, the “paper” typically used in the first century (cf. 2 John 12). It was originally written as a letter of introduction requesting hospitality for the bearer of the letter, a man named Demetrius. But if that were all there was to it, this brief personal note probably would not be in the Bible. When this letter was written, much more was at stake—the very truth about Jesus Christ.
Third John is the only NT book that does not mention Jesus by name (though see commentary on v. 7). But given the brevity and specific purpose of the note as a letter of introduction (as opposed, for instance, to a theological discourse or evangelistic presentation), this is not too surprising. Most Christians today write many notes and emails to believing friends that allude to their shared faith without explicitly mentioning Jesus. While the content of 3 John lacks the theological material of, for instance, John’s gospel or Romans, it does not deserve to be neglected by preachers or in Bible studies. Much less warranted is the conclusion that it lacks edifying material and is of only historical interest today. The evangelical, Protestant doctrine of Scripture does not allow any book of the Word of God to be dismissed as unworthy of our attention.
But to understand 3 John, we must also understand its relationship to the other Johannine writings and the historical moment for which it was written. Despite its brevity and the specificity of its message, 3 John is a treasure that provides a glimpse into early church dynamics, provides a much-needed exhortation to Christians today, and makes a significant theological claim about where the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ is to be found.
The highest level of the form and structure of any text is necessarily defined by the genre of the text. Because 3 John is an actual note from one person to another, it exhibits many features of first-century Greek letters, its epistolary structure being the most obvious of them. In fact, it is closer in form and structure to other extant personal notes from the ancient world than any other book. Just as there are various types of letters in the modern world that take different forms depending on their purpose and the relationship between the writer and the recipient—compare a business form letter to a chatty email from a close friend—different kinds of personal correspondence from the ancient world are known among the extant documentary papyri.1
Among such letters are those that functioned as letters of introduction or recommendation (known in the ancient world as ἐπιστολὴ συστατική, cf. 2 Cor 3:1).2 It is clear from 3 John 12 that this letter functioned to introduce Demetrius to Gaius, but that is not its only, or even its primary, purpose. Recognizing that this is an actual note helps us to bring appropriate assumptions to our reading and interpretation.
For instance, we cannot fault the author for not telling us more about his relationship with Gaius or Diotrephes, because that lack represents information that was shared between the author and Gaius and needed no formal description. We have no warrant to read elements of the text as allegories or poetic features when they can be understood more literally as communicating information between the writer and the recipient. The significance and meaning of the text is not to be sought by lifting it out of its historical moment, but by contemplating how that moment provides insight into the spiritual issues of the time, which are still issues today.
Various methodologies can be brought to bear on NT epistles, each contributing something to our understanding. Third John can be analyzed according to categories of classical Greco-Roman rhetoric,3 according to the conventions of Hellenistic letter writing,4 and according to modern linguistic principles of discourse analysis,5 each producing somewhat different outlines of the text. The rhetorical function of each part of a Greco-Roman letter overlays the discourse structure, which at its highest level is governed by the form of Hellenistic letters; but within its body it exhibits various discourse markers that are based on syntax and depend on the subject and the style and flow of thought of the writer. Therefore, an exact correspondence between the segments in a rhetorical outline of 3 John and those of a discourse outline should not be expected, though there should be some corroboration between the results of various methodologies.
Although exegesis of 3 John shows that the letter functioned to introduce Demetrius to Gaius, the letter really isn’t about Demetrius; rather, it is about the elder’s concern for Gaius’s continued faithfulness to the truth in light of Diotrephes’s previous rejection of the elder’s envoys (see comments on v. 11). The elder employs only subtle persuasion, for he is hoping against hope that he is right to assume that Gaius remains a coworker for the truth. A more polemic tone would have had to assume a greater alienation than was warranted. But if Gaius were beginning to waver, the rhetoric of this letter would function to call him back to the truth while simultaneously presenting a practical test of Gaius’s faithfulness to the elder’s cause.