CAN WE TRUST JOHN? Part 1
There are five crucial questions when we consider the reliability of the Bible. This week we look at the first two questions.
St John by El Greco 1604
1 Who wrote it? and 2 How near to the events was it written?
1 Who wrote John’s Gospel?
At first glance, this should be obvious, even though the gospel is anonymous. John is written in two parts, chapters 1-20 and an appendix, chapter 21, in which Peter asks the risen Jesus what will be the fate of ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved’. The writer of the appendix says, “ This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true.”
There is one person in John’s gospel who turns up frequently but is never named. He is one of the two of John the Baptist’s disciples who followed Jesus in 1.33-39. The other was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He was at the Last Supper (13.21-25), called “the disciple whom Jesus loved”. He was known to the high priest (18.15). He stood by the cross with Jesus’ mother (19.26-27). He ran with Peter to the empty tomb (20.2-9). And he was at the appearance of the risen Jesus by the Sea of Galilee, which narrows the field down to Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee (James and John), and two unnamed disciples.
Furthermore, it is generally thought that the writer of the gospels and of the three letters, 1, 2 and 3 John are the same person, because the style of writing is very similar. (But some recent scholars say there are signifiant differences in style and so argue for a different writer). The opening of 1 John affirms that he was an eyewitness.
‘We declare to you what was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life— this life was revealed, and we have seen it and testify to it, and declare to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us— we declare to you what we have seen and heard so that you also may have fellowship with us…’
It is a solid tradition that John the son of Zebedee lived to a very old age, perhaps to 100, so it is well possible he could have written the gospel whether it is dated early or late. But he is not the only John around. There is the John who was sent as a slave prisoner to Patmos and who wrote Revelation. Most of the Church Fathers, e.g. Pope Dionysius of Alexandria, d.264) agreed that the writer of Revelation could not have written the gospel on account of the wildly different style.
There was also a John the elder, who may or may not have been the person who wrote Revelation. Perhaps John the elder wrote the gospel. After all, two of John’s letters, 2 John and 3 John, are simply from “the elder”. But perhaps John son of Zebedee called himself ‘the elder’ rather than ‘the apostle”, a word, which he never used; instead he always called the apostles ‘the Twelve’.
Perhaps the answer is how the gospel came to be written physically. There were then no computers, no printing, no books as we know them. Perhaps the origin was a whole pile of papyrus A4 sheets with different events and teachings recorded, coming from the recollections of John son of Zebedee, and kept in the local worship centre. (We know from Matthew and Luke that there was a similar document with the words of John the Baptist). At various points the loose sheets would have been collected onto a scroll and/or into a codex, i.e. a book more like we know. It need not have been John himself who carried out the last stage of the process.
2 How near to the events were they written?
If there is confusion as to the author of the fourth gospel, there is just as much confusion as to its date. Most scholars put it between 90 and 110 AD, on the grounds that it reflects the final exclusion of Jewish Christians from synagogues at the hypothetical Council of Jamnia around 80 AD. It certainly cannot be later, because of the finding of some fragments of John 18 on a papyrus fragment dated to about 125.
But C H Dodd in 1963 showed persuasively that there is much early historical tradition in John. In particular, all the geographical references fit the time before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. E.g. the story of the healing of the paralysed man at the pool of Bethesda mentions five colonnades. What that meant was not known until archaeologists uncovered the pool with the fifth colonnade going across the middle.
John Robinson argued strongly that John’s gospel like all the others, was written before 70 AD. Certainly chapter 2 presupposes that the temple still stood: Jesus said, ’Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ The Jews then said, ‘This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and will you raise it up in three days?’
John also seems to have been written independently from the three other gospels, which would also argue for an earlier date. But the mission to the Gentiles is central to John (see 10.16 “I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd.” or 17.20,21 “I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one.”
There is great tension between John’s community and the synagogue. That could argue for a late date, after 80 AD. Or an early date, mirroring the violent disagreement of the Essenes with the Jewish authorities pre-70.
So the final upshot is, we don’t know.