Module Fourteen

The Gospel of John

14.1 Introduction

Fig. 14.1: Depiction of the Incarnate Christ. “The Last Judgment” Mosaic, St. Vitus Cathedral, Prague. Completed in 1371.

Like the Synoptic Gospels, John (often called the Fourth Gospel) tells the story of Jesus’ ministry. Jesus is the main character. He gathers disciples, preaches throughout Palestine, performs miraculous works, and inevitably succumbs to the hostility of Jewish authorities and Roman judicial power. He is arrested, tried, crucified, and raised from the dead. However, apart from the general sequence in the plot and a few shared events, the Gospel of John presents a very different account. It begins by introducing Jesus as the pre-existent Word (logos) who existed with God, and indeed was God “in the beginning” (1:1-4). The Word’s entry into this world is through incarnation, meaning that the Word became a human being (1:14). This is the mystery that pervades the entire story. 

Fig. 14.2: Giotto di Bondone, St. John the Evangelist, 1320-25. Musée Jacquemart-André, Châalis, France. 

John has been one of the most foundational writings in the shaping of Christian doctrine, liturgy, and spirituality. It has been a favourite of mystics, philosophers, theologians, and clergy. In the Eastern Christian tradition, it has been the pre-eminent Gospel because of its elevated portrayal of Jesus (or its high Christology). But there is another reason why John is foundational. The author uses religious language in a very effective way. He is a master at combining simplicity and complexity. While his vocabulary is simple, using terms such as light, darkness, vine, life, belief, and truth, the meanings are deep and complex. His frequent use of plain symbols and metaphors fosters religious imagination that easily allows meaning to operate on multiple levels. Some have compared the author’s use of metaphor to a swiftly running river, whose current pulls the curious and studious in various directions and to unknown depths. Others have compared it to a pool that is shallow enough for a baby to wade in, yet deep enough for an elephant to drown.

14.2 Structure

John’s carefully orchestrated structure, along with its theology, has naturally led to the investigation of sources that may have been used in its composition. John’s structure consists of four sections that are clearly divided from one another. The first section is the prologue, which introduces Jesus as the incarnate Word in the form of a hymn (1:1-18). It contains language, such as logos, which appears nowhere else in the Gospel. The next two sections are often called “books” because they are believed by some to have circulated as independent writings, or parts of larger independent works. The “Book of Signs” (1:19-12:50), as it is often called, contains the story of Jesus’ three-year public ministry. Despite the many “signs,” or miracles, that reveal his identity as “son” of the Father, he is rejected. The primary antagonist in this book is a group called “the Jews.” The “Book of the Passion” or the “Book of Glory” (chapter 13-20) covers the last week of Jesus’ life. As Jesus faces his impending death, he reveals his love for the disciples and the Father—a love that takes him to the cross. This unwavering commitment is the supreme act of glory. The main antagonist in this section is not the “Jews,” but a group called “the world.” The final section of the Gospel is the epilogue (chapter 21), which contains resurrection appearances of Jesus. Since John contains an ending at the end of chapter 20 and then another one at the end of chapter 21, most scholars argue that the epilogue was appended shortly after John was written. Here are the texts in parallel columns:

14.3 Sources

Identifying the sources behind the Gospel of John is a difficult task. Some even say that it is impossible. Unlike Matthew and Luke, who used Mark and Q, we have no literary evidence for John’s sources. Whatever sources were used, they were entirely integrated and reworked within the narrative of the Gospel. Nevertheless, based on clues from the narrative and its structure, scholars have theorized how John came to be written. Three explanations are frequently proposed. 

14.3.1 Eyewitness Gospel

Before the rise of modern biblical criticism, John’s Gospel was assumed to be the product of eyewitness testimony. Throughout most of the history of church, it was agreed that the “beloved disciple,” who is the chief disciple in the narrative, was not only the author, but was the primary source of the Gospel. John 21:24 was commonly used in support of this view. The identity of the “beloved disciple,” however, did not share the same level of agreement. Some thought that he was John the Apostle, whereas others believed he was another person by the same name, John the Elder. Interestingly, the name John is not mention in the Gospel. While some scholars today agree that the “beloved disciple” (whoever it was) was a source, rarely is he still regarded as the only source. There are too many literary indicators in the Gospel that point in more complex directions.

14.3.2 Combined Sources

Most Johannine scholars today do not hold that the Gospel, as we have it, was written by an eyewitness who experienced all of the events recorded in it. Rather, even if some traces of an eyewitness can be found, the consensus is that the author used sources or pre-existent traditions, be they literary or oral. The evidence for these sources arises from John’s literary features, such as the structure (as discussed above), shifts in language style, themes, and even theology. 

One of the most common reconstructions has posited that two underlying literary sources can be detected in John. The first source, which corresponds to the structure of John, is usually called the “signs source.” It is often reconstructed as a collection of successive stories about the miracles and wondrous deeds of Jesus, called “signs,” which circulated within the author’s Christian community (often called the Johannine community) before the writing of the Gospel. Since all of the miracles that are called “signs” occur only in the first half of the Gospel (2:11-12:37), with the first two of the seven being numbered, the original source was probably an organized narrative or list of the deeds of Jesus. Why the remaining five “signs” are not numbered has not been explained sufficiently. Some believe that this source developed into the so-called “Book of Signs” (1:19-12:50), which may have circulated as an independent work.

Fig. 14.3: Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976) was one of the most influential biblical scholars of the 20th century.

A second literary source that has often been proposed isolates the sayings of Jesus, and is appropriately called a “sayings source.” Some theorize that this source eventually developed into the so-called “Book of the Passion” or the “Book of Glory” (chapter 13-20), which was mentioned above. While few doubt that a sayings source existed, there is disagreement about its origin and content. The German biblical scholar Rudolf Bultmann has been one of the most vocal advocates for source theories. 

Others have speculated that the author of John used the Synoptics as a source for the passion account. Luke has often emerged as the closest to John, and thus is thought to have been a source in some capacity. While there is considerable overlap in John’s passion account—more than any other part of the Gospel—the divergences are significant. Consider three examples. First, John does not contain Jesus’ final meal with the disciples. Second, in John, Jesus dies on the day of preparation, and not on the Passover as the Synoptics record it. Third, John has Jesus cleansing the temple at the beginning of his ministry, rather than at the end. In the Synoptics, the temple action constitutes Jesus’ last public act; yet in John it is his first. In the Synoptics, it is met with fierce opposition, and even a call for his death (Mark 11:18). In John there is no repercussion. Instead, the event is spiritualized and used to forecast Jesus’ resurrection. In light of these and other differences, a hypothesis that John borrowed from the Synoptics raises many more questions than it solves. The relationship between John and the Synoptic Gospels continues to be debated.

14.3.3 Developed Tradition

Fig. 14.4: C. H. Dodd

Fig. 14.5: Fr. Raymond E. Brown

By the middle of the 20th century, the theory that the author of John used written sources began to wane. Increasing criticism of source theories, especially among German scholars, led to the ironic observation that the author of the Fourth Gospel would have had to write all of the sources himself in order to account for their similarities. Consequently, a theory emerged, championed by C.H. Dodd and Raymond Brown, which argued that John’s Gospel developed in stages, but was rooted in the words and deeds of Jesus. The process was thought to be similar to the composition of the Synoptic Gospels, which was more or less viewed as a linear development of an early Christian tradition about Jesus.

The stages were explained in a variety of ways. In its most basic form, the first stage consisted of the raw memories of Jesus’ words and deeds. Second, these memories were interpreted in light of the religious experiences of the Johannine community. Finally, the author of John, who was possibly the pastor of the community, integrated the tradition into a written Gospel. 

14.4 Authorship

Fig. 14.6: All that survives from the Sepphoris synagogue is a mosaic floor, which contains seven sections. One of the sections has a mosaic of a large Zodiak with names of the months written in Hebrew. Helios, the Greek sun god sits in the middle of the Zodiak.

Who wrote the Gospel of John? This has been one of the dominant questions in recent scholarship on the Fourth Gospel. Whoever it was had an awareness of Palestinian geography and a considerable knowledge of Jewish religious practices. He had a significant knowledge of Jesus. He was intimately acquainted with tensions between Jews and Christians in the synagogue context. He was also a skilled theologian who expressed complex ideas in simple ways (such as baptism, Eucharist, the Holy Spirit, and Jesus’ divinity).

Fig. 14.7: Damiane. 14th c. Last Supper fresco from Ubisi, Georgia. Throughout history, the beloved disciple is often depicted as a youth, beardless, and physically close to Jesus.

A caveat is required here. Without intending to blur the issue, the designation “author” (also called the “evangelist”) technically refers to the person who is credited with the writing of John immediately prior to its final editing. Most scholars think that John underwent a final edit after the author’s death. For example, this final edit is probably responsible for chapter 21, which contains a second ending to the story, and designations to the author as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” and the unnamed disciple in 19:35 and 21:24.

Fig. 14.8: Illumination from the Book of Kells. The symbol for John the Evangelist is an eagle, which symbolizes his lofty descriptions of Jesus.

Traditionally, the author has been identified as the “beloved disciple” or the “disciple whom Jesus loved” (depending on one’s English translation). It is this character of whom it is said at the end of the Gospel, “This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true. But there are also many other things that Jesus did; if every one of them were written down, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written" (21:24-25 NRSV). Although there is no mention of a “John” in John’s Gospel, much of the search for the identity of the beloved disciple has focused on two figures named John: John the Apostle (known as the son of Zebedee) and John the Elder.

The beloved disciple is mentioned five times throughout the Gospel (13:23; 19:26–27; 20:1–8; 21:7; and 21:20–24). He may also be the unnamed disciple in 18:15-16 and 19:35. So, who is he? The answer to this question usually derives from a combination of what scholars call “internal evidence,” which is the evidence found in the Gospel itself, and “external evidence,” which refers to testimony outside the Gospel.

Info Box 14.1: The Beloved Disciple plays a central role in John.
• He leans on Jesus’ chest at the Last Supper (13:23)
• He is an intermediary between Peter and Jesus (13:24–25)
• He gains admittance for Peter to Pilate’s court (18:15–16)
• He is entrusted with care of Jesus’ mother (19:26–27)
• He witnesses blood and water flowing from Jesus’ side (19:34–35)
• He outruns Peter to the tomb on Easter morning (20:4)
• He is the first to believe in the resurrection (20:8)
• He identifies the risen Jesus for Peter (21:7)
• His fate should not be a matter of concern for Peter (21:21–23)
• He wrote down “these things and his testimony is true” (21:24; cf. 19:35)

14.4.1 John the Apostle

The traditional view throughout much of Christian history has been that the beloved disciple was John the Apostle, the son of Zebedee. In the Synoptic Gospels, he was in the inner circle of Jesus’s disciples along with his brother James and Peter. He ministered alongside Peter (Acts 3–4) and came to be known as a pillar of the church (Gal 2:9). Today, a number of scholars still advocate for his authorship.

Fig. 14.9: The most recognizable depiction of the beloved disciple is in Leonardo da Vinci’s “Last Supper” (1498). The beloved disciple is on Jesus’ right. Peter is telling the disciple to ask Jesus about the identity of the betrayer, who is to Peter’s right clinching the money bag. Since the beloved disciple has feminine features, some popularizers like Dan Brown have identified the figure as Mary Magdalene. There is no evidence, however, to support this claim. Da Vinci commonly painted androgynous looking men.

The internal evidence rests on a comparison between the beloved disciple in John’s Gospel and John the Apostle in the Synoptics. Neither explicitly mentions the other, but their roles are said to overshadow each other. Like the Apostle in the Synoptics, the beloved disciple is very close to Jesus—the closest in fact. He “reclines on Jesus’ chest” at what has sometimes been understood as John’s version of the Last Supper (13:23). He is also closely connected to Peter. He visits the empty tomb with Peter (20:2-10). And, together with Peter, he follows Jesus after he is arrested (18:15-16). Since there is no other person mentioned in the Synoptic accounts who corresponds to this role, the Apostle seems to be the most logical candidate. 

Fig. 14.10: James Tissot (1836-1902), “Saint Peter and Saint John Run to the Sepulchre.” Brooklyn Museum.

Info Box 14.2: Competition between the beloved disciple and Peter.
Interestingly, the Apostle Peter appears in all but one (19:26) of the episodes concerning the beloved disciple. Since Peter seems to be overshadowed by the beloved disciple, some have speculated that some kind of polemic probably occurred between the beloved disciple’s community and Peter’s followers. If the Johannine community’s founder was the beloved disciple, the community likely wanted their traditions to be distinct from the traditions that arose from Peter’s followers. Consider, for example, how the beloved disciple outran Peter to see the empty tomb (20:1-4), or that the beloved disciple, not Peter, recognized the risen Jesus from a distance (21:7).

The external evidence for the Apostles’ authorship consists of testimonies from several Church Fathers, beginning approximately one hundred years after the Gospel was written. One of the earliest testimonies comes from Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyons (130-202 CE). In his most famous writing, Against Heresies, Irenaeus makes a few brief, albeit informative, comments about the authorship of John (3.11, 15, 16, 22). In one example, he writes, “John the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon his breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia” (3.1). Although Irenaeus does not specifically identify “John the disciple of the Lord” as John the Apostle, he does identify him as the beloved disciple (based on John 13:23; 21:20). For an English translation of Against Heresies, see http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/irenaeus.html

Fig. 14.11: Cimabue (1240-1302), “The Beloved Disciple.” San Domenico, Arezzo. In classical portrayals, John the Apostle is depicted either as the youthful beloved disciple (above)  or as an elderly theologian of the Church (right).

Fig. 14.12: “St John the Theologian in Silence,” 18th century. Village of Vladimir. In the Eastern Church, John the Apostle appears on more icons than any of the other evangelists.

Another early testimony to the authorship of John may come to us from early Christian responses to Marcion (85-160 CE) who advocated for a list of canonical writings that only included Paul’s letters and the Gospel of Luke. The dating of these responses is, however, controversial. Marcion’s importance in the process of the development of the New Testament canon is discussed in Chapter Seven. Those Christians who disagreed with Marcion’s list and his theology constructed prefaces or prologues at the beginning of some New Testament writings. These have been called Anti-Marcion Prologues. The prologue on John, which unfortunately has survived only in a corrupt Latin version, records that the Gospel was published during the lifetime of John. It also claims that John dictated the Gospel to Papias, the bishop of Hierapolis (c. 120 CE), who recorded the entire process in his five-volume work Expositions of the Sayings of the Lord. Unfortunately, this work survived only to the Middle Ages. It is no longer extant.

Fig. 14.13: Ostia Antica, the harbor city of Rome, where Marcion would have encounterd people with wide-ranging religious beliefs, including Jews.

Objections

For many contemporary scholars, however, the case for John the Apostle does not add up. They find too many inconsistencies in both the internal and external evidence. Here is a sampling of objections.

1. If the apostle was the author, why is his name missing from the Gospel? The inclusion of John’s name—if he were one of the Twelve—would have automatically established this Gospel as an authoritative writing for early Christians. As such, it would have averted any controversy about this Gospel being included in the earliest canonical lists. 

Fig. 14.14: Jacopo Bellini (1430-35). Panels of St. John the Evangelist (left) and the Apostle Peter (right).

2. Many of the early testimonies to John as the author do not identify him as the apostle, the son of Zebedee, or as the brother of James. He is identified simply as John or John the disciple of the Lord. In and of itself, this does not eliminate the possibility, but it raises the question of why he is not identified as an apostle, as Paul and Peter are. 

3. In Acts 4:13, the apostles John and Peter are identified as “uneducated and ordinary men,” which probably means that they were unable to read or write. This description is consistent with John and James’ portrayal in the Synoptic tradition as Galilean fishermen. In light of these descriptions, it seems inconsistent to claim that such a masterpiece of theological literature came from the hands of an uneducated and illiterate fisherman?

4. In the Synoptic tradition, the Twelve (which includes John) abandon Jesus and flee when he is arrested. Yet in the Fourth Gospel, John (supposedly the beloved disciple) is with Mary while Jesus is dying on the cross.

Fig. 14.15 This Prutah (Heb. “coin of smaller value“) was struck during the reign of Herod Agrippa I. The obverse side contains the inscription, “King Agrippa.’ The reverse contains three ears of barley. Human images were not used on Jewish coins out of sensitivity to religious belief.

5. In Mark 10:39 Jesus tells James and John that they will suffer martyrdom. Many scholars argue that it was a post-eventu prophecy, meaning that it would have already occurred. This prophecy is often linked with James’ martyrdom in Acts 12:1, and by implication with the martyrdom of his brother John. Moreover, the traditions about the martyrdom of both sons of Zebedee are early. If Mark is telling his readers what already happened, John the Apostle was probably martyred during the reign of Agrippa I (41-44 CE).

14.4.2 John the Elder

Many scholars today argue that the beloved disciple was the person who came to be known as John the Elder. He was probably responsible for much of the content in the Gospel, but not the final editing. He may have also written the three Epistles of John in the New Testament, called 1, 2, and 3 John. Some have even argued that he wrote Revelation. While centered in Ephesus, he was a pastor of several churches in Western Asia Minor and came to be regarded, alongside Paul, as a leading Christian theologian in the first century.

Fig. 14.16: Ephesus

Fig. 14.17: Ephesus theatre

The internal evidence points to a person who probably came from Judea, given the region’s prominence in the Fourth Gospel’s portrayal of Jesus’ ministry. Since the content of the Gospel does not reflect the Synoptic tradition, the author does not appear to have been one of the Twelve. He seems to have been well educated and well established socially. If he were the same person as the nebulous “other disciple,” then his acquaintance and direct access to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas the High Priest would have placed him in the elite class (18:15). Much of the Gospel reflects an aristocratic character.

Fig. 14.18: Mosaic floors, such this one from Sepphoris, were common in affluent homes. They often formed patterns and contained mythological figures.

There is very little said about poverty or the poor. Social justice problems receded into the background. Conversely, Jesus tends to interact with the wealthy. He performs his first miracle at a prosperous estate in Cana; he has dealings with the royal steward (4:46-54); he has a private conversation with Nicodemus, “ruler of the Jews” (3:1ff; 7:50; 19:39); and he has relationships with people in the upper class of society, such as Mary, Martha (11:1-44; 12:1ff) and Joseph of Arimathea (19:38). For many scholars the weight of the internal evidence points to an author who is neither a Galilean fisherman nor a  “son of thunder,” as John the Apostle is portrayed in the Synoptics. 

The external evidence strengthens the case for John the Elder. One of the most important texts comes from Eusebius, who preserves a fragment from Papias’ Expositions of the Sayings of the Lord, which describes how he collected information at the close of the first century about the early followers of Jesus. Papias is quoted as saying,

If anyone who had been a follower of the Elders came, I inquired about the words of the Elders—what Andrew or Peter said, or what Philip, or what Thomas or James, or what John or Matthew or another of the disciples of the Lord (said), and the things which Ariston and the elder John, disciples of the Lord, were saying.  For I thought that the things which come from books would not be so useful to me as the things which come from a voice that is still alive (Ecclesiastical History 3.39.4).

In this list, Papias of Hierapolis clearly identifies two persons named John. The first is associated with the Twelve and is most likely John the Apostle. The second John, called “the elder John,” is still alive (along with Ariston) at the time of Papias’ writing. When other quotations from Papias are consulted, it is quickly apparent that John the Elder is mentioned more than any other disciple, which suggests that he was a prominent figure at the close of the first century.

Fig. 14.19: Theatre of Hierapolis. 

Info Box 14.3: Were Ariston and John the Elder the unnamed disciples in John?
Some have speculated that Papias’ list may correspond to John 1:35-48 and 21:2, which mention two unnamed disciples. In both Papias and John, there is no mention of “apostles.” In both, Andrew, Peter and Philip begin the list. At the end of the Papias’ list, Ariston and the elder John are set apart from the others, much like the “two unknown disciples” in the Gospel.

Fig. 14.20: St. Jerome, Albrecht Dürer, 1521. Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga, Lisbon.

In the fifth century, the biblical scholar Jerome refers to the same quote from Papias, but adds that John the Elder was also the author of 2 and 3 John (On Illustrious Men 18), which is not surprising given that in both of the letters, the author identifies himself as “the elder” (2 John 1; 3 John 1). The author is not identified in 1 John, but based on similarities of terminology, style, and theology, many scholars today argue that the same author not only wrote all three epistles, but the Gospel as well. 

.Finally, Irenaeus is sometimes used in support of John the Elder (but more so of John the Apostle). Since Irenaeus believed that both the Gospel and 1 John were written by the same person whom he did not identify as an apostle, but as “John the disciple of the Lord,” some have speculated that he was referring to John the Elder. Had he believed that John the Apostle wrote the Gospel, he surely would have mentioned that. After all, “apostle” was the most authoritative title in the early church. Irenaeus writes, 

John, the disciple of the Lord, verifies saying: “But these are written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God, and that believing you might have eternal life in his name.”... For this reason also he has thus testified to us in his epistle: “little children, it is the last time, and as you have heard that antichrist will come, now many antichrists have appeared...” (Against Heresies 3.16.5).

Objections

While many contemporary scholars opt for John the Elder, they do so recognizing that sound objections still loom and detract from certainty. Here is a sampling:

1. Although the content of John differs from that of the Synoptics, the beloved disciple’s close proximity to Peter in the story reflects that of John the Apostle. There is no other character in the Synoptic tradition that corresponds to the beloved disciple. 

2. Many scholars recognize that though Eusebius makes a distinction between “apostle” and “elder” (the latter referring to a later generation of followers), Papias does not. Papias’ phrase “the discourses of the elders” simply refers to the apostles. He does not have another group in mind.

3. The designation “the elder” in 2 and 3 John is a title of respect, giving attention to his great age, wisdom, and experience. In Judaism, it was a title of honour for great Jewish teachers, such as Hillel, Shammai and Gamaliel. In the Christian setting, the designation could have been consistent with “apostle,” as seems to be the case in 1 Pet 5:1, where Peter calls himself an elder.

4. The distinction that Papias makes is not between apostles and elders of the next generation, but between first generation witnesses who have died (re: the things they said) and the first generation of witnesses who are still alive (re: the things they say).

In summary, while many scholars today gravitate toward John the Elder as the author of John, the issue is far from being settled. Even if this is the case, John the Apostle could well have been instrumental in the formation of the Elder’s ideas. At present, there is no way of knowing. A few scholars have suggested that the beloved disciple is neither John the Apostle nor John the Elder. Some have proposed that the beloved disciple could have been Lazarus, Luke, Apollos (Paul’s rival in Corinth), John Mark, a symbolic representation of the ideal Christian disciple, or even someone who represented the Johannine community’s founder (well known to the intended audience). As such the final editor may have wanted to show that the Johannine community was founded on the witness of a disciple who was very close to Jesus.

Fig. 14.21: Fresco of Jesus raising Lazarus, 3rd century. Catacomb of Saints Marcellino and Pietro, Rome.

Info Box 14.4: Lazarus as the Beloved Disciple?
This may initially sound like a strange connection. Though many do not think to include Lazarus as a candidate, there is some reason to consider this theory. Whereas “the Twelve” are already mentioned in 6:67, the Beloved Disciple does not appear in the narrative until 13:23, just after the raising of Lazarus in chapter 11. This seems to indicate that the Beloved Disciple was not the Apostle John, who was likely among “the Twelve.” If it was not the Apostle John, then it is possible that it was the character who had just been raised from the dead—the only character besides Jesus to have done so. 

This brief introduction to the authorship of John is intended not only to expose students to the different views proposed today, but also to demonstrate how evidence and terminology can be used in support of opposing positions. This may seem confusing at first, but the more one weighs into the discussion, the more one can appreciate how arguments are formed and what constitutes as supporting evidence or mere speculation.

14.5 Date of Writing

Fig. 14.22: John Rylands p52 Fragment, John Rylands Library, Manchester.

Estimates for the writing of John range anywhere from 55 CE to 100 CE, but the vast majority of contemporary scholars argue for the latter part of the spectrum, sometime in the mid-90s. This has not always been the case. John’s sophisticated Christology and possible interaction with Gnostic thought led some historians early last century to argue for a much later dating, sometime in the middle of the second century. The 1920 discovery of a little papyrus fragment in an Egyptian market changed everything. The fragment, known as the Rylands Library Papyrus 457 (p52), contains John18:31-33 on one side and John 18:37-38 on the other. It is currently our oldest New Testament fragment, dated usually between 117 CE and 140 CE. When scholars factor in time for the copying and distribution of John, the upper dating limit today rarely exceeds 100 CE. 

Fig. 14.23: Pool of Siloam. In Jerusalem, Jesus tells the blind man to wash in the Pool of Siloam (John 9), which was commonly used during the Feast of Tabernacles.

Like the Synoptic Gospels, the dating of John hinges on its proximity to the destruction of the temple in 70 CE. A few scholars who have argued for an early dating, prior to 70 CE, point to the author’s use of the present tense when referring to Jerusalem and the temple, which implies that the city is still standing. For example, in 5:2, the evangelist writes, “Now there is in Jerusalem near the sheep gate a pool,” which gives the impression that this structure (which was destroyed in the war) was in full operation at the time of writing. Passages like this are often coupled with the observation that the Gospel never mentions the destruction of the temple. Jesus’ prediction that he will raise the temple in three days after it is destroyed is usually interpreted as a reference to his resurrection (2:19-22). In addition, Jesus’ discussion of Peter’s death in 21:15-19 is sometimes viewed as an inference that chapter 21 was composed shortly after Peter’s death, which can be dated to 64 or 65 CE. Finally, the author’s use of “disciples” as opposed to “apostles” is sometimes regarded as primitive terminology that points to an early dating. While this is just a summary of the major arguments, students who are interested in probing a stronger case for the early dating of John should consult John A. T. Robinson’s The Priority of John, which is widely regarded as the classic study.

Why is it that so many scholars today opt for a later dating? The reasons can once again be divided into internal and external categories, with the former being the most significant. Each is, of course, not without its contentions. The main internal arguments are as follows:

(1) John presupposes the destruction of the temple in 70 CE. Early in the story Jesus’ portrayal as the temple’s replacement (2:13–22) contributes to an important theme about Jesus’ messianic identity in which Jewish traditions, institutions, rituals, and patriarchs are fulfilled. 

(2) In contrast to the Synoptics, the high Christology in John reflects later development in Christian thought. Scholars like James D. G. Dunn have argued that John’s developed Christology—a personal and pre-existent Christ who is incarnate—begins to take shape at the end of the first century. 

(3) John never mentions the Sadducees, who played a significant role in both the social and religious life of Jerusalem before 70 CE. 

(4) Considerable attention has been given to the phrase “to be put out of the synagogue” (9:22; 12:42; 16:2), which is used in contexts where synagogue membership is threatened because of one’s devotion to Jesus. A number of scholars have argued that the phrase reflects the tense situation after the Council of Jamnia (or Yevneh), held between 80 and 90 CE, which banned Christians from synagogues (see especially J. Louis Martyn, History and Theology). 

Fig. 14.24: Bust of Emperor Trajan, early 2nd century. Ephesus Museum.

Proponents of a late dating also point to external testimony among Church Fathers that John wrote late and lived to be very old. We have already mentioned the translator of the Vulgate, Jerome (342-420 CE), who claims that John died in the 68th year after Jesus’ death, which can be estimated to 98 CE (On Illustrious Men 9). In addition to the testimony of others, such as Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius, proponents frequently refer to Irenaeus, who writes, “Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the time of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles” (Against Heresies 3.3.4). The Emperor Trajan reigned between 98-117 CE. 

14.6 Place of Writing

The location of a writing (sometimes called provenance) often factors into its interpretation. While this has been said in relation to other writings in the New Testament, it cannot be stressed enough for the Gospel of John. Location plays an important role in understanding the meaning of John’s many symbols, metaphors, and lofty theological terms. For example, John’s first designation for the pre-existent Jesus as the Word (logos) takes on varied meanings throughout the Roman Empire. Among Jewish groups in Palestine, logos was used to refer to the personification of God’s wisdom or the revelation of the divine. Stoic philosophers in Athens believed that the logos was the divine reason or rational principle behind the creation and order of the universe. In Egypt, Philo believed that the logos was the greatest of the intermediaries through which God communicates to the world. In which context is the author of John writing?

Four locations are commonly proposed. The first is Alexandria, Egypt, on the basis of similarities between the Gospel and the writings of Philo, a first century Hellenistic Jewish philosopher and allegorist. Similarities include key terms terms like logos, the frequent use of symbol and metaphor, and the interpretation of Old Testament texts. The second is Antioch. Proponents of this location have noticed that John contains terminology and ideas that are also found in early writings from Antioch, such as the Odes of Solomon and the writings of Ignatius, one of the first bishops of Antioch. The third proposal is Palestine. John contains numerous religious, cultural, and topographical details that would have been known by Jewish residents of Palestine, especially Jerusalem. The final proposal is Ephesus in Asia Minor. This view has gained the most traction. Traditionally, this location has been based on early Christian testimony that John wrote, and was later buried, in Ephesus. For example, Irenaeus writes, “John, the disciple of the Lord... published the Gospel while living at Ephesus in Asia” (Against Heresies 3.1.2). Eusebius mentions that John went to Asia Minor when the apostles were dispersed at the outbreak of the Jewish War (Ecclesiastical History 1.1). Several early sources also provide indirect testimony such as Polycrates, the bishop of Ephesus (c. 130-196 CE) and Acts of John (150-160 CE). This tradition continues to survive. In Ephesus today, which is one of the world’s most well preserved archaeological sites, guides confidently point out that the Church of St John was constructed on the site where the Gospel was originally written and where its author was later buried. 

Possible locations for the writing of John. Alexandria, Antioch, and Ephesus are labeled in red. Palestine corresponds to the region labeled “Judaea.” Click on the map to enlarge.

Fig. 14.25: Tomb of John the Evangelist, Ephesus.

Some modern scholars, however, are skeptical about Ephesus because the earliest external testimony from that region makes no mention of John or the Gospel. In an early second century letter to the church at Ephesus, Ignatius of Antioch promotes Paul’s residence in that city, but says nothing about John or the Gospel, with which he was clearly familiar. Also, many historians have argued that up until Constantine’s reign (306-312 CE), Asia Minor had broad Christian representation. Ephesus represented only one small part of the broader expansion. A particularly strong influx of Christianity occurred between 90-110 CE, as is evident from the proliferation of Christian writings from that region (e.g. 1 Peter, 1, 2, 3 John, Revelation, Ignatius’ letters, Pliny’s letter to Trajan, Polycarp, Pastoral Epistles). Early Christian expansion in the western part of Asia Minor is sometimes credited to John the Elder.

Fig 14.42-14.54 Gallery of Ephesus. Courtesy of T. R. Hatina

Fig. 26: Today, the ruins of Ephesus attract countless numbers of tourists and archaeological enthusiasts from around the world. Ephesus remains one of the best preserved sites from late antiquity.

14.7 Purpose

Unlike in the Synoptic Gospels, which do not contain explicit statements indicating why the evangelists wrote, the author of John gives us a hint. He declares that the Gospel was written so that his audience might develop in the Christian faith. He writes at the end of the Gospel, “But these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name” (20:31). In the Greek text, it is not clear, however, if the author intends to convey (1) an evangelistic purpose, that his audience “may come to believe,” (2) a pastoral purpose, that his audience “may continue to believe,” (3) an intentional ambiguity, or (4) a double entendre, namely two purposes in one.

A larger problem associated with this purpose statement is its generality. What is the underlying problem that the author is addressing? How does believing in Jesus as the Christ solve the difficulty in which the author is entangled? Whatever the reason for writing may have been, a reconstruction of it must incorporate material from the entire Gospel. It should also be remembered that John, like the Synoptics, conveys a dual perspective. On one level, the evangelist writes his narrative about Jesus in the context of Jewish life set in Palestine during the late 20s of the first century. This is where the plot unfolds and the interactions among the characters takes place. On another level, the narrative is intended to speak to his readers/hearers, who are Christians living in a post-resurrection setting some 70 years after Jesus’ death. This is the level of significance. Thus, the purpose was not to reconstruct the life of Jesus, but to convey his meaning in a new context of conflict. In short, on the one hand the evangelist tells the story of Jesus, yet on the other hand his primary concern is the significance of that story for his own time and place.

While scholars do not agree on the specificity of the purpose, there is substantial agreement that the Gospel was addressed to members of the Johannine Community in order to strengthen their faith in the midst of Jewish intellectual and social opposition. There are indications throughout the narrative that John’s audience is troubled, particularly in relation to their belief that Jesus is the Christ. For example, Jesus is at times concerned that his followers (which represent the Johannine Community) do not abandon their faith (6:60–69; 15:1-18). In the farewell discourses (chapters 14–17) Jesus encourages his followers to stay the course, saying, “Do not let your hearts be troubled. Believe in God, believe also in me” (14:1). At other times, it is the narrator who emphasizes the perseverance of sound faith (4:43–53; 6:25–27; 20:29).

Fig. 14.27: Ruins of the Capernaum Synagogue, 4th century CE.

The specific issue(s) underlying John’s admonitions for faith is not clear. One of the most common proposals is that John’s community was facing hostility or even expulsion from the synagogue by fellow Jews who did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah. Thus, the conflict that John attempts to address is an “in house” division between Jews who claim that Jesus is the Christ and those who do not. Proponents of this view appeal to the phrase “to be put out of the synagogue”—the same phrase discussed above to support a late dating—which is captured by a single Greek term (aposunagogos) found in John 9:22, 12:42, and 16:2. It does not appear anywhere else in the New Testament. John uses the term in contexts where belief in Jesus as the Christ threatens membership in the synagogue. Was the anxiety of new Jewish believers in Christ, who still attend synagogue,the foundational purpose for this Gospel? 

Other purposes have also been suggested. Here is a sampling. Some have argued that when the purpose statement in 20:31 is taken in an evangelistic way, John’s aim was to convert Jews and even Samaritans. Proponents often appeal to Jesus’ discussions with “a leading Pharisee” in chapter 3 and the Samaritan woman at the well in chapter 4 in support of this view. 

Others have pointed to the beloved disciple as the clue to the purpose of the Gospel. Since this disciple receives considerable attention and is “the one whom Jesus loved,” he must have been (or represented) a prominent figure in the community. It is speculated that this much attention was a symptom of a problem that required the beloved disciple (and maybe even the entire community) to be legitimized or supported. Perhaps his leadership or his community was under threat by rival Christian groups, which was not unprecedented. Several decades earlier, Paul experienced similar issues. 

Fig. 14.28: “The Doubt of Thomas,” Caravaggio, 1601-1602. Sanssouci Palace, Potsdam, Germany.

More recently, a few scholars have proposed that John was written to counter Gnostic claims about Jesus’ identity. This is an interesting development and is gaining some traction. For some Christian Gnostics (as we find represented in the Gospel of Thomas), Jesus was not the Christ, but took on the divine function of “the Christ” for a limited time. In some Gnostic circles, “the Christ,” which was viewed as the divine energy, power, or spirit, entered Jesus at his baptism and then left him at the cross, since the divine cannot suffer. For Gnostics, the resurrected Jesus could not have been physical, but only a spirit. In response, the author of John argues that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, even after his resurrection. It is also interesting to read John’s story of Thomas in light of this proposal. Only in John, Thomas, who in Gnostic systems took on a leadership position, touches the risen Christ and pronounces him God. Does this confession and short interplay between Jesus and Thomas attempt to undermine Gnostic Christology by using one of its own leaders?

Info Box 14.5: John and the Gnostics
Early traditions from Asia Minor connect John the Elder with Gnostic opponents, particularly a Christian Gnostic named Cerinthus who echoed the widespread philosophical opposition to Jesus’ incarnation, arguing that the divine could not take on human form and participate in human suffering, weakness, and death. For example, Irenaeus writes harshly (reminiscent of 1 John). “There are also those who heard from him [Polycarp] that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath house without bathing, exclaiming, ‘Let us fly, lest even the bath house fall down because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.’ And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, ‘Do you know me?’ ‘I do know you, the first-born of Satan.’ Such was the horror which the apostles and their disciples had against even holding verbal communication with any corruptors of the truth; as Paul also says, ‘A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject; knowing that he is subverted, and sins, being condemned of himself’” (Against Heresies 3.3.4).

Fig. 14.29: “Preaching of St. John the Baptist,” Bacchiacca, 1520. Museum of Fine Arts, Budapest.

The final example of why John may have been written is multi-layered. Raymond Brown, who has been one of the most respected Johannine scholars in the last fifty years, has argued that no single purpose can adequately explain all the data in John. As a result, Brown (and others) argues that the author of John is addressing several issues. First, he is addressing sectarian Jews who are mistakenly following John the Baptist instead of Jesus. No other Gospel contains as many negations of the Baptist’s identity in contrast to Jesus. For example, in John 3:30, the Baptist tells his disciples, “He [Jesus] must increase, but I must decrease.” Second, John clearly addresses his unbelieving Jewish counterparts, probably in the synagogue context. Third, portions of John make sense in light of early Christian heretical movements, such as Gnosticism. Fourth, John’s Gospel is also concerned with sustaining the faith of the members of his community. In short, John may well have been written as both an apologetic (defense of the faith) and an encouragement Gospel.

Info Box 14.6: John the Baptist as the Christ?
It is possible that some of the earliest followers of Jesus were previously disciples of the Baptist. We know that followers of the Baptist, who may have thought that he was the Messiah, are mentioned in Matt 11:2-16; Luke 7:18-23; Acts 18:24-19:7 and existed well into the third century (e.g. Pseudo-Clementine, Recognitions). More than the other Gospels, John emphasizes who the Baptist is not. For example, the Baptist
    • is not the light (1:9)
    • does not antedate Jesus. Jesus existed before the Baptist (1:15, 30)
    • is not the messiah, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet (1:19-24; 3:28)
    • is not the bridegroom (3:29)
    • must decrease while Jesus must increase (3:30)
    • never works miracles (10:41)

14.8 Uniqueness of John

In the introduction to this chapter, we made brief mention of John’s distinctive character. So, how different is John from the Synoptics? When all four Gospels are read in the canonical order from Matthew to John, a few distinguishing features may emerge for the average reader. However, when the Gospels are read alongside one another, the number of differences escalate. John is unique in writing style, terminology, point of view, sequence of events, and most evidently in content, which is our focus here.

Fig. 14.30: “The Crucifixion of our Lord Christ,” Giotti di Bondone, 1305. Capella Scrovegni a Padova, Italy. The water and blood from Jesus’ side is collected by the angels for the sacraments of baptism and Eucharist.

In contrast to the Synoptics, John is fond of symbolism. Characters within the story often misunderstand Jesus’ words because they take them literally. Consequently, Jesus, or the narrator, offers clarifications that lead the audience to the intended meaning. For example, Jesus says in 2:19-22 “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The audience assumes the literal meaning, but the narrator explains that Jesus is speaking of his body. Another example is the description of Jesus’ wound on the cross. After being pierced by the soldier, we are told that “water and blood” flowed from his side. Given John’s frequent connection between water and the Spirit (which was promised to come at his death in 7:37-39), it probably symbolizes the release of the Holy Spirit. Roman Catholic interpretation has tended to view the reference to water as baptism and the reference to blood as the Eucharist, the primary sacraments which Christ gave to the Church.

John contains many stories about Jesus that are not found in the Synoptics or anywhere else in the New Testament. Many of these stories are significantly longer and contain extensive discourses (e.g. 5:19-47; 6:25-70; 7:14-52; 8:12-59; 10:1-18, 22-39; 12:23-46; 14:1-16:33). John also tells the story of Jesus’ ministry over a three year period (with three Passovers 2:13f; 6:4f; 13:1f), instead of one.

Info Box 14.7: A Few Stories Unique to John
• hymn of the preexistence and preeminence of the Word (1:1-18) 
• calling of Andrew, Philip, and Nathanael as disciples (1:35–51)
• changing of water into wine at Cana (2:1–12)
• conversation with Nicodemus (3:1–21)
• encounter with Samaritan woman at a well (4:1–42)
• healing of a crippled man at Pool of  Siloam (5:1–18)
• teaching on the meaning of the manna/bread from heaven (6:22-71)
• Jesus at the Festival of Booths (7:1-24)
• rescue of an adulterous woman from stoning (7:53–8:11) 
• healing of a man born blind (9:1–41)
• raising of Lazarus (11:1–44)
• washing of disciples’ feet (13:1–20)
• prayer for believers to be united together (17:1–26)
• resurrection appearance to Thomas (20:24–29)

Fig. 14.31: “Healing of the Blind Man,” Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308-11. National Gallery, London.

What about the stories that John and the Synoptics have in common? The stories are not only longer in John, they are also told differently. For example, the Synoptics record that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist (with some variation). In John, there is a similar interaction between the Baptist and Jesus. The Baptist is described as baptizing in the Jordan River and giving prominence to Jesus. The Baptist even says, “I have beheld the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven, and He remained upon Him. And I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ‘He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit’” (1:32-33; cf. 3:22-36). However, at no point in John’s version, does he explicitly say that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.  

Fig. 14.32: “Crucifixion,” Guido Da Siena, c. 1270. Pinacoteca Nazionale, Siena. Notice that Jesus’ mother is comforted by the beloved disciple at the cross. In the Synoptic accounts, all of the disciples flee.

Another example is Jesus’ death. All of the Gospels record this event, but John tells it a little differently. In John, Jesus dies on the day of preparation for Passover, and not on the Passover itself as the Synoptics record. In John 18:28 the crucifixion takes place on the day before Passover, the 14th of Nisan (or Nissan),which was the first month of the Jewish calendar. In the Synoptics (e.g. Mark 14:12) the last supper was the Passover meal and, along with the crucifixion, occurs on the 15th of Nisan. John’s telling of the story spiritualizes the event by having Jesus die at the exact time that the killing of the sacrificial animals began, namely the “day of preparation for Passover, at noon” (19:14). John’s version corresponds to his portrayal of Jesus as the “Passover lamb” at the beginning of the story. 

John’s Gospel is also unique in what it omits. In contrast to the Synoptcs, Jesus does not tell parables, perform exorcisms, dine with sinners and tax collectors, preach about the end times or the kingdom of God, advocate or care for the needy and the poor, undergo temptation, or transfigure on a mountain—to name a few.

Info Box 14.8: Material Not Found in John’s Gospel
• stories of Jesus’ birth
• mention of Jesus’ baptism
• temptation by Satan
• Jesus eating with tax collectors and sinners
• transfiguration
• parables
• exorcisms
• secrecy about Jesus’ messianic identity
• Lord’s Prayer
• condemnations of the rich or words about helping the poor
• Peter as the leading disciple
• command to love one’s neighbour or enemy, (only to love one another 13:31-35)
• call for repentance
• call for disciples to deny themselves or renounce their possessions
• predictions of Jerusalem’s downfall (but the temple is predicted in 2:19–22)
• focus on the kingdom of God (only in 3:3–5 and 18:36)

14.9 Themes

14.9.1 Jesus as God’s Revelation

Fig. 14.33: “Christ the Saviour” (Pantokrator). Icon from St. Catherine’s Monastery, Mount Sinai, 6th century. This is one of the famous depiction of Jesus as Lord.

More than in any other Gospel, Jesus is the revealer of God. He is the embodied revelation. His function as revealer is rooted in his identity as the Word (logos), which has been with God since “the beginning” (1.1). Without explanation, or the benefit of a birth narrative, the Word takes on flesh so that he can dwell among his people and reveal God (1:14). His function as the revealer is similar to that of the Prophets and Moses, but on a more intimate level. Jesus is not just an agent of God, he is the manifestation of God, which has traditionally been called the incarnation. He does not only reveal the will of God, but also his character and function. For example, Jesus reveals that God loves the world (3:16), that God will give the Holy Spirit (4:16), that God is spirit (4:24), that God is active (5:17), and that God answers prayer (16:23). While John’s language has no exact parallel in the New Testament, there are a handful of texts that imply similar ideas (e.g. Matt 1:23; Phil 2:5-8; Col 1:15-20).

In addition to his teachings, Jesus’ revelation takes place through his supernatural deeds, which are appropriately called “signs.” These not only legitimize Jesus’ authority as God’s son, but they are pointers to God’s presence in the world. The signs reveal that God transforms the ordinary into the extraordinary (2:1-11), that he heals people (4:46-54), that he offers physical and spiritual sustenance (6:2-14), and that he gives abundant and eternal life (11:38-44; 12:17-18). Jesus’ manifestation of the divine is captured concisely in his famous saying, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9; 12:45). 

14.9.2 The One Sent from God

Fig. 14.34: Late Roman copy of the Greek Kriophoros (ram-bearer) of Kalamis (5th century BCE), often identified as Hermes. Barracco Museum, Rome. In Greek mythology, Hermes was the messenger of the gods. Jesus as the Good Shepherd has often been compared with this and other pagan images of the lamb-bearer. It is a common image in early Christian art, sarcophagus reliefs, and literature which incorporated and transformed pagan symbols.

Closely connected to the previous theme is the portrayal of Jesus as the “one sent” from God. Over twenty times, Jesus refers to God as “the one who sent me” (e.g. 5:24, 30; 10:36; 11:42; 12:44–45; 17:8). While there are a few references at the beginning of the story to John the Baptist being sent by God (e.g. 1:6, 19), they are minor in comparison. The Greek verb for sending is apostello, from which we derive the word “apostle.” What is unusual about John’s Gospel is that apart from the resurrection account (20:21), the disciples are never “sent” by Jesus. In light of this emphasis, one could say that Jesus is the primary (or only?) apostle in the Gospel of John. 

In the Greco-Roman context, the sending of an agent implied representation. The agent was granted the same level of authority as his sender. He had the right to act and speak in behalf of his master. We see a similar role among the Hebrew prophets, who were sent by God to be his emissaries and convey his will. In biblical language, they were sent to deliver the “Word of the Lord.” John’s theme of Jesus as the one sent by God is heavily influenced by both his Greco-Roman context and his Jewish heritage. Therefore, an acceptance of Jesus and his message is an acceptance of the one who sent him, namely God. Likewise, the rejection of Jesus and his message is a rejection of God. John’s community sees itself within this trajectory as people who have been sent by the resurrected Christ, who in turn was sent by God. As such they believe themselves to be the emissaries of divine truth (17:21).

14.9.3 Jesus as God

Fig. 14.35: “The Holy Trinity,” Domenico di Michelino, c. 1460. Galleria dell’Accadamia, Florence. The Father is depicted seated on the throne. Jesus the Son is on the cross. The Holy Spirit is represented by the dove above the cross.

The divine nature of Jesus is a fundamental belief of the Christian faith. Traditional Christian dogma shared by the three major traditions—Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Protestantism—teaches that Jesus is both human and divine, and as such constitutes the second person of the sacred Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Doctrines, like the Trinity, are complicated and carefully drawn out processes that have taken centuries to develop. In fact, many theologians argue that they are still in the process of development. One of the key components in the formulation of doctrines has been scripture. In the case of the Trinity, the Gospel of John has played a prominent role. Most Christian thinkers throughout the history of the Church have interpreted select references to Jesus’ divinity, like 1:1 (“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God”) and 20:28 (“My Lord and my God”) in a literal way. The intimate love that the son shares with the Father in John has shaped the understanding of the Trinity as an eternal love relationship within the one Godhead. 

Fig. 14.36: “Appearance to Mary Magdalene,” Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308-1311. Museo dell’Opera del Duomo, Siena.

At the same time, John is not shy in presenting Jesus as fully human. Jesus experiences thirst (19:28), irritation (2:4; 6:26; 7:6-8: 8:25), suspicion (2:24-25), fatigue (4:6), grief (11:33-35), anguish (12:27; 13:21), and finally death (19:30). Moreover, Jesus always subjects himself to the will of the Father (5:19, 30). Even in the resurrected state, Jesus seems to distinguish himself from God, saying to Mary Magdalene, “I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.” In the context of Christianity, this tension between the human and divine identity of Jesus has been understood as a mystery.

Scholars have wondered, however, how the divine portrayal of Jesus would have been understood in the context of John’s Jewish Christian audience. At the end of the first century there was no developed idea of the Trinity or the integration of Jesus’ human and divine natures. The evangelist, along with a large portion of his audience, would have been steeped in a Jewish understanding of monotheism that may have included myths of divine or semi-divine humans. Since these were commonplace in paganism, some have suggested they were influential. The common explanation, however, for the origin of Jesus’ divine portrayal in John is that it is rooted in Jewish wisdom tradition, which personified wisdom as a divine mediator and revealer. The primary writings, to which scholars point, are Proverbs, Wisdom of Solomon, and Sirach. The last two are found in the Apocrypha. In these writings, wisdom lives with God in heaven, takes part in the creation, comes to dwell among God’s people, and is the perfect reflection of God (e.g. Prov 8:27, 29-30, 35-36; Sirach 24; and Wisdom 7:25-26; 9:10). While the subject of Jesus’ divine identity is complicated and controversial, it is possible that the Jewish wisdom tradition was influential in the shift from Jewish monotheism to the Christian conception of God, and John’s Gospel may have been an important part in the transition.

14.9.4 Glory

Fig. 14.37: Heel bone of a crucifixion victim found in an ossuary near Jerusalem. Courtesy of the Israel Museum, photographer: Ilan Shtulman. See the brief article in the Times of Israel: http://www.timesofisrael.com/in-a-stone-box-a-rare-trace-of-crucifixion/

One of the most startling features in John’s Gospel is the way in which Jesus refers to his death as glorification. When one thinks of the Roman practice of crucifixion, glory hardly comes to mind. In addition to the beatings that victims often experienced, it was an excruciatingly painful and humiliating ordeal that lasted for days. On the cross, victims often endured ravenous insects and assaults by scavenging birds and wild dogs. When the corpses were removed from the crosses, they were often unceremoniously thrown into mass graves. Where is the glory in this?

Jesus begins to associate his death with glory well before he goes to the cross. He makes several predictions that point to a particular time, called the “hour,” when a series of events will unfold, beginning with his betrayal, which will lead to his death and the eventual giving of the Holy Spirit. For example, after Jesus says, “He who believes in me, as the Scripture said, ‘From his innermost being shall flow rivers of living water,’” the narrator explains that he was referring to the Holy Spirit which will be given when he is glorified (7:38-39). In 12:23, Jesus predicts, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified” (12:23). In 13:13, after the Passover, Jesus predicts his betrayal by Judas, saying “Now is the son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him.” Finally, as he awaits his impending death, he prays, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son so that the Son may glorify you” (17:1).

There are at least two ways in which Jesus’ death can be understood as glorious. First, Jesus’ death as an act of glory is the deepest expression of the son’s love for the Father. Throughout the story, Jesus’ commitment and obedience to the will of God are unwavering. Jesus complies willingly because he loves the Father. When Jesus faces the ultimate act of obedience in the giving of his life, Jesus’ love is taken to the highest level.

Second, Jesus’ glorification can also be viewed as an enthronement. This is expressed in at least three ways.

(1) Instead of the passion predictions that are so commonly found in the Synoptics, John uses the term “lifted up” to refer to Jesus’ crucifixion (3:14; 8:28; 12:32, 34). Since the verb “to lift up” is as ambiguous in Greek as it is in English, it allows the evangelist to once again engage in a double meaning. On one level it refers to the exposure of Jesus’ bare body on the cross, which is the ultimate act of humiliation in early Judaism. On another level, when it is read in the context of Jesus’ messianic identity, it refers symbolically to his enthronement. The two extremes are creatively captured in a single expression. 

Fig. 14.38: The crown of thorns, as a contrast to the Emperor’s laurel wreath, was placed on Jesus’ head to mock his kingly status. Later Christians associated it with the curse of Adam (Gen 3:18) and Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac (Gen 22:13).

(2) Jesus’ enthronement is captured in the title on the cross, “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” (19:19). Although the title is intended to be sarcastic by Jesus’ executioners, it is a stroke of clever irony by the evangelist. Throughout the trial, kingship becomes the dominant theme. Pilate and Jesus engage in a dialogue about the nature of Jesus’ kingship. While Pilate does not see him as a king (certainly not as an earthly king), he does not find him guilty of insurrection. He hands the matter to the Jewish authorities who deny Jesus’ kingship, call for his execution, and proclaim Caesar as king. Pilate reluctantly has Jesus executed. All the while, the reader recognizes that Jesus’ words are true and that the sarcastic title is correct. He is the king of the Jews, who is ironically executed by his subjects and their king. The irony continues into the burial scene. Jesus is buried in an unoccupied tomb, which was common practice for kings (19:41).

(3) Throughout the passion account, Jesus is never a common victim because he is always in control of the events. He allows himself to be arrested (18:1–11) and claims that he could alter the course of events at his volition. Jesus’ response to Pilate that he would have no authority, were it not given to him by God, is paramount (19:11). Even his death is a voluntary act in which he alone must hand over his spirit in order to die (19:30). 

14.9.5 Eternal Life

In John, Jesus rarely preaches about the kingdom of God or the coming of an apocalyptic age, or even his second coming. Instead, he is fond of speaking about life, sometimes as eternal life and other times as abundant life. Here are a few examples. In his lengthy discussion with a Pharisee named Nicodemus, Jesus focuses on the importance of being born from above (or again), which conveys the need to find new life (3:1-15). In his exchange with the Samaritan woman, he promises, “whomever drinks of the water that I give him will never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life” (4:14). In the story of the resurrection of Lazarus Jesus proclaims, “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me will live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die” (11:25-26). During his monologue on rewards and punishments, Jesus declares, “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes the one who sent me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life” (5:24). Finally, in his teaching on the bread from heaven, which has often been understood as referring to the Eucharist practice in John’s community, he astonishingly asserts, “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves” (6:53).

Fig. 14.39: “Institution of the Eucharist,” Stefano di Giovanni, c. 1430. Pinacoteca Nazionale di Siena.

John’s notion of life is associated with salvation. While John includes more familiar language about salvation—that people can become children of God (1:12), be saved (3:17; 5:34; 10:9; 12:47), be set free (8:32), and come to the Father (14:6)—Jesus’ main purpose for coming is that all might have life to the full (10:10). But eternal life is not equated only with a blissful post-mortem existence. It is primarily conceptualized as a form of existence in the present. It does not have to do so much with longevity, but with quality of life. The experience of eternal life, through belief that Jesus is the Christ, is promised for the present (3:36; 5:24). New Testament scholars have often referred to the present experience of eternal life as “realized eschatology.” John presents eternal life as an abundant life whereby the believer experiences the truth of God revealed in and through Jesus, which is primarily manifested in God’s love for the world and his desire to save it, not to punish and condemn it (3:16-17). The ancient notion of belief, however, is not strictly a cognitive assent; it includes faithfulness and love, as it is revealed in Christ. 

Info Box 14.9: Life as Restoration
In the Eastern Orthodox tradition, John’s theology of life is viewed as an antidote to the sin of Adam, known as original sin. Since the Orthodox understand the consequence of original sin as mortality, Jesus’ promise of eternal life is viewed as a restoration of our fallen nature. This view is different from the traditional Catholic and Protestant view, which teaches that the consequence of original sin was guilt, which is inherited by all humanity. According to this Western view, restoration is realized through an appeasement of the inherited guilt.

14.9.6 Love

One of the most beautiful themes running through the entire Gospel is love—mentioned over fifty times. The act of love flows in multiple directions. Primary is the love shared between the Son of the Father. The Son only acts in accordance to the will of the Father, and even gives his life in a final act of loving obedience. The Father and the Son are so close that Jesus can say, “I and the Father are one” (10:30). The highest expression of this relationship is found in the High Priestly Prayer of John 17. Love also flows from Jesus to the disciples (e.g. 13:34), from God to the world (e.g. 3:16), from the Paraclete (see below) to the disciples (John 14-16). Finally, on a number of occasions, the disciples are commanded to love one another as Jesus loves them (e.g. 13:34). However, nowhere in John do we find Jesus’ command to love one’s neighbour or one’s enemies, as it is found in the Synoptics (e.g. Mark 12:31).  

The relationship between Jesus and his disciples (especially the beloved disciple) is often said to be very close. Being a follower of Jesus means loving him (8:42; 14:15, 21, 23; 16:27; 21:15-17) and abiding in him (6:56; 15:4-10). This is the essence of believing in him (20:24-29). When his followers let his words abide in them (15:7), and keep his commandments (15:10), especially the commandment to love one another (15:12), they are in union with him, the Father, and themselves. For John, this is eternal and abundant life. Love, however, is not primarily a feeling, but the act of faithfulness and commitment (13:3-15). 

John’s emphasis on love has caused scholars to wonder why there is so much hostility to Jews and unbelievers. Perhaps it was due to the antagonism that John‘s community experienced, be it within the synagogue or from rival Christian Gnostic groups. 

14.9.7 Paraclete

Fig. 14.40: “The Holy Spirit,” Corrado Giaquinto of Naples, 1755. Private collection.

As Jesus plans his departure during the last week of his life, he frequently promises his followers in his “farewell discourses” (ch. 14-16) that they will not be left alone. After his departure, he promises the disciples that they will be accompanied by a person who is called Paracletos in Greek (transliterated as Paraclete). Since there is no exact translation for Paraclete, English Bibles usually refer to him as the “Counselor,” “Advocate,” or “Helper.” In Greco-Roman culture Paracletos was associated with both legal and religious functions. As a judicial term it referred to a person who spoke on behalf of another, or interceded for another, in a legal setting. As a religious term, it referred to a person who conveyed words of eschatological (end of the age) hope to a persecuted party. John’s Paraclete also takes on these functions, but goes well beyond them. Perhaps the best way to understand the totality of the Paraclete’s role is captured in 14:17 where he is described as “another helper,” which implies another person like Jesus. 

Like Jesus, the Paraclete has a divine origin. He is sent by the Father (14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:13). He is identified as “the Spirit of Truth” (14:17; 15:26; 16:13) and “the Holy Spirit” (14:26). His role is to sustain and build the community of Jesus’ followers after Easter. For example, the Paraclete comforts the disciples’ anxiety and confusion due to Jesus’ departure. The Paraclete provides assurance, in the face of opposition, that the community’s faith in Jesus is true. Finally, the Paraclete brings to mind Jesus’ words and provides their correct interpretation in times of crisis. Members of John’s community believe themselves to be the recipients of the Paraclete and that his ministry is enacted among them. As a result, they see themselves as believing and living in the truth that Christ revealed.

14.9.8 The Antagonists: The World and The Jews

Unlike the antagonists in the Synoptic Gospels, who are Jewish religious leaders in general and Pharisees in particular, John’s antagonists are primarily “the world” and “the Jews.” The first half of the Gospel targets “the Jews,” whereas the second half targets “the world.”

Fig. 14.41: The “world” and its  ruler was represented by enormous commemorative structures, such as the temple of Saturn in Rome, which housed the treasury. In Roman mythology, the god Saturn was associated with wealth.

While the world is intrinsically good, since it came into being through God and his Word (1:3, 14), it is also the environment in which John’s community experiences hostility, hatred, and rejection because of their belief in Jesus as God’s revealer. As such the world represents the unbelievers, who oppose both Jesus and his followers (7:7; 15:18-19; 16:20; 17:14). In spite of the hostility, God still loves the world (3:16) and sends his Son to rescue it (3:16-17; 4:42). Since the world is described as being in darkness (i.e. spiritual darkness) and the domain of the Devil (12:31; 14:30; 16:11), Jesus comes to confront it as the light of the world. When he departs, the disciples are sent into the world to continue Jesus’s mission with the help of the Paraclete, who convicts the world of its need of light and life. Prior to sending them out, however, Jesus warns them about conforming to the world (17:14-18). Whereas Matthew and Acts understand the church to have a transformative and beneficial impact on the world, John seems more concerned about protecting the believers from the temptation and the unbelieving posture of the world (17:11-12, 17-19). John’s warnings have often been understood as a reflection of the community’s struggle to define itself within the hostilities of both the Roman Empire and the synagogue context.

One of the most controversial features of the New Testament, especially since the Holocaust, is John’s depiction of the “the Jews” as prominent antagonists of Jesus and his followers. On the surface it appears as though John is anti-Semitic, singling out Jews as an ethnic or religious people group. This reading would be a misreading since Jesus and his disciples were Jews themselves. For John, “the Jews” is a reference to fellow Jewish people who did not believe that Jesus is the Christ. They cling to the laws of Moses without seeing that he, along with all the scriptures, point to Christ (5:39-47; 9:28). Here we find a battle between the old revelation and the new. For “the Jews,” faith in Jesus as the Christ becomes the reason for expulsion from the synagogues (9:22; 12:42; 16:2). In light of this conflict, “the Jews” are presented as little more than the world. Jesus even goes so far as to say that the ruler of the world – the devil (12:31) – is their father as well (8:44). Because of their unbelief, the evangelist implies that his fellow Jews have lost their privilege as the people of God (8:39, 42, 47). 

Info Box 14.10: John’s Gospel and Anti-Semitism
Scholars point out that the animosity toward “the Jews” in John’s Gospel was never intended to convey a generic condemnation of an entire race or nation of people. Rather, the Gospel contains a more specific attack on a particular rival religious group within Judaism. Regardless, these polemical passages have been used throughout the history of the Church to promote anti-Semitism. Renewed interest in these passages has taken root after the Jewish Holocaust of World War II. Consequently, several scholars have proposed that the Greek word Ioudaioi should be translated as “Judeans” to indicate that it refers to a group of people living in a specific geographical region in the first century, and not to Jewish people as a whole. It may well be that when John is writing, at the end of the first-century, the reference to “the Jews” is used to distinguish believing Jews (who were being called “Christians”) and non-believing Jews (who were simply called “Jews”). As such, the category could have arisen during heated Jewish-Christian controversies, probably in the synagogue context.

 Try The Quiz

Bibliography

Ashton, J. Understanding the Fourth Gospel. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. 842-4442

Bauckham, R. The Gospel of John and Christian Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008.

_____. The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple: Narrative, History, and Theology in the Gospel of John. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.

Beasley-Murray, G. R. John. Word Biblical Commentary 36. 2nd Edition. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1999. 

Brown, R. E. An Introduction to the Gospel of John. New York: Doubleday, 2003.

_____. The Community of the Beloved Disciple: The Life, Loves, and Hates of an Individual Church in New Testament Times. New York: Paulist Press, 1979.

Carter, W. John: Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2006.

Dunn, J. D. G. Christology in the Making: A New Testament Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation. 2nd Edition. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

Hengel, M. The Johannine Question. London: SCM Press, 1989.

Keener, C. S. The Gospel of John: A Commentary. 2 Volumes. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003.

Koester, C. R. The Word of Life: A Theology of John’s Gospel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008.

Köstenberger, A. J. A Theology of John’s Gospel and Letters. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009.

Kyser, R. John: The Maverick Gospel. 3rd edn. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007.

Martyn, J. L. History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel. 3rd Edition. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003.

Robinson, J. A. T.  The Priority of John. London, SCM Press, 1985.

Smalley, S. John: Evangelist and Interpreter. London: Paternoster Press, 1983.