Gospel According to John
Home PhilosophyReligionScriptures The New Testament is a collection of writings that were written during the years of ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad ad Alternative titles include: Gospel of the Fourteenth Gospel Following the Gospel of John, the fourth of four New Testament accounts detailing the life and death of Jesus Christ is told.
The Gospel of John is the only one of the four that is not recognized to be one of the Synoptic Gospels (i.e., those presenting a common view).
John the Apostle, Jesus’ “beloved disciple,” wrote the Gospel; nonetheless, there has been much debate about who wrote it and who wrote it in the first place, and who wrote it in the second.
Furthermore, the fact that some occurrences in Jesus’ life are recorded out of sequence with the Synoptics and that the concluding chapter appears to be a later addition imply that the book may be a composite of multiple different sources.
illumination of a manuscript A manuscript illumination from the Lindisfarne Gospels, dating from the late 7th century, depicts the apostle John the Evangelist.
John’s Gospel varies from the other Synoptic Gospels in a number of respects, including the fact that it covers a different time period than the others, the fact that it places most of Jesus’ work in Judaea, and the fact that it depicts Jesus speaking at length on theological issues.
“I have chosen not to record many of Jesus’ symbolic acts, but I have included certain episodes in order that his readers may understand and share in the mystical union of Christ’s church,” so that they “may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name,” according to the author of John’s Gospel (20:30).
- The author opens his tale with a proclamation on the incarnation that plainly alludes to the beginning of the Bible (“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
- The author continuously interjects his own interpretive views to further elucidate Jesus’ motivations.
- While reading through John’s Gospel, Jesus makes it clear that he is the divine Son of God, rather than concealing his identity as he does in The Gospel According to Mark.
- More Information on This Subject may be found here.
- The Gospel of John is the last Gospel and, in many respects, differs from the other three Gospels.
- The Gospel is distinguished by its distinctive theological character.
Those in charge of editing the Encyclopaedia Britannica Melissa Petruzzello was the author of the most recent revision and update to this article.
2. Major Differences Between John and the Synoptic Gospels
There are two fundamental viewpoints on the relationship between John’s Gospel and the Synoptics that might be taken:
- If John knew of the synoptics, then he wrote to supplement them. (To say John knew of one or more of the synoptics is not to say, however, that he wrote his gospel with copies of Matthew, Mark, and/or Luke in front of him. John may have been aware of the existence of other written accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry without actually having seen them.)
- If John’s Gospel is totally independent from the synoptics, he had enough material to choose from that much of it does not overlap with the synoptics (cf. Jn 20:30 and 21:25). (cf. Jn 20:30 and 21:25). This point is strengthened considerably if one accepts the Fourth Gospel’s claim to reflect eyewitness testimony about the life and ministry of Jesus (John 21:23-24)
There is a significant amount of material missing from John’s Gospel that can be found in the synoptic Gospels, including several rather major episodes: the temptation of Jesus, the transfiguration of Jesus, and the establishment of the Lord’s Supper were all left out by John. In the Gospel of John, there are no accounts of Jesus casting out demons. The Sermon on the Mount and the Lord’s Prayer are not included in the Fourth Gospel, which is a significant omission. In John’s Gospel, there are no narrative parables to be found (most scholars do not regard John 15:1-8as a parable in the strict sense).
2. Inclusion by John of material not found in the synoptics.
In addition, John contains a significant quantity of material that is not present in the synoptics. It is impossible to find any of the material in John 2—4, which describes Jesus’ early Galilean career, in the synoptics. Prior travels by Jesus to Jerusalem before the week of the Passion are recounted in John’s gospel but are not included in the synoptic gospels. The resurrection of Lazarus (John 11) is the seventh sign-miracle, however it is not reported in the synoptic gospels. The longer Farewell Discourse (John 13—17) is not included in the synoptic Gospels since it is not recorded there.
3. Different length of Jesus’ public ministry.
According to the Gospel of John, Jesus’ public ministry lasted at least three, and maybe four years in total. During this time, Jesus travels from Galilee to Jerusalem on a number of occasions. The synoptics appear to depict only one journey of Jesus to Jerusalem (the final one), with the majority of Jesus’ career taking place within a year following the first gospel account.
4. ‘High’ Christology as opposed to the synoptics.
The prologue to John’s Gospel (1:1-18) portrays Jesus as theLovgo”who has taken on flesh and become man (1:14). “My Lord and my God!” says Thomas in John 20:28, capping off an assertion of Jesus’ preexistence and complete divinity that begins at the beginning of his Gospel and culminates in John 20:29. When Jesus makes non-predicatedeijmisayings in the Fourth Gospel as references to Exod 3:14, this points to his divinity as well (John 8:24, 28, 58). As a comparison, Mark opens his Gospel with Jesus’ baptism, whereas Matthew and Luke begin their Gospels with the birth of Jesus.
5. Literary Point of View: John versus the synoptics.
All of the events in the synoptics are described as if the authors had directly watched them all and were just recounting what they saw at the time, although they are written in third person. As a result, they take a descriptive approach to their work. However, John’s Gospel, while likewise written from a third-person point of view, is more contemplative, having been written much later than the events he portrays. The author of the Fourth Gospel takes great effort to maintain a clear separation between himself and the events he relates (cf.
- Regardless matter how evident it is that he was an eyewitness to Jesus’ life, it is as clear that he is looking back on it from a temporal distance.
- Our understanding of the significance of the events reported is enhanced by the writer’s current viewpoint, which is superior to what an eyewitness could have known at the time of the events recorded.
- There are a number of passages in John’s Gospel that may be used to illustrate this latter point of view, for example.
- In John 20:9, the Bible says, “oujdevpw gaVr h[/deisan thVn grafhVn.
- The apostles’ incapacity to comprehend the events that were taking place in their real perspective at the time they occurred is highlighted when he looks back on the events in question.
Only through considering the resurrection of Jesus and its relevance in God’s plan will we be able to grasp the meaning of these events for ourselves.
6. Extended dialogues or discourses rather than proverbial sayings.
Instead of the ‘proverbial’ or ‘pithy’ sayings found frequently in the synoptics, John presents his material in the form of extended dialogues or discourses, such as those found in John 3 (with Nicodemus), John 4 (with the Samaritan woman), John 6 (the Bread of Life Discourse), and John 13—17 (with the Samaritan woman) (the Farewell Discourse with the disciples). According to L. Goppelt, “The Gospel of John passed on the words of Jesus predominantly in a different genre than the synoptics; it did so not in sayings, parables, and controversy dialogues, but in connected or dialogical discourses.”25 “The Gospel of John passed on the words of Jesus predominantly in a different genre than the synoptics,” he wrote.
7. Use of symbolism and double meaning.
When compared to the synoptics, John makes more frequent use of literary techniques like as alliteration and metaphor. Exemplifications include John 2:25 (temple/body), John 7:37-38 (water/Spirit), and John 12:32 (lifted up/exalted). Light and darkness (1:4; 3:19; 8:12; 11:9; 12:35, 46); truth and falsity (8:44); life and death (5:24; 11:25); above/below (eighth chapter); freedom and slavery (eighth chapter); and light and darkness (1:4; 3:19; 8:12; 11:9; 12:35, 46). (8:33, 36). A lot of this antithetical dualism may be found in the Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls) manuscripts as well as in the Bible.
- Charlesworth) (New York: Crossroad, 1990).
8. Use of the “misunderstood statement.”
As a literary technique, John frequently employs the “misunderstood remark” to great effect. The fact that Jesus says anything to someone who does not understand what he means gives him the chance to clarify what he actually meant a second time. Illustrations include the following: John 3 (Nicodemus’ mistaken belief that the new birth was a second physical birth); John 4 (the Samaritan woman’s mistaken belief that life-giving water was potable water).
9.Ipsissima verbaversusipsissima vox.
Unless they provide a true summary and interpretive paraphrase (ipsissima vox) of what Jesus really said, the lengthy lectures in John’s Gospel do not necessarily convey Jesus’ precise words (ipsissima verba). The teaching of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel may be couched in a manner that is particularly Johannine in style. Alternatively, some of John’s style may have been influenced by Jesus’ own style of speaking, either directly or indirectly: in Mt 11:25-27 + Lk 10:21-22, Jesus uses language that is almost identical to that which characterizes his speeches in John’s Gospel— “all things have been given to me by my Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father, nor the Father except the Son and the one to whom the Son wishes to reveal him”— “no one knows the Son except
10. “Kingdom of God” versus “eternal life.”
Unlike the synoptics, John’s Gospel is entirely devoid of any mention of the Kingdom of God (the phrase basileiva tou qeou’ appears just twice in the Gospel of John (3:3, 5) while the nounbasileiva appears only three times in John’s Gospel) (all in 18:36).
Instead, we see John’s focus on ‘eternal life’ as a reality that is currently taking place (John 5:24 etc.). As the following chart illustrates, the focus on ‘everlasting life’ in John’s Gospel is more in line with the writings of Paul than it is with the synoptic gospels:
11. Realized eschatology in the Gospel of John.
The dilemma of so-called’realized’ eschatology in the Gospel of John (a phrase used by C. H. Dodd) may be seen in miniature in John 5:20b-30, which is a passage from the book of Revelation. Those who believe that the parousia (second advent) will occur in the future will find comfort in the following statement: “.for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come forth, those who have done good to a resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to a resurrection of judgment” (Matthew 25:31-46).
As a counterpoint to these, there are statements in 5:20-27 that appear to speak of the full realization of salvation for believers in the present: “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life” (John 5:24 NASB).
Related to John’s focus on ‘eternal life’ as a present reality is the emphasis on judgment, which is manifested in a person’s reaction to Jesus’ teachings in the Gospel of Matthew (John 3:19).
12. Differences in grammatical style from the synoptic gospels.
When compared to the synoptic gospels, the Gospel of John is written in a style of Greek that is considerably distinct. In this case, the vocabulary is more limited. There is a lot of parataxis going on (use of coordinate clauses rather than subordinate clauses). Asyndeton is a condition that often occurs. In relation to the previous point (7), there is little distinction between the statements attributed to Jesus and the words of the Evangelist in the Gospels. For example, in John 3:1-21, attempt to figure out where the words of Jesus to Nicodemus cease and where the interpretative remarks of the Evangelist begin to appear.
Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 293 (Leonhard Goppelt, Theology of the New Testament).
Three Ways John is Different from the Synoptic Gospels (and three ways it’s similar)
There are several discrepancies, as well as some similarities, between the Gospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels, which are discussed here (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). Throughout this brief article, I will highlight three contrasts (style, story, and presentation of Jesus’ words and acts) as well as three commonalities (Jesus’ words and deeds) (overlapping narrative arc, overlapping events, and overlapping sayings of Jesus).
Differences Between John and the Synoptic Gospels
The difference between John’s Gospel and the Synoptic Gospels is instantly apparent upon going to John 1:1, since the opening words of the chapter, “in the beginning,” immediately transport readers back to the beginning of all things—Genesis 1. Mark’s Gospel, on the other hand, gets right to the heart of Jesus’ public ministry, if not before it. The Gospel of Matthew begins with a genealogy before moving on to accounts about Jesus’ birth and early childhood. Before providing a genealogy of Jesus, Luke’s Gospel includes unique information about the birth of John the Baptist as well as Jesus himself (Luke 3:23-38).
Although it starts from the beginning, John’s Gospel portrays Jesus, the Logos (“word”), as both equal to and separate from the God of Israel (“the Word was with God, and the Word became God”).
Another aesthetic distinction, in addition to the initial image of Jesus, is John’s dualistic vocabulary, which is exhibited in contrasts such as belief/rejection, light/darkness, truth/lie.
Instantaneously, the discrepancy between John’s Gospel and the Synoptic Gospels is discernible. To send a tweet, simply click here.
In John’s narrative flow, the three-year ministry of Jesus that is recorded is one example of how it differs from the Synoptics’ narrative flow. Notable is the contentious purification of the temple, which John reports as taking place early in Jesus’ career (Chapter 2), rather than as taking place during the final week of Jesus’ life on earth as related by the Synoptics. The baptism of Jesus is not recounted in John’s Gospel, which instead covers the beginning of the Lord’s public ministry, which begins with the calling of several disciples (1:35-51) and the changing of water into wine at Cana of Galilee (2:1-12).
During the “Book of Glory” (Chapters 13-20), the Lord’s impending crucifixion is highlighted by lengthy discourses from Jesus directed to his disciples (e.g., The Farewell discourse in Chapters 14-16, following the washing of the disciples’ feet in Chap 13, preceding the Lord’s prayer for his disciples in Chap 17), and the Lord’s prayer for his disciples in Chapter 18.
The Presentation of Jesus’ words and deeds
Only in the Gospel of John does Jesus make statements that are followed by a double “amen” (KJV: “verily, verily”), but there are more fundamental distinctions in the words and deeds of Jesus in the other three gospels. In John’s Gospel, we don’t see Jesus execute an exorcism (though he does in 12:31), but in the Synoptics, exorcism is a prominent aspect of Jesus’ teaching and activity. Long lectures are recorded in John, although Jesus does not use many parables in his teaching. In addition to the meetings with Nicodemus (John 3) and a Samaritan woman (John 4), as well as the washing of the disciples’ feet (John 13), John has much original material, although he does not include the institution of the Lord’s Supper.
In addition, there are several more examples of John’s distinctive account of Jesus’ words and acts, such as the fact that John is the only Gospel to mention the promise of the comingparaclete (John 14-16) and the seven “I am” utterances.
The promise of the approaching paraclete, as well as the seven ‘I am’ affirmations, are only found in John’s Gospel, and he is the only one to do so.
Similarities Between John and the Synoptic Gospels
Following that quick review of some of the discrepancies, we should point out that there are certain parallels between the Synoptics and John’s Gospel as well as between the Gospels of Matthew and Luke.
The essential tale of John the Baptist is the same: Israel’s Messiah is heralded by John the Baptist, who preaches and performs miracles, comes into dispute with religious authorities, is imprisoned and tried by Jewish and Roman officials, is crucified, and is afterwards raised from the dead.
The events described in John and the Synoptics are similar in many ways, including: John the Baptist’s career, Jesus feeding over 5000 people, Jesus walking on water, Jesus friendship with Mary and Martha of Bethany, and several other occurrences.
In addition to the happenings, the Synoptics provide several of Jesus’ sayings that are not included in the events. Here are a few illustrations:
- Construction of the temple was completed in three days (John 2:19/Mark 14:58)
- (John 4:44/Mark 6:4) Prophets who are unworthy of their office. Recognizing me and recognising the one who sent me (John 13:20/Matthew 10:40). Predictions of betrayal (John 13:21-30, 38/Matt 14:18-22, 27-31)
- Predictions of betrayal (Matt 14:18-22, 27-31)
Four Unique Representations
The early church came to the conclusion that the four different depictions of Jesus that we have in the New Testament were necessary. For the tale of Jesus, each author brings a distinctive perspective—both stylistically and theologically—to bear. However, while it is unavoidable to acknowledge that John’s Gospel is markedly different from the Synoptics, we must equally acknowledge that John’s portrayal contributes to our understanding of how early Christians perceived the person and message of Jesus.
- In Themes in the Gospel of John, we will examine the cultural and historical context of our time in order to better understand and apply the Gospel of John to today’s reality.
- GET YOUR FREE COURSE–Faith at Work Through Love a number of biblical scriptures that describe how Christians should think about the work they conduct are examined Sign up for a voucher for a course.
- Sign up for a voucher for a course.
- Develop a more in-depth understanding of how the Lord’s Prayer may be used to enhance your everyday life.
- Dennis Edwards is an American actor and director.
- Wright Provides Updates Your email has been sent to you.
The Story Of The Storytellers – The Gospel Of John
The so-called “spiritual gospel” has an architectural enmity toward Judaism that is deeply ingrained. Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program at the University of Texas in Austin, L. Michael White is a scholar who specializes in religious studies. THE GOSPEL OF THE SPIRIT The gospel of John differs from the other three gospels included in the New Testament. That reality has been acknowledged from the beginning of the Christian church. By the year 200, John’s gospel had already earned the moniker “spiritual gospel,” owing to the fact that it portrayed the narrative of Jesus in a symbolic manner that differed radically at times from the other three gospels.
Unlike the other three synoptic gospels, in which Jesus really eats a passover supper before he dies, Jesus does not do so in John’s gospel.
As a result, the chronology of events leading up to the actual crucifixion in John’s account differs significantly from the other gospels.
When it comes to the development of story-telling, how can we account for the distinctions between the two groups?
Basically, this is how the story goes in John’s gospel: on the day leading up to Passover, and since Passover will begin at 6 o’clock with the evening meal, it is on the day leading up to that Passover meal on which all of the lambs are slaughtered, and everyone goes to the temple to procure their lamb for the Passover meal.
- And according to John’s account, it is on this day that Jesus is crucified.
- Through the storytelling method of John’s gospel, we are compelled to conceive of Jesus as a passover lamb, at the very least in terms of dramatic impact.
- Now, this topic of the Lamb of God, as well as the symbolism of the Passover, is carried throughout the duration of John’s gospel, which is a remarkable achievement.
- This is the case from the very beginning of the story.
- And, of course, this is the type of symbolism that would eventually rise to become one of the most deep and prominent in the entire Christian theological tradition as a whole.
- In theological terms, it is a declaration regarding the importance of Jesus’ death on the cross.
- For the most part, the language of John’s gospel is intended to be adversarial at times toward Jewish tradition and toward Jewish sensitivity.
A several times in the book of John, Jesus declares that “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.” Jewish dietary laws, on the other hand, are completely opposed to the practice of drinking blood.
The gospel of John bears evidence to a Christianity that is drifting more and farther away from Jewish tradition with each passing generation.
JOHN’S GOSPEL AND ATTITUDES TOWARDS JERUSALEMeanwhile, each of the gospel authors is faced with a number of issues that must be addressed, questions that must be answered, and crises that must be navigated.
There are more persons from Judea represented in the dramatis personae of John’s gospel than there are in any other gospel.
Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea are two of the most famous people in the world.
According to one interpretation, the sources of the fourth gospel are more closely associated with this socioeconomic strata of people and their concerns.
Galilean traditions are the most important traditions in the region, and as a result, Jesus’ activities in the Galilee and among the people of Northern Judea take center stage.
What effect does this have on the picture that emerges?
The depiction of Jesus that is more in line with Northern Palestinian traditions and concerns, as well as the challenges that are distinctive of Galilee, will undoubtedly be more in line with those traditions and concerns.
They do not have any “in” with those individuals.
There is no way that they are going to be interested with what happened in various strata of Judean society, how particular Judean individuals responded to Jesus, or how certain people responded to the Jesus movement in general.
There are some people who are not from the priestly class but empathize with Jesus.
This is something that John is extremely clear about.
In this contrast, John is extremely cautious to draw, whereas the synoptic tradition, as a whole, is not particularly careful to draw.
The Gospel of John reveals to us exactly who is responsible for Jesus’ death among the governing class of Jerusalem.
Well, I believe that the distinction I just outlined is correct in that it complicates that generalization since it is a potentially harmful one.
It’s not merely a misinterpretation of the evidence that we have at our disposal.
The author of John’s play goes to great lengths to demonstrate that a certain group of Israelite authority railroaded Jesus.
Possibly, as we get further away from Judea, the quality of that picture, or at least the clarity of that picture, is impaired by other considerations.
This concentration is subsequently undermined by other concerns that are communicated through the transmission of Galilean traditions.
Are you able to accept that?
Before the war, this isn’t quite as evident as it should be.
As a result, by the end of the first century, Jesus has emerged as a new choice.
There are still certain kinds of discussions taking place with other branches of Judaism, and such discussions appear to be serious, even if they are not without their own set of problems.
Morison Professor of New Testament Studies Faculty member at the Harvard Divinity School’s Department of Ecclesiastical History THE GOSPEL OF JOHN DISTINCTS ITSELF It goes without saying that the Gospel of John is distinct from the other three gospels.
Both of them make use of the gospel of Mark.
Now the Gospel of John has some relationships to the sources used by the other gospels.
The other thing that is common with the other gospels is a chain of miracle stories.
And that’s the element of Jesus’ discourses and dialogues with the disciples.
They are not comparable to collections of sayings of Jesus that we have, for example, in the Sermon on the Mount.
It’s just a collection.
That is, the Gospel of John constructs the speeches of Jesus in an effort to interpret traditional sayings of Jesus.
Nicodemus comes to Jesus and recognizes he is a great teacher, he’s come from God, and Jesus now tells him something that is, in fact, the quotation of a traditional baptismal saying.
Now John takes that saying as the basis of the development of dialogue.
And that explanation fills the whole rest of the chapter.
And what is interesting here is that some of these sayings have parallels in the sayings we find in the synoptic gospels.
So John draws on a different set of traditional sayings of Jesus than do the first three gospels of the New Testament.
It’s not the sort of thing that if you try to put in a social context would appeal to a large number of followers.
It’s a very developed Christology.
If the historical Jesus was saying the sorts of things that John’s Jesus said, he probably would have been fairly safe.
Does that Jesus have enemies in this gospel?
In John, again, the Pharisees come in for their typical negative role.
But there’s no trial before the Sanhedrin in John.
So, Jesus’ enemies are really provided to give a kind of dimension to the plot.
And then, as he’s hanging on the cross, in a scene that’s curiously leeched of pathos and anguish, he says, “It is finished.” And that’s where the gospel’s complete.
As any parent of a two year old knows, the first two words a child masters when forming its own identity, “Mine” and “No”.
Because this community is developing its own identity vis a vis the synagogue across the street.
You know, this guy’s the Prince of Darkness. this one isn’t any good, this is the only correct method to do it. this is the sort of dynamic that we get, shaping the way John presents Jesus’ life in that particular gospel. Read more on the Gospel of John in thisessayby Marilyn Mellowes.
Gospels Not Written By Matthew, Mark, Luke or John
” Neither the synoptic gospels nor the gospel of John identify its author or writers. Authorial attribution in each case dates back to the second century CE. Dr. Ian Bond is a pastor, missionary, and Evangelical Christian. Much of what is presented in this part was taught to me by Ian Bond, a Christian with great Christian credentials, who ends his webpage with the words “Yours, In Christ.” It is far better and shorter than mine, and it is titled “Who Wrote the Synoptic Gospels.” If you have the opportunity, read what he has to say and then return to me.
No Mention of Gospels Until 2nd Century
According to Christian belief, the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) were written by the individuals whose names appear in the titles of the respective books in the Bible. The majority of people also think that they were penned in the same sequence as they appear in the Holy Bible. The fact is that all of the author’s names are pure speculation or religious deceit on the part of the author. The headings “According to Matthew,” “According to Luke,” and so on were not inserted until late in the second century.
For the most part, they were written in the first half of the second century and are attributed to the Apostles Clement of Rome (Clement of Alexandria), Barnabas (Barnabas), Hermas (Hermas), Ignatius (Ignatius), and Polycarp (Polycarp).
Early Christian academics, too, acknowledge that this was the case.
Henry Dodwell, who wrote: “We have at this day certain most authentic ecclesiastical writers of the times, such as Clemens Romanus, Barnabas, Ignatius, and Polycarp, who wrote after all the writers of the New Testament in the order in which I have named them, and after all the writers of the Old Testament.” However, in Hermas, you will not find a single verse or reference of the New Testament, nor will you find any mention of any of the Evangelists listed anywhere in the text” (Dissertations upon Irenaeus, Henry Bodwell, 1689).
In other words, the four gospels were not known to the early Christian Fathers when they wrote the New Testament.
Over three hundred citations are taken from the books of the Old Testament; approximately one hundred are taken directly from the Apocryphal books of the New Testament; but none are taken directly from the Four Gospels.
According to the Rev. Dr. Giles, “the names of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are never mentioned by him—they do not appear even once in all of his writings” (Christian Records,p. 71).
It is true that the Gospels were written anonymously, despite the fact that they are known by the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These titles originally arose in the second century and were ascribed to anonymous texts in order to confer papal authority on the writings in question. In addition to being written before any of the other canonical gospels, the Gospel of Mark was also written after the destruction of the second temple, which happened in the year 70 CE. They make no claim to have been authored by the gospel writers Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
- They just state that they are doing “in accordance with” the alleged teachings of these Evangelists and nothing more.
- ” (Bible for Learners,Vol.
Finally, Recognition of “authorship”in mid 2nd century
Theophilus, who wrote somewhere after the middle of the second century and before the second half of the second century, makes reference to the Gospel of John. Irenaeus, who wrote a few centuries later, cites all of the Gospels and includes several citations from them in his writing. The Four Gospels were unquestionably written or assembled in the later part of the second century, between the reigns of Justin and Papias and the reigns of Theophilus and Irenaeus, in the course of the second century.
Remsberg was the source for the preceding four paragraphs, which were lifted without permission.
The Gospel According To Mark
The Gospel is a collection of stories about Jesus Christ. According to Mark, the synoptic gospels are the most essential since they serve as the major source for the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Approximately 76 percent of the book of Mark is replicated practically verbatim in the books of Matthew and Luke. A further 18 percent of Mark is replicated in Matthew but not in Luke, and a further 3 percent of Mark is reproduced in Luke but not in Matthew, for a total of 3 percent of Mark in Matthew but not in Luke.
Matthew has 606 verses out of Mark’s total of 661 verses.
Luke reproduces 31 of the 55 verses of Mark that Matthew does not include; as a result, there are just 24 verses in all of Mark that are not included in either Matthew or Luke.
I hope he understands what I’m saying.
Who Wrote Mark and What Were His Sources?
Even the Bible does not say that Mark was an eyewitness to Jesus’ work during his lifetime. According to modern, non-Christian biblical scholars, the gospel of Mark was written in Syria by an unknown Christian no earlier than AD 70, using various sources including a passion narrative (which was probably written), collections of miracle stories (which were either oral or written), apocalyptic traditions (which were probably written), disputations and didactic sayings (which were probably written), and apocalyptic traditions (which were probably written) (some possibly written).
- These stories had been in circulation for years, told in a variety of languages and in a variety of regions, all of which were distinct from the story of Jesus.
- People’s stories and writings serve as the foundation for the gospel of Mark’s story.
- What happens to tales that have been passed around orally for years?
- As a result, much of the synoptic gospels is based on hearsay rather than historical evidence.
- The Gospel of Mark is the first of the four Gospels to include quotations purportedly from Jesus himself.
The impossibility of Jesus’ original words being faithfully preserved 40+ years after they were delivered has been the subject of a treatise published by our team. More information regarding the author of the gospel of Mark may be found HERE.
Who Wrote Matthew and What Were TheSources?
Even the Bible does not say that Mark was an eyewitness to Jesus’ ministry at the time of Jesus. According to modern, non-Christian biblical scholars, the gospel of Mark was written in Syria by an unknown Christian no earlier than AD 70, using various sources including a passion narrative (which was probably written), collections of miracle stories (which were either oral or written), apocalyptic traditions (which were probably written), disputations and didactic sayings (all of which were probably written), and disputations and didactic sayings (which were probably written) (some possibly written).
- In addition to being spoken in other languages and in different countries than the Gospels, these stories were in circulation year after year.
- Other people’s stories and writings serve as the foundation for the gospel of Mark.
- Was it ever discovered what happened to stories that had been passed around orally for decades?
- So much of the synoptic gospels is based on hearsay, and this is the source for the majority of them.
- For the purposes of this demonstration, the simple childhood game of “Telephone” is sufficient to demonstrate that stories passed down from person to person for 35 years or more are unlikely to preserve their original substance.
- Given the arduous journey from Jesus’ lips to “Mark’s” writing, as well as the eons that have gone since the words were reportedly delivered, we have our doubts about the authenticity of these quotations.
- More information regarding the author of the gospel of Mark may be found by clicking HERE.
Who Wrote Luke and What Were the Sources?
Today’s critical scholarship suggests that Luke relied on the Gospel of Mark for his chronology, as well as a hypothetical sayings sourceQ document to record a large number of teachings from Jesus himself. It’s possible that Luke drew on independent written documents as well. Traditional Christian study has placed the authorship of the gospel in the early 1960s, although higher criticism places it in the last decades of the first century, or even earlier. While the conventional notion that Paul’s friend Luke was the author of the gospel is still frequently advanced, a number of probable discrepancies between Acts and Paul’s writings have led many historians to question this narrative in recent years.
Who Wrote John and What Were the Sources?
The gospel of John differs greatly from the synoptic gospels in terms of topic, substance, time span, order of events, and literary style, among other things. In comparison to the other gospels, just around 8% of it is parallel to them, and even then, there is no such word-for-word parallelism as we see among the synoptic gospels. The Gospel of John depicts a Christian tradition that is distinct from the traditions represented by the other gospels. Many persons and groups within the early Christian movement considered it to be heretical, and they were right to do so.
- Despite several concerns, it was eventually admitted into the official canon of literature.
- They had a completely different goal in mind for their intended audience than the authors of the synoptic gospels did when they wrote them.
- Men should still be circumcised, according to Matthew, who goes so far as to say so.
- Unlike John, who welcomes anybody into the fold, Mark, Matthew, and Luke are written exclusively for and to Jews.
- The author of the gospel is identified as “the disciple whom Jesus loved,” according to the text.
Today, the vast majority of scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it, but rather that it was composed by a “Johannine community” that traced its traditions back to John; the gospel itself shows signs of having been composed in three “layers,” reaching its final form around 90-100 AD, according to some scholars.
Visit THIS PAGE to learn more about who truly authored John.
In the canonical gospels, the teachings of Jesus are presented in such a way that they serve as a foundation for the Christian faith. These works are by unknown writers who wrote to buttress the particular points they desired to make. The quotations attributed to Jesus were very certainly made up by the writers in order to bolster their points of view.
- Unlike the titles of the Gospels themselves, the titles of our English Bibles are later additions, rather than originals. The Gospel accounts are always written in the third person, unless otherwise stated. During the second century, the legend that they were authored by two disciples (Matthew and John), as well as two associates of the apostles (Mark and Luke), was first recorded. As for the authors, we may safely assume that they were all highly educated, literate, Greek-speaking Christians of (at least) the second generation
- In contrast, the apostles of Jesus were ignorant peasants from a lower social level who were illiterate and spoke Aramaic.
Even if the gospels had been written by the apostles Matthew and John, who were “eyewitnesses,” it is improbable that they would have precisely described all that happened. Keep in mind that their “testimony” occurs thirty years (in the case of Matthew) and sixty years (in the case of John) after the occurrence. This would-be “eyewitness” testimony was written at least 30 years after the events it alleges to depict occurred, and the writers were in their late fifties or early sixties at the time.
The following is an extract from an article titled ” 34 Years Later, the Supreme Court Will Revisit Eyewitness Identifications ” Written by Adam Liptak Published in the New York Times on August 22, 2011.
Discrepancies And The Holy Spirit
However, Christians contend that the authors of the Gospels, and in fact the authors of all the books of the Bible, were directed by the Holy Spirit and as a result, the words of the Bible cannot be in mistake regardless of who wrote them. Some of the differences that may be found between the same narrative presented by various authors are listed below.
- For example, the stories of Jesus’ birth in Matthew and Luke are diametrically opposed to one another
- In addition to significant disparities between Luke’s and Matthew’s versions of Jesus’ birth, and his family’s move from Bethlehem to Nazareth, there are historical concerns.
- For example, the miraculous star in Matthew that directs the wise men to Jesus’ birthplace, and the census in Luke that compelled everyone to identify where their ancestors came from, are both examples of how the Bible is structured. Furthermore, this census encompassed the whole Roman Empire, and there is no other description of such a massive census anywhere else in the Bible save in Luke.
When it comes to the genealogy of Jesus, the one provided to us by Matthew differs significantly from the one supplied by Luke. Jesus teaches for three years in the Gospel of John; Mark, Matthew, and Luke each portray a one-year ministry. Following this, Mark and Luke provide an account of teaching and healing in Galilee, followed by a journey to Jerusalem, where an event occurs in the Temple, culminating in the crucifixion on the day of the Passover celebration. According to John, the Temple event occurred early in Jesus’ career, he made multiple journeys to Jerusalem, and the crucifixion occurred soon before the Passover festival, on the same day that the lambs for the Passover supper were being slaughtered in the Temple, according to Matthew.
Additional Proof Can be Found Here
A 606-page dissertation named The Rejection of Pascal’s Wagerexplains in detail the evidence that the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John were not written by the people that Christians believe they were written by, and it is available online. In this book, true biblical experts (those who did not attend Moody Bible College or Dallas Theological Seminary, among other institutions) give overwhelming evidence that the Gospels were not written by their traditional authors.