Lesson 10

Question 1

1. Relate John’s Gospel to the synoptics. Explain the similarities and differences. How can evangelicals answer the “Johannine problem”?

Answer 1

B. Johannine Problem
1. Introduction to the problem
a. Differences between John and the Synoptics
i. Irenaeus recognized differences in the prologue
ii. Clement of Alexandria: Referred to John as a “spiritual gospel”, whereas the other evangelists wrote of the “physical things”
b. Differences raise questions about John’s historicity.
i. Differences between John and the Synoptics
c. Content
i. Lacks key synoptic material:
1. baptism,
2. temptation,
3. exorcisms,
4. parables,
5. transfiguration,
6. Lord’s Supper,
7. Gethsemane,
8. ascension
ii. Lacks key synoptic themes:
1. repentance,
2. Kingdom of God, etc
iii. Original content:
1. long discourses
2. Changing of water into wine
3. Nicodemus about being born again
4. Woman at the well
5. Resurrection of Lazarus
6. Garden discourse,
7. Various miracles mentioned in John not in Synoptics
d. Chronology
i. Galilee vs Jerusalem
ii. Cleansing of the Temple (John mentions at the bigging where synoptics mentions at end)
iii. Day of Crucifixion
e. Language
i. Perspectives on the Johannine Problem
ii. Style and vocabulary

1. Evangelicals answer the “Johannine problem”?
f. We must avoid overestimating the differences
i. They are more the same than different
ii. Question of genre
iii. All gospels follow the same outline of the life of Christ and contain common elements (John the Baptist, feeding 5000, walking on water, healing the lame, giving sight to the blind, use of the phrase “son of man,” passion story)
iv. The amazing fact is not that the synoptics and John have differences, the amazing fact is that all the synoptics are so much the same. If we only had two gospels, one synoptic and one John, there would be none of this discussion.
g. John’s knowledge of the synoptics
i. Dating and authorship
ii. So, why not include synoptic material?
iii. John saw no need to repeat what had already been said
iv. He was writing for a particular purpose and for a particular audience, and he wanted to include material he saw as important
v. The different material can likely be explained by the fact that John focused more on Jesus’ teaching in Jerusalem and Judea, whereas the synoptics focused more on Galilee.
vi. The synoptics present a true, but limited, picture of a complex and intricate historical situation.
h. John, like the other writers, did not always quote Jesus verbatim
i. Standards of historiography: quoting verbatim was not required, but they often paraphrased, abbreviated, or captured the gist of what a person said
ii. Distinction between Ipsissima Verba (his very own words) and Ipsissima Vox (his very voice)
iii. Applied to John: John’s verbal style does not negate his gospel’s trustworthiness or accurate presentation of the person and teachings of Jesus
2. Historicity of John
a. Richard Bauckham: John presents itself as a writing that should be taken as history (topography/geography, eyewitness testimony, long discourses)

Question 2

2. Explain the authorship of John and the various views and their supporters.

Answer 2

1. Author
   a. The “beloved disciple” (John 21:20-24)
   b. Up to 23 different options
   c. Identity of the “beloved disciple”

i. John the Apostle, Son of Zebedee
ii. Internal evidence in 1:35-40; 13:23; 20:2; 21:20
1. Follower of Christ
2. One of the 12
3. An original eye witness
4. Closest to Jesus – even among the inner circle
5. Companion of peter.
6. In the Gospel of John, the Apostle of John is never mentioned
iii. External Evidence in:
1. Irenaeus who got all his info from Polycarp who actually knew John personally
2. Muratorian Canon Says John Son of Zebedee
3. Eusebius Says John Son of Zebedee
4. Tatian based the chronology of his Diatessaron on John’s Gospel showing that early on it was viewed and received as apostolic and authoritative.

d. John the Elder
i. Two Johns in early Christianity
ii. Martin Hengel, The Johannine Question (Trinity Press, 1989)
iii. Origin of idea: Possibly Eusebius, who misunderstands an early statement from Papias where the name John is mentioned twice (Hist. eccl. 3.39.3)
iv. It is very unlikely that there were two Johns in Jesus’ earliest circle, both at the last supper, both eyewitnesses to the resurrection

Conclusion: Best view is that the author is the apostle John, son of Zebedee, and thus the Gospel was written by someone who was an eyewitness.