M14a
The Gospel of John
Introduction
​
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.
​
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.
​
​
Giotto di Bondone, St. John the Evangelist, 1320-25. Musée Jacquemart-André, Châalis, France.
​
​
​
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:
​
​
​
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.
​
​
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.
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.
​
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.
​
Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976) was one of the most influential biblical scholars of the 20th century.
​
​
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.
Developed Tradition
​
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.
Authorship
​
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).
​
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.
​
​
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.
​
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.
​
​
Illumination from the Book of Kells. The symbol for John the Evangelist is an eagle, which symbolizes his lofty descriptions of Jesus.
​
​
​
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)
​
​
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.
​
​
​
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.
​
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
​
​
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).
“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.
​
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.
​
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).
​
​
Jacopo Bellini (1430-35). Panels of St. John the Evangelist (left) and the Apostle Peter (right).
​
​
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.
​
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.
​
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.
​
​
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.
​
​
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.
​
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.
​
Date of Writing
​
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.
​
​
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).
​
​
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.
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.
​
​
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.
​
​
​