“When Herod Antipas, the ruler of Galilee, heard about Jesus, he said to his advisers, “This must be John the Baptist raised from the dead! That is why he can do such miracles.”—Matthew 14:1,2 NLTread more
When, and By Whom, Was the Gospel of John Written?
Today, critics often assert that the Gospel of John was written in the 100’s CE, not by the apostle John, but by someone, or even multiple writers, who weren’t even born until long after Jesus’ death. These critics, of course, deny the inspiration by God’s holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16), “as they do also the rest of the scriptures” (2 Peter 3:16 NKJV). Although the Gospel of John was written anonymously, it is important for us to know when, and by whom, was the gospel of John written, if possible. Every extant manuscript that includes the beginning of the book names John as the writer. Was this “John” someone other than the apostle John? This article investigates and analyzes the facts.
JOHN WAS LITERATE
Critics have claimed that John was an illiterate fisherman. However, this claim is unsupported by any facts. When Jesus “called” John and his brother James to follow him full time, “they . . . were in a boat mending their nets. So they left their father Zebedee in the boat in the boat along with the hired men and followed Jesus” (Mark 1:19,20 NAB). John was involved with his father’s fishing business on the Sea of Galilee, which was lucrative enough to have “hired men”. The Galilee area was an international crossroads, with Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek being spoken, and it is likely that John was fluent in these languages. He likely had business dealings with various people who spoke these languages.read more
History says Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote the books with those titles. People seem to have a highly variable standard in their assessment of what ancient writings are genuine, especially the Bible. What do we mean? Here is an example:
Did Matthew, Mark, Luke and John really write the Gospels, or were these names attributed later?
Most people accept Alexander the Great as a real historical figure. Yet, the two earliest biographies of Alexander the Great were written by Arrian and Plutarch more than 400 years after the Great One’s death 323 BCE. Legends about him developed centuries after these two writers. Yet, Alexander’s true, accurate history is viewed as being preserved for hundreds of years prior to these legends.
Let’s clear up a misunderstanding about the titles of the Gospels by considering the manuscript evidence: True, there was no “uniformity of the titles.” Yes, there were many variances. But, the one thing that is 100% consistent about the titles is that in the reservoir of several thousand manuscripts of the gospels, they all attribute writership to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John respectively. The exact wording of the titles in various early manuscripts were different, not the same, but they all list Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as the writers. None of the titles indicates anonymity..
In every single instance, the names included Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John respectively. While there was not uniformity of the titles, there was 100% agreement on writership.
The popular agnostic Bible scholar Bart Ehrman claims that the titles of the Gospels were added by later scribes. But, as is well known, even experts can be wrong. Ehrman’s theory about the titles contradicts the facts.
An interesting point to note here is that while there are four gospel accounts, there is in reality only one gospel that runs through the entire New Testament – the Gospel of, and about, Jesus Christ. As Mark opens his account:
“The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” (Mark 1:1LSB; NASB)
The Gospel is the theme of the four accounts of Jesus’ life, ministry, death and resurrection. Hence, the titles were drawn from this. Notice:
“Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people.” (Matthew 4:23)
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free” (Luke 4:18)read more
Does the temple cleansing in John contradict the Synoptic Gospels?
Critics claim that the temple cleansing in the Gospel of John is either the same temple cleansing reported by the three Synoptics, Matthew, Mark and Luke, or is out of place, therefore, constituting a “contradiction” in the Gospels.
Below are listed a number of reasons why the temple cleansing in John is accurate and was performed by Jesus around the time of the first Passover after his baptism, which was probably about six months earlier. John clearly states in John 20:31 and John 21:25 that he was highly selective in his reporting on the events of Jesus’ life.
The other three Gospel writers had already reported on the second temple cleansing by the time John wrote his gospel. Upon close examination, it seems fairly obvious that John was very familiar with these other three Gospels, and quite possibly had copies of them in his possession as he wrote the fourth Gospel.
John filled in many gaps that the Synoptics did not report on. In fact, about 92% of his gospel is unique. John reports the following details about the first temple cleansing, that are omitted from the second temple cleansing recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke:
John 2:1 – “on the third day a wedding took place in Cana of Galilee.”
John 2:11 – “was the first of his signs“. John’s Gospel states that Jesus’ turning water into wine at a marriage feast was the first of the seven signs, or miracles, reported by John that Jesus performed prior to his death.
John 2:12 – “After this,” was when Jesus cleansed the Temple for the first time.
John 2:13 – “When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem.” This was Jesus’ first Passover that he attended after his baptism.
These significant differences in details between the Temple cleansing in John and the Temple cleansing in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are strong evidence that these two cleansing occurred on two widely separated occasions in different years. Notice, also, how John places the Temple cleansing he records and the Temple cleansing recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke:
“Once more he visited Cana in Galilee where he had turned the water into wine . . . This was the second sign Jesus performed after coming from Judea to Galilee (John 4:46,54 NIV).read more
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/2048px-John_1-5c2d79b2c9e77c0001830496.jpg)
