When, and By Whom, Was the Gospel of John Written?

When, and By Whom, Was the Gospel of John Written?

John and the Synoptic Gospels (Differences)
 
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.

 

THE GOSPEL OF JOHN WAS WRITTEN MUCH LATER THAN THE OTHER GOSPELS

The writer of John apparently had the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, before him as he wrote, and he tried to fill in some of the gaps, because about 92% of the book of John contains unique material. Clement of Alexandria, who lived in the late 100’s to early 200’s, reported that John wrote to supplement the accounts found in the other Gospels. “Last of all, John, perceiving that the external facts had been made plain [in the other canonical gospels] . . . composed a spiritual gospel”  (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6.14.7). This, of course, means that the Gospel of John was written after Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

Another clue as to when the Gospel was written is the fact that “the Sea of Galilee” is explained to be “the Sea of Tiberias” in John 6:1and is simply called “the Sea of Tiberias” in John 21:1The designation, “the Sea of Tiberias,” was not even used until late in the 1st century. The Gospels of Matthew and Mark use the name “Sea of Galilee,” and Luke uses “the Lake of Gennesaret” (Luke 5:1).

EXTERNAL TESTIMONY TO THE APOSTLE JOHN’S WRITERSHIP

 Early Church tradition indicates that John wrote the Gospel toward the end of his long life, in the 90’s CE. The apostle John is identified as the writer by such early Church historians and authorities as:

Papias of Asia Minor, 125 CE

Basilides of Alexandria, a Gnostic heretic, 170-138 CE

Justin Martyr of Rome, 150 CE

Clement of Alexandria, 180 CE

Irenaeus of Lyon, !80 CE

The Moratoria Fragment, 180 CE

Tertullian of Carthage, 200 CE

Origin of Alexandria, 220 CE

These independent testimonies provide very strong external evidence of John’s writership of the Gospel bearing his name.

INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF WRITERSHIP

The internal evidence of the Gospel of John reveals that the writer of the book did leave some clues as to his identity. Of the four Gospels, John is the only book that:

—Does not mention by name the apostles John and James, who were sons of Zebedee (Matthew 4:21,22). The Gospel of John does make reference to them as “the sons of Zebedee” (John 21:2).  James and John were two of Jesus’ three closest, most intimate apostles, one of Jesus’ inner circle of three (Matthew 17:1; Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:32,33), and they were very prominent in the early church (Acts 3:1; 4:1-20; 8:14; Galatians 2:9). These facts are very difficult to explain if one of them did not write the book, but quite natural to understand if one of them did write the book, and modestly refrained from identifying himself by name in the book.

—Does not use the term “John the Baptist (Matthew 3:1; 11:11,12; 14:2,8: 16:14; 17:3; Mark 1:4; 6:14,24,25; 8:28; Luke 7:20,33; 9:19), but instead, simply uses the name “John” to describe “John the Baptist” (John 1:6,15,23,26,29,32,35,40,42; 3:23,24,26,27; 4:1; 5:33,35,36; 10:41), except for Simon Peter’s father (John 21:15-17).  

John’s brother James is eliminated as possibly being the writer of the book of John because, “King Herod . . . had James, the brother of John, put to death with the sword” (Acts 12:1,2 NIV). History confirms this event took place in 44 CE, which is far too early in time for James to have been the writer of the Gospel of John.

Even though the apostle John is not named in the book, every extant manuscript of the fourth gospel that includes the title names John as the writer. Critics often claim that the titles of the Gospels, including John, aren’t original, but were added many years after they were composed. However, there is no evidence to support such assertions.

THE GOSPEL OF JOHN HAS UNIQUE DETAILS

There are unique details to the Gospel of John that are very oddly specific, and highly unlikely to be made up. Only the Gospel of John:

—Refers to one of the apostles as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7,20), rather than by his name, which, again, is difficult to explain if John did not write the book, but easy to understand if he did write the book. The “Church Fathers” {for example, Irenaeus) attested to this expression referring to the apostle John.

—Also makes several references to “another disciple,” “this disciple,” and “the other disciple” (John 18:15,16; 19:27; 20:3,4,8).

—Records the special closeness Jesus felt for “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23-25).

—Records that Jesus, just before he died, entrusted the care of his mother to “the disciple whom he loved” (John 19:26,27).

THE WRITER OF JOHN WAS A JEW WITH INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF JEWISH LIFE AND OPINIONS

The writer of this book appears to be a Jew with an intimate knowledge of Jewish life, expectations, and opinions in the first third of the first century, such as:

—Popular messianic speculations, such as, the Messiah would be “the prophet,” or “Elijah,” and would come from David’s line of descent, and be from Bethlehem, (John 1:21; 6:14; 7:40-42). “We have heard from the law that the Christ remains forever” (John 12:34 NKJV).

—Customs, such as the purification rituals of the Jews, (John 2:6), the hostility of Jews toward Samaritans  (John 4:9), the duty of circumcision on the 8th day taking precedence over the prohibition of working on the Sabbath (John 7:22).

—The popular low estimate of women (John 4:27).

—The Judean disparagement of “the dispersion”, “the Jews in other lands” (John 7:35 NAB; NLT).

—Festivals, for example, the Festival of Dedication (John 10:22,23) is in the “winter.”.

—The Messiah was expected to live “forever” (John 12:34).

THE WRITER WAS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE AREA

He also shows a very detailed knowledge of the geography of Palestine and Jerusalem (which suggests he was a native), such as:

“Bethany across the Jordan” (John 1:28). This Bethany was north of the Dead Sea, just over the Jordan River in Perea.

—His mention of “Cana of Galilee” (John 2:1), which is a village that is not referred to in any previous writing that is known to us.

—Thw trip from Cana to Capernum was going “down” in elevation (John 2:12). Jesus, in Cana, was asked by an official to “come down” to Capernaum to heal his sick son (John 4:46,47), even though he would travel northeast. Cana is 709 feet above sea level, Capernaum is 682 feet below sea level, almost an 1400 foot drop in elevation, as one travels from Cana to Capernaum. 

—The well at Sychar that Jacob gave to Joseph was “deep” (John 4:5,11).

—The Sea of Galilee, or Tiberias, was large enough for the apostles to have rowed “about three or four miles” (John 6:19 NIV; NAB) out into it and be in the middle of it, because today we know it is about 13 miles north to south and about 8 miles west to east.

“Jesus spoke in the treasury as He taught in the temple” (John 8:20 NKJV).

—“Ephraim” was in “the region near the desert” (John 11:54 NAB).

“The Kidron valley” is just outside Jerusalem (John 18:1 NAB).

“In the place where he had been crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb, in which no one had yet been buried” (John 19:41 NAB). The burial place of Jesus was close to his execution site.

THE WRITER OF JOHN WAS AN EYEWITNESS

The book has numerous clues that its writer was an eyewitness. Many of these details are very specific, but for no apparent reason, other than they are the vivid observations of an eyewitness. The writer twice explicitly admits to being an “eyewitness” to, at a minimum, at least some of the events he recorded (John 19:35 GWT; 21:24 GWT), and very likely many of the events he recorded. The writer includes personal touches in his accounts that reveal he was an eyewitness, such as:

— Includes himself as being an eyewitness of Jesus. Notice his use of “we” in the scripture. “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14 NASB).

—Naming people who said, did, or experienced, certain things. “Andrew was one of the two” (John 1:40). “Nicodemus” (John 3:1,4,9; 7:50; 19:39). “Jesus . . . said to Philip . . . Philip said to him” (6:5,7).  “Simon,” Judas Iscariot’s father (John 6:71). “Lazarus” (John 11:1-44; 12:10). “Malchus” (John 18:10). Caiphus’ relationship to Annas (John 18:13).  The slave who identified Peter as being with Jesus, and was a relative of the man whose ear was cut off (John 18:26). (Also see John 12:21; 14:5,8,22; 18:10).

—Giving details about the times of events (John 4:6,52; 6:16; 13:30; 18:28; 19:14; 20:1; 21:4).

—Accurately providing exact numeric descriptions, as well as references to days, or the time of day or night, and time periods, without embellishment (John 1:35,39; 2:6,20; 3:2; 4:6,18,40,43,52; 5:5; 6:9,16,17,19; 11:39; 12:5; 13:30; 18:28; 19:14,33; 21:8,11,26).

—The type of bread used to feed 5,000 was “barley” (John 6:9).

“There was a great deal of grass in that place” where Jesus fed the “five thousand” (John 6:10 NAB).

—The type of “leafy branches” used for Jesus’ triumphal entry (Matthew 21:8; Mark 11:8) were “palm branches” (John 12:12,13)

— The house at Bethany being filled the fragrance of the broken perfume jar (John 12:3).

—The type of fire for warmth in the high priest’s “courtyard” was “a charcoal fire” (John 18:15-18).

—During Jesus’ last “Passover . . . evening meal” with “his disciples” (John 13:1,2,22), when “Judas . . . went out . . . it was night” (John 13:30).

—John’s form of the inscription on the cross is the fullest of the four Gospels, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews,” and John’s gospel notes that it was written in, “Hebrew, Latin, and Greek” (John 19:19,20 REB).

—Jesus’ “undergarment” was “seamless” (John 19:23 NIV).

THE WRITER OF JOHN KNEW MUCH ABOUT JESUS’ THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS

The writer of the Gospel of John must have been not only an apostle of Jesus, but one of his inner circle, because he knew so much about Jesus’ mind, feelings, and reasons for certain actions. Some examples of this are:

“Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all people” (John 2:24 NIV).

“Jesus . . . asked Philip” a question only “to test him, for He Himself knew what He was going to do” (John 6:5,6 HCSB).

“Since Jesus knew that they were going to come and carry him off to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain alone” (John 6:15 NAB).

“Jesus was aware that his disciples were criticizing his message (John 6:61 GWT).

“Jesus traveled around Galilee. He wanted to stay out of Judea, where the Jewish leaders were plotting his death” (John 7:1 NLT).

“He was greatly disturbed in spirit and deeply moved” (John 11:33 NRSV). (Also see John 13:21).

“Jesus fully realized all that was going to happen to him” (John 18:4 NLT).

THE WRITER WAS FAMILIAR WITH THE APOSTLES’ THOUGHTS AND IDEAS

The writer of John seems to have had firsthand knowledge of the apostles thinking. Even when some of the apostles’ ideas were unclear or wrong, the writer of John was familiar with them. 

—“The temple he had spoken of was his body. After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said” (John 2:21,22 NIV).

—“They thought Jesus meant Lazarus was simply sleeping, but Jesus meant Lazarus had died” (John 11:13 NLT).

—“At first his disciples did not understand all this. Only after Jesus had been glorified did they realize that these things had been written about him and that these things had been done to him” (John 12:16 NIV).

—“But no one at the meal understood why Jesus said this to him” (John 13:28 NIV).

—“They did not yet understand the scripture that he had to rise from the dead” (John 20:9 NAB).

—“When it was already dawn, Jesus was standing on the shore; but the disciples did not realize it was Jesus” (John 21:4 NAB).

The writer of John knew:

—What the apostles said to Jesus (John 4:31; 9:2; 11:8,12; 16:29,30).

—What the apostles said among themselves (John 4:33; 16:17,18; 20:25; 21:3,5).

—Where Jesus went to get away from, or avoid, people (John 11:54; 18:1,2).

POWERFUL EVIDENCE THE APOSTLE JOHN WROTE THE GOSPEL PRIOR TO 100 CE

The historian Eusebius ( c 260-340 CE) quotes Irenaeus as saying: “John, the disciple of the Lord, who had rested upon his breast, himself gave fourth the gospel, while he was living at Ephesus in Asia” (The Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius, V, viii 4; Irenaeus, Hair., 3.1.2). 

The prediction by Jesus of Peter’s martyrdom (John 21:17-19), led Peter to ask Jesus about the life of “the disciple whom Jesus loved ” (John 21:20,21). Jesus’ reply, “‘If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?'” and “Because of this, the rumor spread among the believers’ that this disciple would not die” (John 21:22,23 NIV). This seems fit well with the apostle John’s very long life, since he lived into his upper 90’s.

As mentioned earlier, some have strongly asserted that the Gospel of John was written as late the middle of the second century. However, the discovery of the Rylands Papyrus 457 (P52) (a papyrus fragment of John 18:31-33,37,38), paleographically dated to about 125-135 CE, has led most scholars back to the traditional date of the 90’s CE as the time period of the writing of John’s Gospel. Why? Because several decades would have been required between the time of the original writing, likely in Ephesus (Asia Minor, today Turkey), and its being copied and circulated as far south as Egypt. Additionally, discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran, by improving understanding of Palestine in the first century, have confirmed the genuineness of the Jewish background and thought patterns evidenced in the book. These facts fit in well with the evidence presented above that the apostle John wrote the 4th gospel in the 90’s CE.

WHY THIS IS VITALLY IMPORTANT

All of this information helps us to accept the Gospel of John “not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God” (1 Thessalonians 2:13 NIV). We have such an abundance of powerful facts that we don’t have to be in any “doubt, because the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind” (James 1:6 NIV), and is “in confusion” (Acts 19:32 NIV). Why is this belief in the Gospel of John so important? Because it was written so that you may continue to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life by the power of his name” (John 20:31 NLT). Our eternal life depends on it!

11 thoughts on “When, and By Whom, Was the Gospel of John Written?

  1. GW: Your case is very weak.

    BA: These critics, of course, deny the inspiration by God’s holy Spirit…
    GW: Since God does not exist and this has been proven, the Holy Spirit also does not exist.

    BA: The writer of John apparently had the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, before him as he wrote, and he tried to fill in some of the gaps, because about 92% of the book of John contains unique material.
    GW: Yes, the writer of John filled in the gaps mostly with fabrications and theological rather than historical material.

    BA: These independent testimonies provide very strong external evidence of John’s writership of the Gospel bearing his name.
    GW: They were not independent. One guy speculated it was John, and the other guys followed suit.

    BA: Even though the apostle John is not named in the book, every extant manuscript of the fourth gospel that includes the title names John as the writer.
    GW: The titles were added later when guesses were made as to authorship.

    BA: The Gospel…Refers to one of the apostles as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”…
    GW: Didn’t Jesus love all the disciples? Didn’t he love them equally? The other Gospels do not corroborate this designation, and so it is very likely just a fabrication. According to the other Gospels, if Jesus loved any one disciple more than the others, it was likely Peter.

    BA: The Gospel…Also makes several references to “another disciple,” “this disciple,” and “the other disciple”
    GW: But never gives a name. Never makes an exact identification.

    BA: The Gospel…Records that Jesus, just before he died, entrusted the care of his mother to “the disciple whom he loved”
    GW: Not corroborated by the other three Gospels, so probably a fabrication.

    BA: The writer of this book appears to be a Jew with an intimate knowledge of Jewish life, expectations, and opinions in the first third of the first century…
    GW: Bart Ehrman disagrees with this opinion. Remember: This Gospel was written in Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic. The writer could have a knowledge of Jewish history and customs without being a Jew.

    BA: The book has numerous clues that its writer was an eyewitness.
    GW: This evidence is weak since most of the book is written in the third person, not the first person. We discussed the authorship of this Gospel long ago and I refuted that it was written by an eyewitness of Jesus. The consensus of scholars is that none of the Gospels was written by an eyewitness of Jesus. Just look at Bart Ehrman’s work in this area.

    BA: All of this information helps us to accept the Gospel of John “not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God” (1 Thessalonians 2:13 NIV).
    GW: It has been proven that God does not exist. We cannot trust the Bible which promotes belief in God.

    1. Your assertion the John wrote fabrications is lacking any evidence.
      You cannot prove your assertion that the early writers testimonies that the apostle John was the writer were parroting earlier testimonies.
      The facts are that every extant Greek manuscript that includes the beginning of John has a title that names John as writer. There is no evidence the title was added some time after the book was written.
      Jesus did indeed love all the disciples. “Having loved his own that were in the world, he loved them to the end” (John 13:1 NIV). However, Jesus was especially fond of the apostle John (John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7,20).
      It is foolish to assert that a single witness is false on the face of it without any contradictory evidence.
      Yes, John was written in Koine’ Greek, the international language of communication in the Roman Empire. Many Jews knew Greek, as evidenced by the fact that “Pilate also had an inscription written and put on the cross . . . Now many of the Jews read this inscription, because the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Latin and Greek” (John 19:19,20 NAB). John was a native Jew who wrote in Greek.
      Many ancient works by eyewitness were written in third person, so your assertion lacks merit. We’ve read Ehrman’s contrary assertions, and they’re baseless speculations.
      The longer that time passes, the more claims of the Bible’s critics have been demolished by the evidence, and the more the Bible is corroborated by the evidence (1 Peter 1:24,25).

      1. BA: Your assertion the [that] John wrote fabrications is lacking any evidence.

        GW: The author probably fabricated many of the things he claimed, and there is evidence for this. For example, he wrote that a Roman soldier pierced Jesus in the side. The evidence against this is that 1) it is not mentioned in the three other Gospels, and 2) it makes no sense in context.

        BA: You cannot prove your assertion that the early writers testimonies that the apostle John was the writer were parroting earlier testimonies.

        GW: True. I cannot prove it at this time, but it is the best explanation of the facts.
        BA: The facts are that every extant Greek manuscript that includes the beginning of John has a title that names John as writer. There is no evidence the title was added some time after the book was written.

        GW: I believe this is mistaken. I believe that the oldest manuscripts of that Gospel or fragments of that Gospel did not have the title “The Gospel According to John.” I believe Bart Ehrman has said so. If a “John” wrote that Gospel, it is very unlikely that he would use that title.

        BA: Jesus did indeed love all the disciples. “Having loved his own that were in the world, he loved them to the end” (John 13:1 NIV).

        GW: Thanks for agreeing with me on this point,.

        BA: However, Jesus was especially fond of the apostle John (John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7,20).

        GW: Sorry, but you cannot rationally use the Gospel of John to support the point that Jesus loved the disciple “John” the most. That is circular thinking.

        BA: It is foolish to assert that a single witness is false on the face of it without any contradictory evidence.

        GW: Here you are begging the question. You are assuming that the author of this Gospel was a witness of Jesus without having proven it. The burden of proof is on you, not me.

        BA: Yes, John was written in Koine’ Greek, the international language of communication in the Roman Empire. Many Jews knew Greek, as evidenced by the fact that “Pilate also had an inscription written and put on the cross . . . Now many of the Jews read this inscription, because the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Latin and Greek” (John 19:19,20 NAB).

        GW: It is more probable that the author of this Gospel was Greek and not a Jew than the converse.

        BA: John was a native Jew who wrote in Greek.

        GW: You don’t know this. Again, you are begging the question. This is an error in critical thinking.

        BA: Many ancient works by eyewitness were written in third person, so your assertion lacks merit.

        GW: False. My assertion has great merit. If a person was an eyewitness, it is more likely that they would write in the first person than in the third person. This has always been the case throughout the history of humankind.

        BA: We’ve read Ehrman’s contrary assertions, and they’re baseless speculations.

        GW: False. Ehrman’s assertions are based on evidence and logic. He is the world’s greatest NT scholar. I will take his assertions over yours any day.

        BA: The longer that time passes, the more claims of the Bible’s critics have been demolished by the evidence,…

        GW: False. The opposite is the case. In the last five years I have demolished the claim of the Bible that God exists. The claim that Jesus came back to life has also been demolished. Christianity is on the decline, if you consider the whole world, but especially look at Europe.

        BA: and the more the Bible is corroborated by the evidence (1 Peter 1:24,25).

        GW: The key assertions of the Bible are being undermined by evidence and logic. See above for two of them.

        1. A single witness is not disqualified without contradictory evidence. Regarding Jesus’ side being pierced at John 19:34, the report is corroborated by the prophecy at Zechariah 12:10, “when they look on the one they have pierced, they will mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weeps bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn” (NRSV).
          You admit that you cannot prove your “controversial speculations” (1 Timothy 1:4 NIV).
          You ‘believe the oldest manuscripts and fragments of John don’t have the title.’ Of course, fragments dont because they’re only fragmentary pieces of the manuscript and not the entire work. The fact is that 100% of the oldest manuscripts of the beginning of the book have the title attributing writership to John.
          The article presents numerous evidences that John was written by an eyewitness, namely the apostle John.
          Facts are not dependent on probability. The article presents numerous facts that the writer of John was a native Jew.
          Many ancient writings by eyewitness were written in third person. Probability is irrelevant to facts.
          Your dependence on Ehrman’s opinions as opposed to documented facts is a serious flaw in your reasoning.
          FYI: The number of Christians in the world is increasing, not declining. Global population in 202o to 2024 is going from 7.84 billion to 8.11 billion, a 0.87% increase. For the same period, Christians are going from 2.52 billion to 2.63 billion, a 1.08% increase, with much of the increase coming from Africa and Asia.

          1. BA: A single witness is not disqualified without contradictory evidence.

            GW: First, you don’t have a single proven witness of any event in the life of Jesus or its aftermath. Secondly, a single witness to a single event is not disqualified, but can be ignored when evaluating hypotheses about highly significant or miraculous incidents. You need corroboration. If a single person told you they saw Muhammad riding on a winged horse in the sky one day, you would ignore this report. If a single person told you they were abducted into an alien spacecraft one day, you would ignore this person. What percentage of how many people does it take, reporting essentially the same thing, to confirm that an event was objective and not merely subjective or fabricated?

            BA: Regarding Jesus’ side being pierced at John 19:34, the report is corroborated by the prophecy at Zechariah 12:10, “when they look on the one they have pierced, they will mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weeps bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn” (NRSV).

            GW: First, a prophesy or a prediction is never corroborating evidence. Secondly, the author of Zechariah’s prophesy is too vague. It does not say that a Roman soldier will pierce Jesus in the side, while hanging on a cross, in approximately 30 CE when Pilate is ruling in Palestine. Thirdly, in this case it is likely that the author of John fabricated the detail of the piercing of the side in order to try confirm the vague prophesy of Zechariah. The author of John knew the prophesies. He admits this.

            BA: You admit that you cannot prove your “controversial speculations” (1 Timothy 1:4 NIV).

            GW: Likewise, you cannot prove yours. Where two contradictory speculations cannot be proven, we must endorse the one more likely to be true, which is mine.

            BA: You ‘believe the oldest manuscripts and fragments of John don’t have the title.’ Of course, fragments dont because they’re only fragmentary pieces of the manuscript and not the entire work. The fact is that 100% of the oldest manuscripts of the beginning of the book have the title attributing writership to John.

            GW: I doubt this. I believe Ehrman has refuted this claim.

            BA: The article presents numerous evidences that John was written by an eyewitness, namely the apostle John.

            GW: But none of the evidence is any good. It is poor in quantity and quality. The Gospel of John is not a first-person, author identified, low bias, promptly written, eye witness report to any event in the life of Jesus and its aftermath.

            BA: Facts are not dependent on probability.

            GW: Yes, they are! A fact is a proposition describing something real with a very high probability of being true. When describing events which may or may not have happened, probability is highly important.

            BA: The article presents numerous facts that the writer of John was a native Jew.

            GW: This is unlikely. If he were a native Jew, he would have written in Hebrew or Aramaic. These are the languages which would have been used by Jesus and his Jewish followers, as you well know.

            BA: Many ancient writings by eyewitness were written in third person. Probability is irrelevant to facts.

            GW: I already refuted these claims. See above.

            BA: Your dependence on Ehrman’s opinions as opposed to documented facts is a serious flaw in your reasoning.

            GW: Ehrman’s opinions are rational conclusions about documented facts, and more facts than what you presented here.

            BA: FYI: The number of Christians in the world is increasing, not declining.

            GW: FTI: The percentage of Christians in the world is declining, not increasing.

            BA: Global population in 202o to 2024 is going from 7.84 billion to 8.11 billion, a 0.87% increase. For the same period, Christians are going from 2.52 billion to 2.63 billion, a 1.08% increase, with much of the increase coming from Africa and Asia.

            GW: I found this quote from a Google search, differing from your figures: “The percentage of the world’s population that is Christian has remained relatively stable over the past 120 years, dropping slightly from 34.5% in 1900 to 32.3% in 2020.” So, it depends on the time period which you look at. Over long time periods the percentage of Christians has declined.

            GW: In countries where populations decline and prosperity increases, Christianity declines in popularity. In Africa countries birth rates are still high and prosperity is still low, so we would expect to see fairly high rates of Christianity and Islam also in those countries.

            GW: Overall, the percentage of the world’s population which is nonreligious has increased over the last two millennia.

            GW: We now know that God does not exist. This has been proven. As the proofs are circulated, the incidence of Christianity will decline in further.

          2. Ehrman admits the fact that every extant gospel manuscript containing the beginnings of the 4 gospels has a title attributing writership to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John respectively. He asserts, without any supporting evidence, that these titles were added to the untitled original manuscripts and copies during the 2nd century.
            Since copies of the gospels were quickly spread all over the diverse Roman Empire, i.e., Palestine, the Middle East, Europe, and Africa, via foot or boat, without any mass communication or central church authority, how is it that 100% of the manuscripts’ titles attribute them to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, respectively? Ehrman’s assertion flies in the face of the facts and common sense!
            “Since they have rejected the word of the LORD, what wisdom is in them?”—Jeremiah 8:9 NRSV

  2. The parables of the mustard seed and the leaven (Matthew 13:31-33) illustrate the kingdom’s expansion from small beginnings.

  3. BA: Ehrman admits the fact that every extant gospel manuscript containing the beginnings of the 4 gospels has a title attributing writership to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John respectively.

    GW: I doubt this claim of yours. Please present quotes, citations, and links to support it.

    BA: He asserts, without any supporting evidence, that these titles were added to the untitled original manuscripts and copies during the 2nd century.

    GW: I have never known Ehrman to make any assertion without supporting evidence. I don’t believe you here. Some of the evidence might be that the Gospels were written about in the first, second, and third centuries without reference to any titles or authors.

    BA: Since copies of the gospels were quickly spread all over the diverse Roman Empire, i.e., Palestine, the Middle East, Europe, and Africa, via foot or boat, without any mass communication or central church authority, how is it that 100% of the manuscripts’ titles attribute them to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, respectively?

    GW: I disagree with your idea of “quickly spread.” You have no good evidence for that. It is likely we don’t have any of the original manuscripts. All of the oldest manuscripts we do have were probably written many generations, decades, or even centuries after the originals. It is likely that the titles were added much later than the original manuscripts were written. I believe this is what Ehrman asserts.

    BA: Ehrman’s assertion flies in the face of the facts and common sense!

    GW: False. Ehrman’s assertion is consistent with the facts and common sense.

    BA: “Since they have rejected the word of the LORD, what wisdom is in them?”—Jeremiah 8:9 NRSV

    GW: Here the word “Lord” refers to “God.” We know God does not exist. This has been proven. So Jeremiah was mistaken.

    GW: Here is a new version of one of my previous arguments:
    Argument Against the Existence of God Based on the Consequences of No Universal Communication: Gary Whittenberger, 8-9-2024
    1. Definition: God is 1) the hypothetical, unique, exclusive, supernatural, independent, spiritual, normally invisible person, conscious intelligent agent, or sentient entity. He is OMNI lasting (eternal), present, knowing, powerful, intelligent, rational, creative, and resilient (invincible). He is also OMNI loving, compassionate, and moral with respect to other persons. He fills the roles of cosmos designer and producer (creator), occasional interventionist in the world, and afterlife manager who decides the favorable or unfavorable disposition of human souls after they die. or 2) the greatest imaginable possible person (the “GIPPer”) who, if he existed, would possess all desirable traits to their highest degrees and no undesirable traits, and who would be worthy of our greatest respect, admiration, and worship.
    2. If God did exist, there would be only one religion.
    3. But there are hundreds or thousands of religions.
    4. If God did exist, there would be only one “holy book”.
    5. But there are hundreds of “holy books”.
    6. If God did exist, there would be no disagreements or conflicts about God.
    7. But there are billions of disagreements or conflicts about God.
    8. If God did exist, his communications would be objective.
    9. But many alleged communications by God are subjective.
    10. If God did exist, there would be no atheists.
    11. But there are millions of atheists.
    12. If God did exist, there would be no intermediaries for him.
    13. But there are thousands of alleged intermediaries for God.
    14. If God did exist, there would be no doubt that he exists.
    15. But doubt of God’s existence is widespread.
    16. If God did exist, then everyone now existing seven years or older would know that he exists.
    17. But millions do not know that God exists.
    18. If God did exist, then #2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 would be true because God would regularly communicate to all existing persons at the same time.
    19. But God has never communicated in this manner, and all the conditions mentioned in #3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 17 exist right now.
    20. Therefore, God does not exist.

    1. See Ehrman’s 5-31-2018 article, “Did the Gospels Originally Have Titles?” He claims they didn’t, but admits that all extant manuscripts containing the beginning of the gospels have titles.
      You need to read more carefully. The originals are not extant today. Copies of the originals were made and quickly distributed all over the Roman Empire.
      If the originals did not have titles, but titles were added “many generations, decades or centuries later,” as you assert, some of the manuscripts that have titles would have the names of others in addition to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

        1. There is NO agreement with your and Ehrman’s assertion that “the gospels did not originally have titles.” Since all extant manuscripts of the beginnings of the four gospels have titles attributing writership exclusively to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John respectively, there is no evidence that the originals did not have titles attributing writership to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com