Bede

Hi all,

This has come up a few times around the boards and I thought I'd give it a thread of its own. The question is:

Who wrote the Gospel of John and what evidence is there for your view?

Any comments on (in)dependence on the synoptics would also be welcome. As it is so different from the other Gospels it is prima facie independent so what reasons are there for thinking it is dependent on Mark or other works?

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Lance

Bede: I don't think we know exactly WHO wrote any gospel. The names if I remember correctly are attributed.

There are plenty of theories, but I'll go with "we don't know". And that goes for all the gospels.

None of the gospel accounts show any authorship until about 180 AD.

More correctly, the gospels are "given" authorship at this time. The writings themselves still remain anonymous.

I wrote the Gospel of John.

I expect a royalty check for the mention of my gospel in this thread.

John the Baptist wrote the gospel of John and the book or Revelation. John the Baptist was the sublime mind of Joseph the carpenter who wasn't really a carpenter but became Christ because carpenters make many things.

Just my opinion sir and that's all. I actually believe that John the baptist and Mary theotokos were the primary cause of the salvation of Joseph (see "The Crucifixion with Mary and John" by Masaccio).

Amos

1. Is there a point to this? Do we really know anything about the "John" who supposedly wrote this book? Isn't this rather like the old joke about the classical scholar who argued that the Iliad was not written by Homer, but by another blind Greek poet of the same name?

2. No one knows who wrote the Gospel according to John, or when, or where. And the same is true of the ones attributed to Matthew, Mark, and Luke. All we have are guesses and speculation. And there might well have been decades available for someone to alter it before multiple copies existed. We not only don't have the original manuscript, we probably don't even have copies of it. Or copies of copies. How can something be "forged" if it doesn't even claim to be by anyone in particular?) This kind of "evidence" would be laughed out of any court in the country. Who cares what the supposed sources of the supposed author were? Before getting into that, you might give us some reasons why you think that this anonymous work, which no one considers to be biographical, has any evidentiary value.

Well Bede, there are athiests out there like myself who know that all four gospels were pretty much intact by A.D. 50 and that three of them were written after A.D. 37. John had two authors with the one who finished up being called "John" for that very reason.
John was written first and edited last. The reason for this declaration is because of the story about "The raising of Lazarus" which is found in John. Lazarus was Simon Magus and this Simon was the other chief priest (aside from Caiaphas) whose citadel was located at Qumran. According to the Clementine Homilies Jonathan Annas replaced John the Baptist, then Simon Magus replaced Annas. The piecing together of the puzzle has it that Simon Magus replaced Jonathan Annas then Simon was involved in a zealous activity along with Theudas and Judas Iscariot and for this reason Simon (Lazarus) was defrocked and replaced by Annas. "Jesus Wept" because Simon, Theudas, and Iscariot refused to follow his mission of a peaceful rebellion (like the one pulled off successfully by Mahatma Ghandi) and Jesus knew, that by releasing Lazarus, he would be included in the group of zealots against Rome. When Jonathan Annas became the chief priest again he became hostile toward Jesus and that is the reason Jesus said, "Father, why have you forsaken me?". The chief priest who resided at Qumran (heaven) was known as "father" and "God" to his followers. Also, Caiaphas, as the the high priest, becomes Jonathan's father-in-law.

Simon Magus and St. Paul became bitter enemies with Simon remaining with the Eastern faction whereas the mission led by St. Paul became westernized and Jesus went with this group. Jesus survived the crucifixion and there is no way that the Christian religion would ever have materialized had the "cat been let out of the bag".

Who wrote John? read The Book that Jesus Wrote by Barbara Thiering. I would advise you to read this book yourself instead of getting on some fundie url knocking her for her writings. I am getting rather perturbed at everybody degradeing Thiering using second hand resources. I wonder, is there one fundie out there who writes his/her own stuff? Nomad has mentioned Thiering and gave out mis-information and Ish can not even spell her name.

Thanks, Offa

I have to differ with you here. I personally think John was edited first and written last.

Sorry, it's that whole e before i except after h thing. No, wait, that's not it...

Seriously though, Offa, pick up some other authors and you'll see Thiering's imaginative theories refuted. To understand better, you need to read more than Thiering and Josephus. I posted some quotes from other authors on the Dead Sea Scrolls thread if you're interested.

Ok, I think I've got Thiering's name right now, at least temporarily...

Ish

[This message has been edited by Ish (edited May 12, 2001).]

I generally agree with bd-from-kg, except to say that there are some who enjoy discussing who might have written the narrative attributed to a person named John. Speculation can be fun.

With respect to Barbara Thiering, I got knee-deep into Jesus and the Riddle of the Dead Sea Scrolls before deciding she is a commentator whose ideas are far too incredible to be taken seriously.

rodahi