Johns Gospel Authorship and Dating

GCE A Level (AS)

St John’s Gospel

Authorship & Dating

Key Point Quote or view of ScholarIssues of authorship and dating are closely connected with debate surrounding the purpose of writing(which is studied at A2).

How can we answer the question of who wrote the 4th Gospel and when?

a. The Title of the Book – Was thisbook always known as “John’s” Gospel?

b. External Evidence ie. What otherwritten documents, outside the 4th Gospel, discuss who the author was?

c. Internal Evidence i.e. What clues do we have in the Gospel itself?

We must also consider:

Who was the Apostle John

Who else could have written this Gospel if it was not John?

R Brown in his introduction to his commentary identifies 3 reasons why scholars have questioned the unitary authorship of the Fourth Gospel:1. There are differences in Greek style in the Gospel.Small stylistic details are evident in ch.21 and the prologue (1.1-18) has a “carefully constructed interlocking poetic pattern found but rarely in the Gospelproper. Moreover the Prologue employs important theological terms not found elsewhere in the Gospel…” (e.g. Word, grace and fulness).2. There are breaks and inconsistencies in sequence.Brown acknowledges 20.30 & 21.25, but comments on passageswhich show great editorial care (ch9 & 18-19) whilst others lack care and organisation (ch7-8). He also notes:Sudden changes in location of events : 14.31, but there isa continued discourse until 18.1 : 20.30-31 appears to bethe natural conclusion of the book : Two conclusions to public ministry in 10.40-42 & 12.37-43 : Compare knowledge of John’s disciples in 1.29f & 3.26f : See 4.54 yet 2.11 & 23. (Jerusalem signs are not acknowledged) : Compare 13.36 & 14.5 with 16.5 : In ch.3 Jerusalem is in mid-Judea but note 3.22.3. There are repetitions in the discourses which may be two traditions woven together (compare 5.19-25 with 5.26-30, and 6.35-50 with 6.51-58, also 14.1-31 and 16.4-33), and passages that do not belong to their context (the words of Jn3.31-36 appear to be John’s words but are more appropriately from Jesus, and 7.44-50 follows 7.36!).

Theme: Authorship & Dating (Page 1)

When was it written and does this give any clues as to who the author could be?

Where was it written and does it support any textual evidencein John’s Gospel or external evidence?

Brown suggests 3 possible explanations: Accidental displacement; Multiple source material; or, Multiple editions. Brown prefers a 5-stage process: 1. Original traditional material (various sources)2. Developed traditions in Johannine pattern3. First draft of Gospel (by the evangelist)4. Re-edit of Gospel (by the evangelist)5. Final edit by someone other than the evangelist.

Key Point Quote or view of ScholarWho was the Apostle John?

Son of Zebedee

Brother of James (sons of thunder: Mark 3:17)

A fisherman from Galilee.

One tradition claims John was martyred with his brother James (4 years after death of Jesus), cf. Acts 12:2. The basis of this beliefis Mark 10:39. Supporters of this say that Mark included his comment because their death was already common knowledge. If this is true then John died before 70AD and couldnot be the author.

Another tradition by Iranaeus (see below) suggests John died as an old man at Ephesus, who lived until the time of Trajan (98-117AD).

The Title of the Book.

There is no Manuscript (MSS) evidence of any other title for thisGospel.

John Marsh states regarding authorship and dating “…there are divergent judgements, sometimes put forward with great assurance; yet none can claim certainty…The best a commentator can do is to state the case for and against some of the chief solutions…and leave the reader largely to make up his own mind.”

L Morris criticises the tradition that John was martyred with his brother James. This is not mentioned in Acts 12 and the earliest confirmed record of this belief is not until 5th Century.

Daniel Wallace “As with the other Gospels, no MSS which


The two earliest papyri discovered are dated c.200AD.

These MSS are also from very different origins, which suggest that they have both come from a previous MSS tradition which will be3 or 4 textual generations earlier.

contains John’s Gospel affirm authorship by anyone other than John.”

Key Point Quote or view of ScholarExternal Evidence in favour of John:

Iranaeus (c.130-200AD) Bishop of Lyons,wrote in his book ‘Against Heresies’, “And all the elders that associated with John, the disciple of the Lord bear witness that John delivered [the Gospel] to them.” He claims he was told this by Polycarp (c.69-155AD) who tradition says was converted to Christianity and made Bishop by John.

Polycrates (late 2nd Century) wrote in aletter to Vector, Bishop of Rome, confirming that the Gospel was written by “…John, who reclined on the breast of the Lord, was a witness and a teacher.”

The Muratorian Fragment is a MSS dated c.170AD. In it a list of books regarded as Holy Scripture is listed, including a statement that John approved the writing of the fourth Gospel. It states that John was given the commission to write this Gospel after Andrew received a vision indicating John would do this.

Historical Probability – All the patristic writers (Church Fathers) after Iranaeus unanimously agree that the author was John the Apostle e.g.

CK Barrett criticises this tradition from Iranaeus because nowhere in the NT does it say John the Apostle went to Ephesus, neither did any of the early Christian writers mention this even though they had opportunity to do so. Also, If Iranaeus iscorrect then John would have been about 90 years old when Trajan began his reign. Would John’s memory have been so clear and reliable?

JAT Robinson suggests that John may have written the core of the Gospel, but that the Prologue and the last chapter have beenadded at a later date.

Tasker suggests that even if John was not the actual author he may have told his story to another who wrote it down.

Critics of Johannine authorship point out that it was in the interests of the Early


Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen.

Clement of Alexandria (150-215AD) writes that John, “urged by his friendsand inspired by the Holy Spirit, composed a spiritual Gospel.”

Anti-Marcion Prologue written by Papias, Bishop of Hieroplis, affirms that John was the author, but there is some confusion over the identity of this “John”.

Church Fathers to affirm John’s authorship because they were fighting against heresiesabout Jesus and John’s Gospel gave important support to traditional Christian doctrine.

Key Point Quote or view of ScholarTheme: Authorship & Dating (Page 4)

External Evidence against John

Eusebius, an early Christian historian believed Papias, identified two John’s at Ephesus: John the Apostle and John the Elder. Dionysius of Alexandria (who died c.265AD) said there were 2 tombs in Ephesus thought to be the tomb of John. Critics of the traditional view conclude the Elder is a more likely author because:1. He would have lived through the reign of Trajan

2. The 2nd & 3rd letters of John in the NT are written by ‘the Elder’

Internal Evidence for John the Apostle

Eye-Witness statements: there are 4 main statements which suggest the author was physical present at the events being written about:

1. The Last Supper is a very intimate event and contains detailed information (cf. 13:4, 24)

2. The ‘other’ disciple was allowed into a private questioning by the High Priest whilst Peter had to stay outside (18.16). in v.19-24 we are

S Smalley explains that Papias was careful totrace the source of all his traditions back to the Apostles, “…for he regarded the living tradition as more profitable than the written.” In his writings their were 2 lists both mentioning John, one listed with the Apostles the other “the elder”. Smalley argues that Eusebius misunderstood Papias and that these were the same person, one listing the apostles who haddied, the other list is the elders at Ephesus. He points out that in the same document papias uses the phrase elders of theapostles! He concludes, “We do not have to follow Eusebius, and on this flimsy basis invent a second (elder) John…”

Supporters of the Apostle John also point outthat the 1st letter of John (which is most like the Gospel) does not claim to be writtenby the Elder, so this difference of style appears to support the Apostolic authorship claim.

Westcott gave 5 evidences for Johannine authorship:1. He was a Jew – he knew detailed Jewish beliefs and customs

2. He was a Palestinian Jew – he knew details ofJacobs well, the geography of the journey from Canaan to Capernaum, and he

told what happened behind closed doors.

3. In ch 19 small details of information are included e.g. 19:13

4. The author mentions that exactly 153 fish were caught (21:11)

distinguishes between Bethany and ‘Bethany beyond the Jordan’.

3. He was an eye-witness4. He was an Apostle – he knew intimate detailsof what happened among the disciples.

5. He was John – Why else is John’s name omitted? Also he use the name John of ‘theBaptist’ so he does not identify his own name to avoid confusion.

Key Point Quote or view of Scholar

Jewish Characteristics & knowledge of Jewish traditions:1. Constant references to Jewish Feasts2. Knowledge of geography (5:2)3. Knowledge of home rituals (2:6)

In .21:24 the disciple following behind Jesus claims to be the author.

The anonymous disciple whom Jesus loved narrows the options to four unnamed disciples. Given the significance of John in the Synoptics (along with Peter and James they formed an inner circle ofdisciples who were sometimes selected byJesus for special insight e.g. the transfiguration), it seems very surprising that John is not mentioned ifit was one of the other unnamed disciples.

Internal Evidence against the Apostle John:

Changes to historical information e.g. the cleansing of the Temple in Ch 2

The Sea of Galilee is also called the Sea of Tiberius – but this name was not

D Guthrie says that John’s use of the phrase ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved’ is not a noteof arrogance or superiority but of humility. Jesus’ love for all people is a key theme in the Gospel and the 1st Epistle.

Re: Temple cleansing - This assumes the Synoptic record is more reliable or that it did not occur on two separate occasions.

Can we know for certain when the new name forthe Sea of Galilee was first used?


known till much later after the time of Jesus.

Contradictions: In 18:13 & 24 the High Priest is Caiaphas but in 18:19 it is Annas!

John the Apostle was a fisherman, is it likely that he would have known the HighPriest to gain access to the inner court, and some scholars also doubt whether he would have had the education to write such a Gospel.

In Acts 4 Luke writes that the Jewish leaderswere amazed at Peter and John’s knowledge since they were unschooled! This suggests John could have had the necessary skill and knowledge.


If not John the Apostle who else could itbe?

1. John the Elder – see Papias (above)

2. Lazarus – There is an anonymous disciple called “The disciple whom Jesus loved” (13:23). Lazarus is referred to by the disciples as “the one you love” in 11:3.

3. John Mark – he fits the profile because he lived in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus and being younger than the apostle allows for a later dating. He also comes from a Priestly family which would have given him access to the High Priest in ch.18.

4. A community Authorship – in 1:14 and 3:11 the use of “we” suggests multiple witnesses rather than the ‘royal’ use of the word. Also in 21:24 the voice

There is no early Church writings or evidence to support the belief that the4th Gospel was writtenby John the Elder, Lazarus, or Nicodemus (as others have also suggested).

S Smalley points out that the beloved disciple could be symbolic of the ‘ideal disciple’. However, he disputes this idea because there are so few references to this disciple, and when it is mentioned it has a very clear historical emphasis.

There is no textual evidence to support John Markas the author, and even he would be getting old by the time of Trajan (80 years).

Raymond Brown suggest that we should not look forone author, but the writer was reflecting the life and experiences of the Johannine community.

Rudolph Bultmann suggests that a later redactor (editor) compiled the work of the community into the finished edition. As such it reflects the experiences of the community which had moved awayfrom Judaism and experienced the oppression and rejection of traditional Jews.

S Smalley recognises the difficulty in


of the community appears to confirm themessage of John’s Gospel.

identifying who the author of the Gospel was. Buthe concludes, “the beloved disciple was very probably John the Apostle…but evidently he was not the final redactor of that tradition.” He continues, “John the Apostle…was responsible for preserving the tradition underlying John, but that he and the fourth evangelist(s) were not the same people.”

When was the Gospel written?

Arguments in support of an early date

Given significant differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics suggest that the author did not have access to the otherGospels. This would also make the 4th Gospel more historically reliable.

Messianic fervour in 6:15 would have diedout after the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.

If John was martyred with his brother he could still have written the core of the Gospel and a later editor added the Prologue and Ch.21.

The Gospel appears to be written originally in Aramaic and translated at a later date into Greek.

Arguments in support of Late 1 st Century

Most ancient MSS agree that this was the last of the 4 Gospels to be written. If it was the Apostle then it must be no later than 100AD.

JAT Robinson proposed a date as early as 50AD. He suggested that no Apostle would useanother persons record of events but would draw on their own experiences.

CH Dodd suggests that the author was presenting an independent ancient Palestiniantradition. This means that the Gospel presents important detail in our quest to form an historical reconstruction of the Ministry of Jesus behind the Gospel traditions.

Other scholars argue that John’s style is highly reflective, with the intention of trying to help later readers identify with events at the time of Jesus, otherwise unknown to them.

CF Burney highlights imperfections in the Greek translation which appear clumsy. He believes this is because translating from Aramaic to Greek posed difficulties for a later translator. Based on this he argues for an early date.

Dr Colwell has since disputed Burney’s claim and shown that these alleged imperfections were characteristic of Greek at that time.

J Marsh states that if the Iranaeus traditionis correct and also the tradition that John lived until the time of Trajan, then the Gospel must have been written before 117AD.

Key Point Quote or view of Scholar The earliest MSS fragment containing

portions of John 18:31-38 (known as P.457) is dated early 2nd Century, it must therefore have been in circulation before this date. Another papyrus (Egerton Papyrus 2) contains similarities to verses from Jn.5, 7, 8, 9 & 10

In 9:22 & 16:2 it talks of Christians beingput out of the synagogue for their faith inJesus. Between 85-90AD Jewish-Christian talks under the leadership of Rabbi Gamaliel led to the Synagogue Benediction i.e. a formal excommunication of all those dissenting from Judaism.

Arguments in support of a 2 nd Century Date

There is some suggestion that the Gospel was used by 2nd Century Gnostics. There aresimilarities between Gnostic beliefs & writings (dated 150AD) and those found in the Gospel.

There is no direct reference to the 4th Gospel before 150AD.

Where was the Gospel written from?

Ephesus – The Capital of the Roman Province

Clement of Alexandria (c.212AD) states thatJohn was the last Gospel to be written.

Marsh points out the need for caution when trying to date John using papyrus MSS. He says similarities between the Egerton Papyrus and John have 3 possible explanations:1. The Papyrus used John2. John used the Papyrus3. They both drew information from another source.

S Smalley is sympathetic to the idea that John may have had some involvement in the early stages of the Gospel – possible finish date c90AD,

CK Barrett is not convinced at John’s involvement, therefore concludes c.100AD ismore probable.

R Bultmann supported the possible links between the 4th Gospel and Gnosticism arguing that John may have been a “proto-Gnostic’ i.e. a fore-runner of Gnostic beliefs. This theory has now largely been discredited because Gnosticism is so hard to define and it is possible to understand


of Asia. A base for Paul’s missionary journeys and there was a thriving Christiancommunity there. Consider also Jewish andGreek mix + disciples of John the Baptist (cf Acts 19)

Antioch – Ephraim Syrus (306-370AD) suggests this was the home of the Gospel, the 3rd city of the Roman Empire which also had Jewish/Greek mix.

the authors intended purpose without reference to Gnosticism.

J Marsh concludes, “the identity of the author must remain,

like that of the beloved disciple,wrapped in anonymity.”

Johns Gospel Authorship and Dating

Documents

Transcript of Johns Gospel Authorship and Dating