Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gospel of john earlier research
The gospel of john analysis books
Analyzing the Gospel of John
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gospel of john earlier research
Who wrote the gospel of John
The question who wrote the gospel of John still remains open. For the longest time it was believed, that it was written by John, the son of Zebede and one of Jesus's most loved apostles.
Nowdays specialists are no longer sure, that the gospel was in fact written by apostle John. The facts, that defent this thesis are the following:
1. Excerpt Mark 10:39 can be interpreten in a way, that Zebede's son suffered martyrdom under the emperor Agripo in 44 AD. The gospel of John couldn't have been written before the year 44. The analysis of the gospel shows, that it was written in a longer period of time and is the result of a longer passing of the Good News.
2. The gospel of John doesn't contain any events, described by
…show more content…
Alomost certainly there is a »John's school,« that collected traditions under the name of John. The use of his name also surely contributed to the fact, that the gospel got accepted into the canon.
When was the gospel written
We already mentioned that it couln't have been written before the year 90. We also know, that it is not possible, that it was written after the year 130. The oldest found manuscript of the New testament is an excerpt from John's gospel. It was a copy and not the original and it way scientifically discovered, that it's origin is from the time around the year 130.
Today biblicists say, that the gospel was written sometime between the years 90 and 100 which defines the time od the third Christian generation.
Fathers of the church thought, that John's gospel was written in Ephesus, Asia Minor or in Antioch and Syria. Today's science of the Bible thinks, that it was likely written in Syria, which they confirm by using geographic data and with the fact, the the data about Judaism, written in the gospel, are extremely inaccurate, which means that the text couldn't have been written in Palestine. Based on the writings of Ignatus of Antioch, who lived in Syria, we can reach the conclusion, that he knew
He objects to a view which argues that John is speaking of God’s timing rather than ours by pointing out the concrete historicity of Revelation including churches and expressions used are “emphatic-declarative.” Regarding an objection which states that the events will ...
The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are the origin of nearly everything the Christian Church teaches about Jesus. The Gospels, in turn, serve as the scale or test of truth and authenticity of everything the church teaches about Jesus. It is said that the Gospels are the link between Jesus of Nazareth and the people of every age throughout history who have claimed to be his followers. Although the Gospels teach us about Jesus’ life they may not provide concrete evidence that what they speak of is true there are several other sources.
The Gospel of John, the last of the four gospels in the Bible, is a radical departure from the simple style of the synoptic gospels. It is the only one that does not use parables as a way of showing how Jesus taught, and is the only account of several events, including the raising of Lazarus and Jesus turning water into wine. While essentially the gospel is written anonymously, many scholars believe that it was written by the apostle John sometime between the years 85 and 95 CE in Ephesus. The basic story is that of a testimonial of one of the Apostles and his version of Jesus' ministry. It begins by telling of the divine origins of the birth of Jesus, then goes on to prove that He is the Son of God because of the miracles he performs and finally describes Jesus' death and resurrection.
The study of the Gospel of John can be viewed as distinct and separate from the study of any of the previous three synoptic gospels. The Fourth Gospel contains language and conceptions so distinct from the synoptics that scholars are often faced with the question of its historical origins. Originally, scholars believed the main source for the Gospel of John to be Jewish wisdom literature, Philo, the Hermetic books and the Mandaean writings, leading to the idea that John was the most Greek of the Gospels. However, with the discovery of the scrolls, scholars were now faced with source materials, remarkably similar to the concepts and language found in John, illuminating the literature as not only Jewish but Palestinian in origin. The discovery of the manuscripts opened up an entirely new interpretation of the gospel of John and a progressive understanding of its proper place within biblical scripture.
As we read John, we see that the stories center around the concept of belief. In the second chapter of John, we are told of the miracle that Jesus did at a wedding: turning water into wine. This miracle was told so that we may believe. “Jesus did this, the first of his signs, in Cana of Galilee, and revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him” (John 2:11). Through these miracles we are able to see signs of Jesus’s power and glory and how God’s presence is in him, leading many to believe in him. After this, Jesus went to Capernum, then Jerusalem to the temple, where he found people selling things
It is known to most that the gospels often differ from historical facts due to the writer of each gospel putting significant emphasis on particular actions and attributes of Jesus. Also a major part in this difference is the fact that the gospels were written 35-60 years after the death of Jesus and some of these memories have altered over time. Differences in conflicting evidence, writing to different communities, writing during a different time period, and with different intentions are all more reasons as to why these gospels conflict with historical facts. There is said to be six accounts that are subdivided into two separate traditions. These two traditions are those having to do with the appearance of Jesus in Galilee and the others are the appearances of Jesus to the eleven disciples in Jerusalem. These two traditions seem to not have any knowledge of one another and when the two were attempted to be combined into one tradition it was proven that this is not only impossible but it is unbeneficial.
One of the main characteristics of the gospel of Mark is it’s length. Mark is much shorter than Matthew and Luke, but what it lacks in quantity, it makes up for in quality. The author of Mark does not slow down the gospel story and makes sure that only important and relevant details are included. When Mark is compared with Matthew and Luke, it becomes obvious to see what Mark has eliminated. The author’s omission of Jesus’ birth, lineage, resurrection, and ascension denote careful planning and purpose in the gospel of Mark.
In the gospels of Mark and John, both showed a vivid portrait of Jesus in their writing. Mark’s gospel describes much more of Jesus' life, miracles, and parables as suffering servant. However, John’s gospel was written to convince people to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God. Nonetheless, both John and Mark present many of the crucial events of Jesus' life, including his trial, crucifixion, and resurrection.
The New Testament is a collection of different spiritual literary works, which includes the Gospels, a history of early church, the epistles of Paul, other epistles and apocalypse. Without deeply thinking or researching of the chronological order of the Gospels, a reader should not have problem to observe that the Gospels begin with the Gospel of Matthew, and to notice that there are many common areas, including content and literary characteristics, among the first three Gospels, the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
“Christianity Begins with the starling statement that the center of human reality is love” the central issue here is what love is, how the gospel of John brings to the Johnnie community? And how do we understand the Word “Love” and its reality. Obviously John portrays love as synonymous to Jesus the Son of God
The contents of the Bible have dealt with controversy in regards to its inerrancy since publication, and will surely continue to. Historians progress to learn more about biblical stories in order to provide evidence for the reliability of information. Many believers today understand that not everything in the Bible has been factually proven. An outstanding topic many scholars pay attention to lies within the four gospels. The three synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, replay essentially the same story with minor inconsistencies, while John portrays Jesus in an entirely different way. The differences in each gospel are due to how each gospel entertains different portrayals of the life and understanding of Jesus himself, in order to persuade
Mark was Peter's son (I Peter 5:13, possibly spiritual son), who wrote down what Peter said about who Jesus was, what He did, where He went and what happened; Mark's gospel is therefore Peter's account, an eye-witness account, written down by Mark.
Traditionally, John the apostle, the son of Zebedee, is seen as the author of Revelation. He is clearly a well-known and recognized teacher in the church of Western Asia Minor, part of the reason he could address such a letter of significance to these churches. Another possible author, John of Patmos, is supposed by some critics because of the drastic stylistic difference between the four NT books (John, 1, 2, and 3 John) and the book of Revelation. John in Revelation promotes himself as a recorder of this apocalypse, not necessarily as the “apostle that Jesus loved”, causing some to affirm John of Patmos as the author. The third author, suggested by some, is another “John” altogether, possibly a high ranking member or elder of the early
Chronologically speaking, the Gospels were all written while people, other than Christians, who had been eyewitnesses to the life of Christ were still alive. For the most part, the non-Christian eyewitnesses were opponents of the faith. The resulting effect of this would be the necessity for the disciples to relate the life of Christ accurately due to the fact that any inaccuracies would have allowed opponents to discredit Christianity right from the beginning (McDowell 52-53). The third test to prove historical reliability is that of exterior evidence. Gottschalk defines external evidence as "conformity or agreement with other known historical or scientific facts.(McDowell 54)." Other writers are a great source of external evidence.
The New Testament teaches about who Jesus is and what he did on the earth. John wrote the last of the four gospels which recount Jesus’ life and what is to come. The gospel of John is somewhat different from the other three gospels, in that it is more symbolic and less concrete. For example, John expresses Jesus as the Passover Lamb when Matthew, Mark, and Luke do not. This gospel is showing that Christianity is moving away from the long-practiced Jewish traditions. John’s gospel can be laid out into four parts: the prologue or the incarnate word, signs of the Messiah with teachings about life in him, the farewell teaching and the passion narrative, and the epilogue or the roles of Peter and of the disciple whom Jesus loved. The Gospel of John is arguably the most