#6 The Gospel of John Overview

welcome to video lecture number five the Gospel of John and overview let's start by discussing authorship historically there were two different opinions about who wrote the Gospel the majority opinion was that it was John the Apostle who wrote the Gospel a minority opinion was that it was John the Elder as somebody other than John the Apostle the traditional view supported by early church fathers such as irenaeus and terellian holds that John the Apostle one of the 12 disciples of Jesus is the primary author of The Gospel this view is based on an association between the

Beloved disciple mentioned in the gospels and John the Apostle early Christian writings claim that John lived to an old age and wrote the Gospel in Ephesus reflecting his firsthand knowledge of Jesus's life and Ministry but in the early church there was a different perspective that John the Elder might have been the writer a minority tradition notably from papus suggests that another John known as John the Elder could have been the author this figure distinct from John the Apostle was believed to be an early Christian leader with close ties to the Johan Community or that community

that was built around the Apostle John papius the second century Bishop mentions John the Elder as one of the sources for information about Jesus this view proposes that John the Elder might have been an ey witnessed to some of the events in Jesus's life and a leader with who contributed to the gospel's formation this was the particular view for most of Christian history until the historical critical period came and a new view was established that of the Johan School the historical critical approach which developed in modern scholarship suggests that the Gospel of John may have

been produced by a johanning school or Community rather than a single individual this view posits that followers of John the Apostle or the Elder could have developed and shaped the gospel over time incorporating theological Reflections and oral Traditions into the text the gospel in this Theory reflects the collective thought of a group of writers rather than the solitary work of one eyewitness in recent opinion there's been a shift back to more ancient understanding of the writer of John primarily it's based in a perceived Unity of the book and eyewitness accounts in the book in recent

scholarship there has been a renewed focus on the unity of the gospel and the presence of eyewitness accounts within the text Scholars such as Richard bman argue that the gospel is a coherent whole reflecting the memories and accounts of someone who personally witnessed the events described rather than being a collection of thoughts written by a community if this latter had been the case there would have been more disjointed and a lack of free flow of thought uh there is some belief that it was probably John the Elder if this view is correct that was the

one that collected all these thoughts he could have been an eyewitness perhaps walking in the time of Christ certainly be a disciple of John the Apostle and it could be that he founded the johw Henning school perhaps as a disciple of John the Apostle a clear depiction of the argument of Martin hangle the johanning question maybe develops this idea some Scholars propose that John the Elder may have been this eyewitness and potentially the founder of that school that was proposed the johanning school as an important early Christian figure John the Elder could have provided the

foundational witness to the gospel's content even if later editors or Disciples of his shaped the final form of the text the idea would be that he gave the eyewitness account he wrote it all out and then someone came along later and kind of put the final in final touches on it in this view uh John the Elder might have been a disciple of John the Apostle transmitting and interpreting his teachings into this new community the Johan name Community this is the view of CK Barrett Martin Hingle and Richard Bachman you can find some of the

work in that book I quoted a moment ago called the Johan name question those that suggest it was the Apostle John who wrote it with possible editing which is my perspective by the way would point to several different things for example in John chap 21 verse 24 the text says we know that his testimony is true compare the we to I suppose in just a few verses earlier you see in John CH 21: 25 uh it says that I suppose indicating that there is a eyewitness account of things versus in verse 24 where it says

we trust his testimony this view suggests that John the Apostle was the prim AR author but editors were involved in completing or polishing the gospel this idea partly is based on passages such as the ones I mentioned John 21:24 where the author says we know that his testimony is true the shift from he to we in the passage suggests that an editorial group could have endorsed the gospel's content and affirmed its truth additionally that final verse CH 21:25 which which begins with I suppose implies a more reflective editorial voice meaning that they're thinking through the

consequences of what is written another hint that might have helped us to understand that is found in chapter 21 but now in verse one where we see it talks about Jesus walking at the Sea of tiberias a a term that's used for the Sea of Galilee but later in the first century we see that the term Sea of Galilee which is referred to as the sea of Tiberius in chapter 6 verse1 is written differently so in chapter 6 it's referred to as the Sea of Galilee in chapter 21 it's referred to as the sea of

tiberias the use of the Sea of tiberias in relation to this passage uh might suggest that the earlier reference to the Sea of Galilee which is the Sea of tiberias in John chapter 6 provides important Clues regarding to the authorship and dating of the Gospel the historical context of the name sea of tiberias is that the Sea of Galilee historically was known by that name in the Old Testament and in the inter uh Testament periods and in the synoptic gospels where was also referred to as the sea of tiberias in Roman times named after the

city of tiberias which was founded by Herod Antipas around the year 20 ad in honor of the Roman Emperor tiberias by the time of the writing of the Gospel of John's composition the name had become more common the name sea of tiberias had become more common than the Sea of Galilee especially in romanized areas the use of the Sea of of Tiberia suggests that the gospel was written after the region had undergone um a significant Roman influence likely in the latter part of the first century this change in terminology could indicate that the author or

perhaps the final editor was writing for a broader audience familiar with the romanized name which might have been in more common especially after the destruction of Jerusalem in ad70 the distinction between the two Seas the Sea of Galilee and the Sea of tiberias that we saw earlier in John chapter 6 uh seems to suggest that there's an editorial refinement as the latter passage assumes that the the audience is already familiar with the romanized name this thus the use of the Sea of tiberias helped Scholars to narrow down the time frame for the gospel's composition to

the late 1 century and provides insight into the cultural and geographical understandings around the lake as a result it supports the theory of the editorial hand as later references to the Sea reflect more more Roman influence possibly adding to the editor's familiarity with the romanization in other words that would fit an understanding that the Apostle wrote the Gospel and then at the very end it was edited by perhaps John the elder or by the joh Hunning School let's look at the structure of the Gospel of John the structure that I provide for you is one

that I've compiled from several different authors such as kostenberger Kellum and quarrels in the Cradle across from the crown uh Morris's commentary in the new international critical uh commentary of the New Testament borer in The Knack and in blomberg's Craig blomberg's commentary on the Gospel of John I see that John breaks down in the following format chapter 1 uh verses 1- 51 is an introductory testimony about who Jesus is and there's a break at verse 18 that we move from a little bit more of a metan narrative understanding of who Jesus is to a more

concrete eyewitness account of who Jesus is then we see in chapter two up through the end of chapter 11 testimony of signs and discourses the first part of that chapters 2 3 and four uh deal with Jesus and Jewish institutions chapters 5 through 10 particularly I deal with Jesus and Jewish festivals and then chapter 11 deals with Jesus as the resurrection and the life now we see a a a shift in the book beginning in chapter 12 which deals with the testimony of death and Resurrection beginning in chapter 12 we see the actions in preparation

for the death that include the anointing and entry of Jerusalem in chapter 13-1 17 there's the teaching the discourse section if you will in preparation for death and then chapters 18- 20 there are the events surrounding Jesus's death finally chapter 21 is the closing or concluding testimony so it's as if this is a a debate or an argument and you have an opening testimony two main points one of which deals with the signs and discourses of Jesus the other of which deals with the death and resurrection of Jesus one are the teachings or the things

that point to who he is as the Son of God the other is the action that he accomplished as the Son of God and then with a final concluding testimony let's look at the phrase the Gospel of John obviously the Greek word for gospel which is euangelion uh deres from the word of meaning messenger or one who brings good news the term euangelion thus carries foundational meaning of providing good news news the verb form to evangelize means to announce the good news while the noun form is used in all three of the synoptic gospels Matthew

Mark Luke as well as in the gospel in the book of Acts in Paul's letters in First Peter and in the Book of Revelation the verb form uh the the term never appears in the Gospel of John or the Johan Epistles that's a little peculiar but it may help us to understand how John is operating at a different level than the other gospels let's look at the theological themes of the Gospel of John the first is that Jesus as the word the Lamb of God and the Messianic Son of God Jesus as the word of

God the logos beginning in John 1: 1 John introduces Jesus as Halos which is the Greek word for word it is a concept with deep philosophical and Theological Roots the term conveys the idea of divine reason order and creative Force several backgrounds contribute to John's use of the Gospel to John's use of the word logos the first is the stoic understanding of logos that we see pantheism in which in stoic philosophy the logos was considered the rational principle that permeates and sustains the entire universe often thought of as the world Soul if you will or

the animating force of the universe Pho of Alexandria a helenistic Jewish philosopher synthesized the Greek philosophy with Jewish theology interpreting logos the word as a mediator between God and the World Mandan thought uh a gnostic religious sect saw the logos as a Heavenly redeeming figure the tarum or Aramaic traditions of the Hebrew Bible uh use the term mimra which is has the same meaning it's the word word to refer to God's power his creative word seen as an extension of God's president uh God's presence Hebrew scripture and Jewish literature suggest that the word of God

is God's spoken power bringing creation into existence we see in Genesis chapter 1 and delivering God's commands to his people for example written about in Isaiah chapter 55 uh 10- 11 and of course all throughout the Old Testament John's use of logos Bridges these rich Traditions to identify Jesus as both the creative power and and divine presence let's see how John uses the phrase Jesus as the Lamb of God starting in John 1: 29 see it in verse 36 where John the Baptist refers to Jesus as the Lamb of God an image that evokes the

Passover Lamb from Exodus 12 the Passover Lamb was sacrificed to spare the Israelites from judgment and by app applying the image to Jesus John links Jesus's sacrificial death to the ultimate deliverance from sin and death theologically this positions Jesus as the Fulfillment of the Old Testament sacrificial system in Jewish worship highlighting the substitutionary atonement nature of his work for the sins of the world John also presents Jesus as the phrase the Son of God for example in John 3:17 John presents Jesus as the Messianic Son of God sent by the father to bring Salvation to

the world the idea of shal or shalak as a Hebrew term plays a key role here in Jewish custom a shalak was a legal representative who carried the full authority of the one who sent him this concept blurs the distinction between the siner in this case God and the one who has sent in this case Jesus emphasizing Jesus's Divine Authority and his role as God's ultimate agent in the world Jesus embodies the father's will acting as a visible res representation of God's presence and Mission the Gospel of John deals a lot with signs and wonders

Miracles we're going to deal with these a little bit more as we get to the later uh videos that talk about them but I do want to touch on them here in the Gospel of John these signs are significant miraculous events that point to Jesus's Divine identity and Mission and while we'll explore these later it's important to note that each of these signs not only demonstrates Jesus's power but also serves as a revelation of his identity as the Messiah and the Son of God another important theme in the Gospel of John is that the New

Covenant Community and John's portrayal of the Jews the idea that John does not teach that the church replaced Israel but instead identifies Jesus as Israel's replacement reflects a critical aspect of Johan theology the church doesn't replace Israel Jesus replaces Israel rather than envisioning the church as a new Israel John sees Jesus himself as the Fulfillment of Israel's history Jesus embodies the true Israel fulfilling its covenants prophecies and purposes this interpretation shifts the focus from the nation to the person of Jesus making the response to him the decisive factor in belonging within God's people this is

seen in John's portrayal of Jesus as the Fulfillment of Jewish festivals and traditions such as the Passover or with the Tabernacle another important theme in the Gospel of John is God the father in John 1: 18 we encounter a textual variant that's very interesting concerning whether Jesus is described as the only begotten son or the only begotten God this variant touches on key theological debates regarding the nature of Jesus's relationship ship with the Father the dominant reading points to Jesus as the unique revealer of the father's nature underscoring the intimate relationship between God the Father

and Jesus the son another important theme in the Gospel of John is that he have salvation and substitutionary atonement one of John's Key theological emphases is on Jesus's mission to give life a mission sent entered on the concept of substitutionary atonement in John 3:16 and verse 17 God's purpose in sending Jesus to the Earth is for salvation not condemnation the Son of God uh is found in the Gospel of John repeatedly uh as underscoring the work of Jesus as Savior the Gospel of John therefore underscores that Jesus is dead was not just an example of

love so for us to follow but it was an act of substitution in which Jesus Took on the penalty of sin for all believers to receive eternal life Jesus gives life in abundance he says in John chap 10 verse 10 and this life comes to the sacrificial death of Jesus as the Lamb of God the Holy Spirit plays an important role in The Gospel of John in John chapter 2 vers 22 Jesus breathes on his disciples and says receive the holy spirit this act of breathing on them recalls Genesis 2:7 where God breathes life into

Adam making him a living being in John Jesus's act symbolizes the imparting of a new spiritual life to the disciples empowered by the holy spirit this intimate connection between between uh the new uh spirit and uh God helps the hold the disciples to be transformed and make the Believers uh new creatures in Christ the word used in John 20:22 links this event to the Act of Creation where God breathes life God is intending to make his followers New Creations new creatures and this is done through the power of the Holy Spirit Jesus also fulfills in

the Gospel of John a typology of the Jewish feasts and Sacred Space by that I mean this John consistently portrays Jesus as the Fulfillment of Jewish typology particularly in the relationship to the Jewish feasts and the Sacred Space such as the Tabernacle and later the temple Jesus is depicted as the true Passover Lamb in John 1: 29 as the Fulfillment of the Feast of Tabernacles in John 7: 37-39 and the true bread of life replacing the Mana from heaven in John chapter 6 Jesus also redefines sacred Place Sacred Space declaring that his body would be

the true temple in John chapter 2 verses 19- 21 thus indicating that God's presence now dwells in him not in the temple this leads us to an understanding of a realized eschatology John's gospel is notable for its emphasizes for his emphasis on this realized eschatology the idea that eternal life is not merely some future promise but it's a present reality for John eternal life begins in the present when individuals believe in Jesus passages like John 3:18 John 5:24 and John 12:31 describe judgment and eternal life as current realities based on one's response to Jesus this

already not yet understanding of the Gospel there's a tension in that is a key feature in John's testimony eternal life is characterized by Abundant Life in the present life in John 10:10 it's characterized by knowing god intimately in John 17:3 and having a future home in the resurrection in John 6 verse 40 why is John different than the synoptic gospels the real question should be why are they so similar it is natural for different authors to practice to produce different styles of Works um the core carigma seems to be shared between John and then Matthew

Mark and Luke there's a death of Jesus that pays for the sins there's teachings uh most of them are very similar there's travels uh throughout the land that focuses eventually on Jerusalem there's conflict with religious leaders and all of them present Jesus as more than just a prophet the synoptic gospels emphasize one trip to Jerusalem thus they leave out de details not related to those other trips such as Lazarus which John covers at numerous uh locations John seems to explain something that only someone familiar with the synoptic gospels would need additional explanation for example in

mark 14: 19 Jesus refers to numerous times uh taught in the temple courts without being arrested but this is the only time in the gospel of Mark that he visits the temple John indicates several V visits to Jerusalem and therefore it may be that John is explaining some details in Mark that Mark just leaves out again in Mark 15: 1-3 Mark does not explain why Jesus is passed from the Sanhedrin to pilate uh John 18:31 explains that only Rome has the authority to execute they have uh different audiences which may explain why they're a little

bit different the Sadducees would have been meaningless to Asian Gentile Christians to whom John was writing so he doesn't deal a lot with the Gentiles with the Sadducees John as an opposer to previous thought might have been more conscious to be historically accurate in terms of traditional Greco Roman historiography he's trying to be a little bit more precise with his historiography Jesus's sermons have 145 words that are not paralleled in jawning narrative or epistle writing this would suggest likely that there was an effort to quote Jesus accurately I believe that John was trying to capture

the very words of Jesus and his unique use of these words seem to S suggest that John contains material that remains unclear for the original audience and when she often does not clarify via an aside this suggests that John kept original pericopes intact even before their full significance was understood he wrote down what he heard even if he didn't fully explain that elsewise he would have sought to elucidate the meaning in these texts John stays clear of Parables because they're not helenistic and uh exorcism or excessive Miracles because there is a risk of misinterpretation due

to Greek culture both of which are featured in the synoptics so this might explain why John's writings are a little bit different than the synoptic gospels Pho considers these Divine powers in their totality also treating them in a single independent being which he designates the logos one last thought is the idea of John for readers of Mark Richard Bachman's John for readers of Mark explores how the gospel El of John complements the gospel of Mark providing a deeper theological reflection for readers familiar with Mark rather than competing with Mark John assumes knowledge of its narrative

and expands on key themes if I can make it simpler this is the idea the reason that John does not write what's in Mark is because he had a copy of the Gospel of Mark and understood that whoever else had that copy did not need him to repeat the words of Mark and so bam makes this interesting analysis where he takes the gospel of Mark and the Gospel of John and lay them by each other and it seems to appear that where Mark starts to write and then stops and then skips some time and starts

to write something else John fills in that space he writes in the spaces that Mark leaves out and it seems then that the Gospel of John was where where John took the gospel of Mark and just filled in the empty spaces with a few uh places where there was some corresponding information that was shared such as the passion because the story of Jesus doesn't make sense without the passion uh let's look at how this might fit together beginning first with the narrative Styles Mark is fast-paced focused on Jesus's actions and his role as the suffering

servant with little theological explanation John is more reflective emphasizing the significance of the events through theological discourses and focusing on Jesus's divine nature so in the narrative style John is explaining some of Mark's action let's look at Jesus's identity Mark's hidden Messiah is where Jesus as the Messiah is gradually revealed often misunderstood by his disciples John opens with declaration that Jesus is clearly identified ifed as the word the Son of God and the Messiah from the beginning with no ambiguity he says this in contrast to mark because Mark's already been writing in his own point

of view let's look at Miracles and signs Mark's Miracles are acts of authority and compassion with less theological explanation John's signs are that Miracles serve as signs pointing to Jesus as the Divine uh nature and invite iting belief into him let's look at how the two deal with narrative compliments John compliments Mark by com by providing theological depth and um filling in narrative gaps as I said a moment ago such as the extended teachings of Jesus in the farewell discourses in John chapters 13-1 17 of course the cross is something that shows up in both

the cross and the resurrection Mark emphasizes Jesus's son suffering and brief Resurrection account whereas John focused on Jesus's glorification through the cross and his extended Resurrection appearances revealing his victory over death uh let's see how they both address the Holy Spirit Mark has very brief mentions of the holy spirit in his gospel John on the other hand offers detailed teaching on the Holy Spirit especially in Jesus's promise to send the spirit after his departure moving on to eschatology Mark focuses on the future coming of the kingdom of God John emphasizes a realized eschatology where eternal

life begins in the present through belief in Jesus and Carries On into the future Bachman's work shows that John provides a deeper theological lens for understanding Jesus complimenting Mark's action-oriented narrative by focusing on Jesus's Divine identity and Mission we're going to look at more details about all of the gospels and in it we're going to incorporate the teachings in all of the gospels uh this singular uh EX look at the Gospel of John is trying to understand some uniquenesses about it recognizing that John is basically broke up into two major portions the first one about

the signs that are pointing to who Jesus is the signs um that indicate that he is the Messiah and then the work that he does as the Messiah his death and Resurrection help us to understand the structure of the Gospel of John John wants us to be aware that Jesus is indeed the Messiah the special word of God the logos he's the son of God the unique Son of God that is paying a substitutionary atonement for the sins of all of humanity he is fulfilling the Old Testament prophecies he's fulfilling the role of Israel that

Israel failed to to live up to and he's fulfilling all the signs like the the Tabernacle and the feasts in a way that he as a person succeeds where Israel as a nation did not John offers a very intimate and beautiful portrait of Jesus one that I believe is from an eyewitness account that helps to prepare us for the work of the holy spirit that comes afterward