Traditionally appearing after Matthew, Mark, and Luke in the NT canon, the Gospel of John is also referred to as the Fourth Gospel. Because of its many unique features, John is often discussed in distinction from the other three Gospels, which are grouped together as the Synoptic Gospels.

Authorship

Technically, the Gospel of John is anonymous. The author, however, identifies himself with the Beloved Disciple (21:24). In light of the nearly unanimous testimony of the early church that the Fourth Gospel was penned by the apostle John, the son of Zebedee, and that no formidable argument has been set forth against this position, the majority of conservative scholars agree that the Beloved Disciple is John the apostle.

Evidence for apostolic authorship is multifaceted. First, the external evidence weighs heavily in favor of the traditional view that John the apostle penned this Gospel. There is some evidence that title pages with an accompanying ascription identifying the author date back very close to the time of the origin of the Gospels themselves. Such ascriptions may have been necessitated as a means of distinguishing the Gospels from one another. With regard to the Fourth Gospel, the earliest manuscripts uniformly ascribe it to the apostle John.

The evidence from the early church fathers also supports the traditional viewpoint. Ignatius appears to have been familiar with the language of the Fourth Gospel. Also, the Shepherd of Hermas alludes to it. Justin appears to be the first orthodox writer to quote John (1 Apol. 61.4–5, quoting from John 3:3–5). Irenaeus is the first to overtly assert Johannine authorship: “John the disciple of the Lord, who leaned back on his breast, published the Gospel while he was resident at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1). This position finds further support in Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 200). The Muratorian Canon (AD 180–200) tells us that John was urged by his disciples, and that Andrew had a dream that John should write. Eusebius’s silence on the questions of the authenticity, authorship, and canonicity of John speaks loudly, since it was his objective to address the doubtful cases. In all, there is unquestioned acceptance by the end of the second century that the Fourth Gospel was written by John the apostle.

Second, the internal evidence corresponds with the identification of John the son of Zebedee as the author in that he appears to meet all the requirements for authorship. John was one of the Twelve and, along with Peter and James, a member of the inner circle of Jesus’ disciples. This close association with Peter makes John the best candidate for the Beloved Disciple. Also, the call narrative of 1:35–51, when compared with Mark 1:16–20, supports the identification of the unnamed disciple with John. Several personal allusions in the Fourth Gospel are best accounted for if the author is John the apostle. For example, in 1:14; 19:35 the author suggests that he has personally witnessed Jesus. The author provides details that suggest this Gospel was written by an eyewitness, and some of these details serve no purpose except to affirm that an eyewitness saw or experienced them. These include a proclivity for specifying the time or day of an event (1:19–28, 29, 35, 39, 43; 2:1; 4:6, 52; 18:28; 19:14; 20:19); the number of water jars (six) at Cana (2:6); the distance (twenty-five or thirty stadia) that the disciples rowed (6:19); the number of fish (153) caught (21:11); and the distance of the boat from land at the postresurrection appearance of Jesus (21:8, 11).

Furthermore, the author of the Fourth Gospel is aware of Jewish customs and history as well as the geography of first-century Palestine. This too accords with our knowledge of John the apostle. For example, he is aware of customs regarding cleansing (2:6), laws concerning the Sabbath (5:10), and the Feast of Tabernacles (7:37). The writer of the Fourth Gospel is also familiar with history (the number of years spent rebuilding the temple [2:20]), Jewish politics (the attitude toward Samaritans [4:9]), Jewish authorities (Annas and Caiaphas [18:13]), and the geography of Palestine (the pool at Bethesda with five porticoes [5:2], the Pool of Siloam [9:7], Sychar [4:5], the two Bethanys [1:28; 11:1, 18; 12:1], Ephraim [11:54]).

The question remains as to why the apostle John would have written anonymously and used such a cryptic means of identifying himself as “the beloved disciple” (21:20; NIV: “the disciple whom Jesus loved”). It is conceivable that John’s readers knew his name, and that in keeping with the Semitic custom of anonymity, John used this alternative designation. Why, though, in an effort to humbly remain anonymous, would someone choose a designation that seemingly connotes superiority?

In response, some have suggested that John may have used the title with a sense of wonder about how Jesus loved him. The stress would then be one of amazement: John, instead of mentioning his own name, draws attention to what he owes Jesus. This title is also combined with other, more modest titles: “another disciple” (18:15); “the other disciple” (20:2); “the man who saw it” (19:35). Finally, others have noted that the designation “the beloved disciple” may simply have been a title by which John was known throughout the churches of Asia.

Furthermore, if the apostle John is not the author of the Fourth Gospel, then we must account for his absence from the narrative. The failure to mention James and John (aside from the somewhat passing reference to the “sons of Zebedee” [21:2]) is striking. According to the Synoptic Gospels, these brothers are two of the most prominent disciples in the ministry of Jesus. If John’s readers were familiar with James and John and their general role in the life of Jesus, then by not naming himself, John could keep his own role subordinate in the narrative. John, as an eyewitness, needed to mention himself, for doing so would help to establish the historical credibility of this Gospel. This designation allowed him to write a biography of Christ and not mention himself by name.

Time and Place of Writing

Though the conclusion is ultimately uncertain, it is widely believed that John penned the Fourth Gospel from Ephesus somewhat late in the first century (c. AD 85–95). It appears from 21:19, 23 that a measure of time has gone by, and that Peter has already died. It has been argued that the Gospel of John was written before the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in AD 70 (on the basis of references suggesting that the temple is still standing [cf. 5:2]), but this argument from silence does not necessarily establish the point that it attempts to prove. Supporting a date late in the first century is the external evidence. The early church fathers claimed that John was written last, at the urging of his disciples, and that he wrote from Ephesus.

The suggestion that John was written sometime well into the second century has been rejected by nearly all scholars. The discovery of a very early manuscript, P52 (dated around AD 125), confirms that the Fourth Gospel was written and circulating early in the second century. Copies of the Bodmer Papyri P66 and P75 further establish that the Gospel of John was circulating in Egypt as early as AD 140.

Outline

I. Prologue (1:1–18)

II. Preparation for Jesus’ Ministry (1:19–51)

III. Jesus’ Public Ministry: Signs and Teaching (2:1–12:50)

IV. The Last Supper and Farewell Discourse (13:1–17:26)

V. The Passion and Resurrection Narratives (18:1–21:25)

Purpose and Message

The Gospel of John states its purpose in 20:31: “But these [signs] are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” The Greek text of this verse is relatively ambiguous (something that was noticed from a very early date and has resulted in some discrepancy among the earliest manuscripts). It raises the question of whether John wrote so that his readers might come to believe or that they should continue in their belief. A number of leading scholars have concluded that John was intentionally ambiguous and that he wrote with both purposes in mind.

The Gospel of John clearly focuses on the person, work, and identity of Jesus Christ. John intends to clarify and affirm exactly who the Messiah/Christ/Son of God really was and why he came. For John, the answer is evident: Jesus Christ is the physical manifestation of God, and he came to be crucified.

The thesis statement of the Fourth Gospel appears at the close of the opening prologue: “the one and only Son, who is himself God” has “made him [the Father] known” (1:18). John demonstrates this by affirming that what God is, the Word is (1:1); what the Father does, the Son does (5:19); the Son and the Father are one (10:30); the Son speaks what the Father has told him (8:28; 12:49; 14:10); and the Son is in the Father, and the Father is in the Son (14:10–11). The climactic statement, then, is Jesus’ proclamation: “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9).

Several proposals have set forth various secondary intentions for the Gospel of John. Many of these have some measure of legitimacy, though it is difficult to establish any of them as forthright in the mind of John. For example, it has been suggested that the Fourth Gospel was written to combat a growing form of gnosticism. Although this Gospel has traces of evidence that support this contention, and there is even some external evidence in its favor, it is difficult to establish that this was an explicit intention of John. Gnosticism as a developed system did not arise until the second century. Others have argued that this Gospel was written as an anti-Jewish polemic. A close reading, however, suggests that this was not one of John’s purposes. Perhaps the most plausible secondary proposition is that John’s Gospel was written to complement the Synoptic Gospels.

John and the Synoptics

The relationship between John and the Synoptics is essential for our understanding of the Fourth Gospel. That John is independent from the Synoptics is evident in that the Fourth Gospel has a detailed knowledge of events beyond those recorded in the Synoptics. John knows of lengthy discourses after miracles (e.g., 6:26–58), a wedding in Cana (2:1–11), conversations with Nicodemus (3:1–21) and a Samaritan woman (4:7–37), repeated confrontations with the Jews (e.g., 8:12–59), the raising of Lazarus from death (11:1–44), and more. Nothing in chapters 3–5 is paralleled in the Synoptics; and of the material in chapters 1–5, only the ministry of John the Baptist and the cleansing of the temple are found in the Synoptics. Compared to the Synoptics, John has a distinct vocabulary (e.g., truth, witness, abide, love, believe, light, life).

Also in contrast to the Synoptics, John focuses on Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem, has Jesus beginning his ministry before the arrest of John the Baptist (3:22–24 [cf. Mark 1:14]), shows Jesus’ ministry being of longer duration than in the Synoptics, records no parables of Jesus and no transfiguration, and scarcely mentions the kingdom of God (3:3, 5; 18:36). Furthermore, John’s theology and explicit identification of Jesus with God are unique among the Gospels.

Despite the differences, however, the Gospel of John reflects significant parallels with the Synoptic accounts. John is aware of the Synoptic traditions regarding the Spirit’s anointing (1:32–33), John the Baptist (1:19–34; 3:22–36), the feeding of the five thousand (6:1–13), and Jesus’ walking on water (6:15–21). Furthermore, the Fourth Gospel seemingly intends to explain features that are obscure in the Synoptics. For example, why did the disciples follow Jesus when he came to them and said, “Follow me”? John explains that many of them were disciples of John the Baptist, and that they had met Jesus earlier (1:19–51). That Jesus had an extensive ministry in Judea explains why the Jerusalem authorities were so angry with Jesus and were plotting to kill him when he came into Jerusalem for the Passover. The central charge that Jesus taught against the temple (cf. Mark 14:58; 15:29) is also explained by John.

In all, it appears that John and his readers were aware of the Synoptics. John may even have been written to complement them and to explain aspects of the Synoptic accounts that were obscure. Thus, the parenthetical insertions in 3:24 and 11:2 may have been intended for readers who were familiar with the Gospel of Mark. Most significantly, John complements the Synoptics by presenting the significance of the person of Jesus beyond what is found in the Synoptics.

Jesus in the Gospel of John

The most significant feature of John is its high Christology. John intends to specify precisely the person and identity of Christ. The equating of Jesus with God undergirds the entire Fourth Gospel. In no other Gospel is Jesus so clearly identified as God. The Gospel begins with the affirmation that the Word was in the beginning with God, and “the Word was God” (1:1). Later, Thomas confesses Jesus as “my Lord and my God” (20:28).

John, however, identifies Jesus with a wide variety of titles and designations. He is the Word (1:1, 14), the one and only God (1:18), the one and only Son (3:16, 18), the Son of God (1:34, 49; 11:27; 20:31), the Son of Man (3:13–14; 5:19–27), the teacher from God (3:2), the prophet (4:19; 6:14; 7:40; 9:17), the Messiah (1:41; 4:29; 11:27; 20:31), the King of Israel (1:49; 6:15; 12:13), the King of the Jews (19:19), the Holy One of God (6:69), the Lamb of God (1:29, 36), the coming one (11:27; 12:13), the sent one of God (3:16–17, 34; 5:30; 7:16–18; 10:36), the I Am (see below), Paraclete (14:16), rabbi (20:16), Lord (6:68; 20:18; 21:7), and Lord and God (20:28).

Perhaps the most significant title applied to Jesus is the identification of him with the divine name for God: “I Am” (Gk. egō eimi [cf. Exod. 3:14]). John employs this designation for Jesus to buttress his claims that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s role. On seven occasions, the “I am” is followed by a predicate: bread of life (6:35); light of the world (8:12); gate (10:9); good shepherd (10:11, 14); resurrection and the life (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); true vine (15:1, 5).

John also employs the phrase “I am” in an absolute construction (i.e., without a predicate) in parallel to use in the LXX as a title for God. On some of these occasions, John uses the absolute construction as a common means of identification (18:5–8). Most intriguing, however, is John’s employment of this designation in the extended dialogue with the Jewish authorities (8:24, 28, 58). In 8:24, 28 the sense seems incomplete, and the form is more a title. This becomes explicit only when compared with the final and most significant use of this title in 8:58. On this occasion, Jesus’ intent is not missed, and the Jews respond with the desire to stone him for blasphemy (8:59).

The Old Testament in the Gospel of John

The Gospel of John has only fourteen direct references to the OT, fewer than any of the Synoptics. Nonetheless, one of the key features of John’s portrait of Jesus is Jesus’ fulfillment of the OT not just as the Messiah but also in terms of the institutions, symbols, and festivals of Judaism. In Jesus “the old has gone, the new is here” (2 Cor. 5:17). Thus, in John’s Gospel the old purifications are replaced with the new wine (2:1–11), the old temple with the new temple (2:12–25), the old birth with the new birth (3:1–21), the old water with the living water (4:7–15), and worship in Jerusalem and Gerizim with worship “in the Spirit and in truth” (4:20–24). Often Jesus’ activities are dated in relation to a feast. Throughout chapters 5–10, John affirms that Jesus has fulfilled and replaced the Jewish festivals—Sabbath: related to work (5:1–47); Feast of Passover: bread (6:1–71); Feast of Tabernacles: water and light (7:1–9:41); Feast of Dedication: temple (10:22–39).

Also, John builds upon a typological emphasis of Jesus. He is the true temple (2:21), the antitype of the bronze serpent (3:14), the true manna (6:32–35), the true water-giving rock (7:37), and the new Torah (13:34). Thus, the entire Gospel is framed around Jesus’ visits to Jerusalem, where John presents Jesus as the fulfillment of Israel’s hope and central to the life of the nation. Furthermore, this Gospel is replete with references to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses. Despite the relative lack of OT citations, the message of the OT is interwoven into the substructure of the Fourth Gospel.

Symbols and the Gospel of John

Closely related to understanding the Gospel of John and the OT is the manner in which John utilizes symbols to convey his message. For example, water often signifies life, cleansing, refreshment, renewal, the newness that Jesus ushers in, and ultimately the life-giving Spirit. Thus, Nicodemus must be reborn in water and the Spirit (3:5). Jesus turns water into wine (2:8) and promises living water to the woman at the well (4:10).

John also sees in Jesus’ miracles a greater significance than appears from the physical phenomena. Thus, he uses the designation “signs” (see, e.g., 2:11) to reference the miracles of Jesus. By means of this designation, John focuses on the significance of the miracle and not merely the power of Jesus. John informs us that the signs of Jesus are christological; they signify who he is, not merely what he does. For example, from Jesus’ multiplying of the bread we learn that he is the giver of eternal life and the source of our sustenance (6:26–27).

Irony and Misunderstanding in John

Another key to understanding the Gospel of John is found in its use of irony and misunderstanding. Irony is a literary technique evidenced in John in instances in which opponents of Jesus make statements about him that are derogatory, sarcastic, and so forth and yet are more true or meaningful than they suppose. John presents such statements but leaves them unanswered, supposing that his audience will see the deeper truth. For example, many of the Jews missed the very Messiah they were looking for (1:11, 45; 5:39–40); they claim to know where Jesus is from (7:27), and yet they refuse to accept the truth that he is from God (7:28). The most famous use of irony appears in Pilate’s famed “Here is the man!” (19:5).

Misunderstandings are occasions when Jesus makes a remark that is ambiguous or metaphorical and his partner in conversation responds by taking the remark literally, thus showing that the spiritual meaning has eluded that person. John then explains to his readers the true meaning. John uses this technique to bring his readers to a greater knowledge of who Jesus is: God in flesh. Examples of misunderstandings are found in 2:19–21; 3:3–5; 4:10–15, 31–34; 6:32–35, 51–53; 7:33–36; 8:21–22, 31–35, 56–58; 11:11–15, 23–25; 12:32–34; 13:36–38; 14:4–6, 7–9; 16:16–19.

Anti-Semitism in John?

The contention that John displays an anti-Semitic agenda in which the burden for the crucifixion of Jesus is placed on the Jewish people results from a misreading of the Fourth Gospel. A thorough reading of John confirms that the designation “Jews” often reflects the generic term “Israelites.” The term “Jew” is used in a neutral sense in 4:22 (salvation is from the Jews); 8:31; 11:45; 12:11 (many Jews believed); and 2:13; 5:1; 6:4 (feast of the Jews). When the designation “Jew” appears in a negative sense in John, it refers particularly to the Jewish leaders and authorities (7:13; 9:22; 19:38; 20:19). Consequently, John’s use of the term is not based on an inherent degradation of the people, but instead reflects the historical reality of Jesus’ confrontation with Jewish authorities.

That John does not place all the blame on the Jews in an effort to exonerate the Romans is also evident from the fact that Pilate is portrayed as one who disregards justice. He has an innocent man beaten and crucified (“I find no basis for a charge against him” [19:6]). John does not record this cry from the Jewish people: “His blood be on us and on our children” (Matt. 27:25 ESV, NRSV). Consequently, the charge of anti-Semitism in the Gospel of John is unfounded.