DAY 21
CHALLENGE
The Gospel of John is not historically reliable. It was written in the A.D. 90s and is markedly different in style and substance from the other Gospels.”
DEFENSE
Actually, the Gospel of John is very historically reliable. Arguments to the contrary do not prove their case. Even if John were written in the A.D. 90s, that’s within sixty years of the events it records. Historically speaking, that is quite close to them, and it poses no barrier to the accuracy of John. But John likely was written earlier. It refers to architecture in Jerusalem as still standing (5:2), but Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70. The Greek text of John 21:19 refers to the death by which Peter “will glorify God” (future tense), suggesting it was written before Peter’s martyrdom in mid-67. Whenever it was written, John is based on the testimony of an eyewitness (the “beloved disciple”)—a point the text makes explicitly (21:24), for the ancients were as aware of the value of eyewitness testimony as we are. John is written in a different literary style than the other Gospels, but this is not surprising. Each author has his own style, and John’s is simply different than the others. This does not mean that he isn’t interested in history. In fact, he records key historical facts about the chronology of Jesus’ ministry that the other evangelists do not. Thus he mentions that at least three Passovers took place between the beginning and end of Jesus’ ministry (2:13, 6:4, 11:55). Using this and other information, we are able to determine that Jesus’ ministry lasted over three years. John also contains significantly different material than the other Gospels, and the reason is very simple: John intends to supplement the other Gospels by recording things they didn’t. In particular, John is supplementing Mark, and his Gospel is designed to interlock with Mark’s.
TIP
For arguments on an early dating for John, see John A.T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament and The Priority of John. On the dating of Peter’s martyrdom and the value of John’s chronology, see Jack Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology, 2nd ed., and Andrew E. Steinmann, From Abraham to Paul. On John’s use of Mark, see Richard Bauckham, “John for Readers of Mark” in The Gospels for All Christians.