This is the fourth installment in our series on the Gospel authors. We’ve covered Matthew, Mark, and Luke-Acts.
Did the apostle John write the Gospel of John? That would be considerable evidence that the Gospel of John is historically reliable if it was written by an eyewitness who walked and talked with Jesus. This is what we will look at today.
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE
Irenaeus of France (120–190 A.D.)
‘Now the Gospels, in which Christ is enthroned, are like these. For that according to John expounds his princely and mighty and glorious birth from the Father, saying, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” and, “All things were made by him, and without him nothing was nothing made.” Therefore this Gospel is deserving of all confidence, for such indeed is his person.’1
Clement of Alexandria (150–215 AD)
‘Again, in the same books [the Hypotyposeis], Clement gives the tradition of the earliest presbyters, as to the order of the Gospels, in the following manner: “The Gospels containing the genealogies [i.e. Matt and Luke], he says, were written first. The Gospel according to Mark had this occasion. As Peter had preached the Word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered his sayings, should write them out. And having composed the Gospel he gave it to those who had requested it. When Peter learned of this, he neither directly forbade nor encouraged it. But, last of all, John, perceiving that the external facts had been made plain in the Gospel, being urged by his friends, and inspired by the Spirit, composed a spiritual Gospel.’2
Theophilus of Antioch (written around 180 A.D.)
‘And hence the holy writings teach us, and all the spirit-bearing [inspired] men, one of whom, John, says, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, showing that at first God was alone, and the Word in Him.’3
The Muratorian Canon (A.D. 180-190)
‘John, one of the disciples, wrote the Fourth Gospel. When his fellow disciples and the bishops urged him to do so, he said, ‘Join me in fasting for three days, and then let us relate to one another what shall be revealed to each.’ The same night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should write down everything in his own name, and they should all revise it.’4
Tertullian in Carthage (160-220 A.D.)
‘The same authority of the apostolic churches will afford evidence to the other Gospels also, which we possess equally through their means, and according to their usage–I mean the Gospels of John and Matthew–whilst that which Mark published may be affirmed to be Peter’s whose interpreter Mark was. For even Luke’s form of the Gospel men usually ascribe to Paul. And it may well seem that the works which disciples publish belong to their masters.’5
Origen (185-254 A.D.)
‘And the third by Luke, the Gospel commended by Paul, and composed for Gentile converts. Last of all that by John.’6
INTERNAL EVIDENCE
He was one of the “inner circle” among Jesus’ disciples.
Not only is he familiar with scenes where only the disciples are present (their calling in John 1:19; the journey through Samaria in 4:1; the feeding of the five thousand in 6:1; the visits to Jerusalem in chapters 7, 9, and 11, etc.), he frequently describes their thoughts, feelings and reactions (2:11, 17, 22; 4:27; 6:19, 60; 12:16; 13:22, 28; 21:12). He knows both what they said to Jesus (4:31; 9:2; 11:8, 12; 16:29) and what they said among themselves (4:33; 16:17; 20:25; 21:3, 5). He knows the places where they would go as a group without the company of strangers (11:54; 18:2; 20:19). He knows the misimpressions they had that were later corrected (2:21; 11:13; 12:16; 13:28; 20:9; 21:4).
Who is the Beloved Disciple?
Throughout the gospel, we read of one disciple who goes unnamed (e.g. 1:35, 37, 40) but is later described simply as “the beloved disciple.” At the very end of the gospel (21:24), we find out that the beloved disciple is the one who wrote the gospel. And going back over the places where he is recorded as being present, we find that they are the specific places where the scenes are recorded with particular vividness and detail—the conversation at the last supper, for example, or the scene by the fire at night in the hall at Caiaphas’s house. There is no reason to doubt that this identification of the beloved disciple with the author of the fourth Gospel is correct. But who was the beloved disciple?
From the lists of those present in some of the scenes (1:35; 21:2), including cross references with the Synoptic Gospels, he must have been either Andrew, Peter, James, or John. He cannot be Andrew, since Andrew appears with him in the opening chapter. He cannot be Peter, since he appears with Peter in the closing chapter. James was martyred too early to have written the Gospel (Acts 12:1). By process of elimination, we arrive at the conclusion that he was John.
And once we have come to that conclusion, we can see that there are other indications of it in the text. If it was not John, then why is John—a prominent disciple, according to the synoptic gospels—never named in any scene in the fourth Gospel? But if John is the beloved disciple, then this problem does not arise. Again, when he describes John the Baptist in the opening chapter, why does the author say simply: There was a man, sent from God, whose name was John—not including the descriptive phrase “the baptist” that we find so frequently in the other Gospels, to distinguish him from John the son of Zebedee? Because John the son of Zebedee was the author of the fourth Gospel and, unlike the other evangelists, he had no need to distinguish among various “Johns” in his use of names. When he said “John,” everyone knew who he meant!
Because of these reasons (and many others not-mentioned here), we can be reasonably certain that John, the son of Zebedee, is the same person who wrote the Gospel of John.
Footnotes
- Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, 3.11.8
- Cited in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.14.5-7
- Theophilus, To Autolycus, II.22
- Muratorian Canon quoted in F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John, [Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1994], p. 10
- Tertullian Against Marcion, 4.5, 207 AD
- Cited in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.25.6
