Apostle John was not the disciple, I think his gospels show this clearly.

[metis]

Because of its late writing, as compared to the synoptics I think it's quite clear it's an embellishent of the Gospel narratives, which doesnt make it wrong in any way. Remember, these are subjective sources, not objective.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I mentioned this point to a member yesterday who had been quoting from John's gospel, and there it was, another thread for your consideration.

That Apostle John was not Disciple John could be argued because of where he is reported to have lived... on a kind of prison island called Patmos, off the Ephesian coast. There's also the approximate dating of this gospel compared with the approximate age of the youthful disciple in AD/CE 28-30... how old would he have been when this gospel was written and comparisons with the projected average ages of Galilean peasants in early first century Northern Palestine. But not here on this thread!

This thread is dedicated to comparing the accounts as reported in the synoptic gospels with John's account, just that. I'll offer evidence, a single exhibit in a single post, and will offer one post each day. I'll try to answer all questions and challenges as best I can.

The first exhibit will be offered after this OP.

One of the scholarly theories is that the Apostle/disciple John is not the same John as the John on Patmos.

We pretty much know that the gospel of john and nis epistles were not written by John. The gospel is actually a combination of three texts. It began with a text that is sometimes called the seven wonders of Jesus. then an author took that text, and added more to it. then a third author took that edition, and added even more.

 

[firedragon]

how old would he have been when this gospel was written and comparisons with the projected average ages of Galilean peasants in early first century Northern Palestine.

Maybe 90.

This thread is dedicated to comparing the accounts as reported in the synoptic gospels with John's account, just that. I'll offer evidence, a single exhibit in a single post, and will offer one post each day. I'll try to answer all questions and challenges as best I can.

The only way to attribute the gospel of John to someone is to speculate. Scholars are pretty much unanimous on this matter. The author is unknown.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I mentioned this point to a member yesterday who had been quoting from John's gospel, and there it was, another thread for your consideration.

That Apostle John was not Disciple John could be argued because of where he is reported to have lived... on a kind of prison island called Patmos, off the Ephesian coast. There's also the approximate dating of this gospel compared with the approximate age of the youthful disciple in AD/CE 28-30... how old would he have been when this gospel was written and comparisons with the projected average ages of Galilean peasants in early first century Northern Palestine. But not here on this thread!

This thread is dedicated to comparing the accounts as reported in the synoptic gospels with John's account, just that. I'll offer evidence, a single exhibit in a single post, and will offer one post each day. I'll try to answer all questions and challenges as best I can.

The first exhibit will be offered after this OP.

The Appostle John did not write the gospel of john. the gospel has at least three authors. The first wrote a document that scholars call the sSeven Wonders of Jesus. Then another author took that text, and added to it. Then a third author took the combined text, and added even more, bringing the gospel to its present form.

 

[oldbadger]

A challenge! Ok. I propose arguments that it is Judas.

The disciple that Jesus loved may have been Judas. It was Judas who was greeted by Jesus with a kiss. Judas may have been working the whole time to get closer to Jesus, perhaps to become the treasury keeper. It was Judas whom Jesus personally sent on an errand at the Last Supper. It was Judas that was doomed to betray Jesus, which would possibly have made him even more of a favorite of Jesus.

The list of disciples in Matthew 10 lists Judas last, because he is the worst both for betraying Jesus and for being a member of the Siccari (Iscariot). Luke 7:47 says that whoever is forgiven much loves much, and whoever is forgiven little loves little. Judas, having been forgiven the most, loves the most.

[Mar 10:21-22 NIV] 21 Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." 22 At this the man's face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.

In a way the above story is about Judas. Judas is following Jesus but is stealing from the treasury. "Jesus looked at him and loved him."​

Best of luck with your search for the disciple oldbadger.

***edit***

Also Judas may have been situated near to Jesus at the last supper. He may have been the one who leaned against him and asked "Which of us will betray you?" (John 21:20)

[Mat 26:23 NIV] 23 Jesus replied, "The one who has dipped his hand into the bowl with me will betray me.​

Who was next to Jesus? Who was so near at the last supper? Who was the disciple Jesus loved?


********************
But I really don't know. I'm just tossing it at you.

How does your post (above) help to show that Apostle John was Disciple John?
By the way, Judah BarSimon (or possibly BenSimon) ...his nickname could possibly have been Judah Siccario. If you say it quickly twenty times you will come to Judas Iscariot.

 

[oldbadger]

I am not sure why leaving out an event makes him not the author of it. All of them leave out events the others mention.

Correct. Luke was not there! Luke wrote down what he knew about it all and copied gospels like Mark's. Matthew was not there or he would not have needed to copy Mark's Gospel. But Mark was there himself for some incidents and I reckon the rest of Mark was drawn from the memoirs of Cephas.

But this thread is about Apostle John who not only did not know what Jesus and his disciples did (such as the Transfiguration!!) but he got everything all mixed up.

 

[oldbadger]

One of the scholarly theories is that the Apostle/disciple John is not the same John as the John on Patmos.

We pretty much know that the gospel of john and nis epistles were not written by John. The gospel is actually a combination of three texts. It began with a text that is sometimes called the seven wonders of Jesus. then an author took that text, and added more to it. then a third author took that edition, and added even more.

Could be........ and there gospel evidence shows that Apostle John was not Disciple John. So you might have three Johns here.

 

[oldbadger]

Maybe 90.

The only way to attribute the gospel of John to someone is to speculate. Scholars are pretty much unanimous on this matter. The author is unknown.

......... which supports this thread's title.
Apostle John was not disciple John.
What evidence there is is mostly in the gospels.

 

[oldbadger]

The Appostle John did not write the gospel of john. the gospel has at least three authors. The first wrote a document that scholars call the sSeven Wonders of Jesus. Then another author took that text, and added to it. Then a third author took the combined text, and added even more, bringing the gospel to its present form.

That looks about right.
Which supports this thread's title that the Apostle John (whoever wrote that gospel) was not the disciple John.
These authors didn't actually know what the disciples did with Jesus, nor when.
The gospel is useful because it was built from many anecdotes and pieces of info, a collection. But the timeline is a mess and many situations undocumented.

 

[oldbadger]

DAY 2! Exhibit 2.........

Many Christians can't actually write down what Jesus and disciples did during the first three days of that last week before Passover in Jerusalem. Apostle John couldn't either.

Most RF readers will know that Jesus and the disciples went (literally) sightseeing during all of day One before leaving for the night. This actually becomes part of exhibit three (tomorrow). But John...... no idea about any of those three days and the tumultuous events of those last two.

Below this intro is shown John's account of that last week from entry to Jerusalem on first day to the last supper/passover meal. There is nothing in between apart from a thunderous voice of God from the heavens and some conversation. Nothing.

But the Gospel of Mark tells us about those three days, as shown in precis below.
Thus, The writer of G-John (Apostle John?) was not there, and was not disciple John.

Exhibts:-
Gospel of Mark:-
{11:11} And Jesus entered into Jerusalem, and into the temple: and when he had looked round about upon all things, and now the eventide was come, he went
out unto Bethany with the twelve.
{11:12} And on the morrow, ........................ ]{11:15} And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; {11:16} And would not suffer that any man should carry [any] vessel through the temple. {11:17} And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves............................... {11:19} And when even was come, he went out of the city.
{11:20} And in the morning......................... {11:27} And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders, {11:28} And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?

Gospel of John:-
John {12:1} Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. {12:2} There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him. ......................
{12:12} On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, {12:13} Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him............................
{12:20} And there were certain Greeks among them that came up to worship at the feast: {12:21} The same came therefore to Philip, which was of Bethsaida of Galilee, and desired him, saying, Sir, we would see Jesus. {12:22} Philip cometh and telleth Andrew: and again Andrew and Philip
tell Jesus......................
{12:28} Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, [saying,] I have both glorified [it,] and will glorify [it] again. {12:29} The people therefore, that stood by, and heard [it,] said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him. .................
{12:36} While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light. These things spake Jesus, and departed, and did hide himself from them..................
{13:1} Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come ...............

 

[firedragon]

......... which supports this thread's title.
Apostle John was not disciple John.
What evidence there is is mostly in the gospels.

None.

 

[firedragon]

Because of its late writing, as compared to the synoptics I think it's quite clear it's an embellishent of the Gospel narratives,

You are a lecturer in theology right? Thd I assume Thus, why do you think the synoptics are called just that if John is an embellishment of them?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Could be........ and there gospel evidence shows that Apostle John was not Disciple John. So you might have three Johns here.

eeehhhhhhh.... I have to disagree with you. The disciples, except for Judas, simply got renamed as Apostles. So John the disciple did get renamed the Apostle John.

 

[firedragon]

eeehhhhhhh.... I have to disagree with you. The disciples, except for Judas, simply got renamed as Apostles. So John the disciple did get renamed the Apostle John.

Why did you single out Judas as never have been appointed apostle by Jesus?

 

[oldbadger]

eeehhhhhhh.... I have to disagree with you. The disciples, except for Judas, simply got renamed as Apostles. So John the disciple did get renamed the Apostle John.

What mankind decided to call them is not evidence.
What they wrote offers some evidence.
An Apostle is different to a Disciple, otherwise just one of those titles could have been used throughout the entire story.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Why did you single out Judas as never have been appointed apostle by Jesus?

Because he committed suicide, and was dead.

 

[oldbadger]

Because of its late writing, as compared to the synoptics I think it's quite clear it's an embellishent of the Gospel narratives, which doesnt make it wrong in any way. Remember, these are subjective sources, not objective.

Because of it's late writing, considering the average age of a North Palestinian peasant was back then, this might need to be taken in to account when considering if Apostle John was Disciple John.

G-John is not an embellishment of the synoptics because it tells a differing story on a differing timescale with mangled accounts about what really happened. Jesus rampaging through Anna's Bazaar at the beginning of his ministry instead of during the last week does show this, amongst many other examples.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

What mankind decided to call them is not evidence.
What they wrote offers some evidence.
An Apostle is different to a Disciple, otherwise just one of those titles could have been used throughout the entire story.

The eleven disciples were all called Apostles.

 

[oldbadger]

Because he committed suicide, and was dead.

Now where did you get that from? That's not certain at all.
One account tells that he fell over in his field and split his stomach open....another tells of suicide.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

the average age of a North Palestinian peasant was back then

Just to be clear, at that time in histiory, there was no territory of Palestine. There were the provinces of Judea, Samaria, and Gallilee