1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Who wrote the Gospel of John?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by adrian009, Jan 3, 2021.

  1. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,174
    Ratings:
    +2,787
    Honestly I have never read this authors books, and never heard of him. So I cannot really connect with his work.

    Papias wrote a series called Kurion kiriakon exegesis. That we know from Irenaeus, but not because we have his actual books. Some scholars have dated his work to a time period between 80 to 160 AD, thus if that is correct it is very similar to the Gospel according to John or at least the earlier date of Papias is. Though Mark has the priority, and John the inferiority, John seems to have had a very significant impact and take up. One of the main reason to think like this is the discussions on the two famous Johns, the Gospel, and the earliest ever found manuscript of any book of the New Testament is from the Gospel of John. How come the latest Gospel has the earliest manuscript surviving? Maybe because it was more taken.

    Nevertheless, speaking of these disciples, going through the four Gospels in perspective, the sons of Zebedee, one of which this thread seems to be addressing as the author of the Gospel of John was only mentioned in Mark or the Markan tradition. This guy is not mentioned in John, or in fact any other book. Only in Mark. Now in Mark you would notice that Peter, John, James and some would argue Andrew also are like a "close companion" type. You would notice that in the Synoptic Problem address, the Gospel of Matthew or Luke do not mention these disciples in any verse other than those we call are from the source of Mark. Thus, only in the verses that are copied from mark or at least you could say "influenced by Mark" almost verbatim contain them. Outside this tradition they are cited once. Also you would note that John cites Nicodemus, Nathanael, Lazarus, Mary who's husband was Clopas as important disciples with significant roles. Lazarus is even assumed to be "that beloved disciple" by some scholars. But they are not so in the Synoptic Gospels. Thats just about the disciples in perspective of the four Gospels and I just mentioned it to show one of the reason for the Synoptic Gospels to be Synoptic and John to be not.

    It was Eusebius who quotes the prologue of Papias as far as I recall. Okay. I can trust that Eusebius was truthful. This definitely shows that Papias knew the Gospel of John. If that was your point, I would respond with an "absolutely".

    Also, the statement you copied from this author you quoted, I can recognise it verbatim from another scholars work. I mean, "verbatim". And I must agree with it. I cannot deny it because this is absolutely accurate. Papias according to Eusebius mentioned the first six names exactly in the order the Gospel of John mentioned them. This means Papias was writing almost with this part of the Gospel in his hand. What is significant to note is that the epilogue of John is taken by Papias which means he had not only the Book of Signs, the book of Glory but also the Epilogue. But if you note there, the author addresses the Sons of Zebedee in the Epilogue. But he calls the "beloved Disciple" separately. Making John, the son of Zebedee, and the author of this book would mean he is both the beloved disciple, the son of Zebedee, and he himself. The problem is, most who make this case without much consideration have not even read the book. The significance of what you have done is not highlighted enough. This listing of the 6 disciples, exactly in the order of the Gospel of John by Papias shows one major thing. That is, he never thought that the "beloved disciple" was "John the son of Zebedee". I hope you understand that logic. The Gospel mentions the beloved disciple early, then mentions SONS OF ZEBEDEE right at the end. Completely cloven apart. Also, the man some call was a hearer of John, does not make the connection.

    And you are absolutely right I think, because Papias has Matthew as well in there who was not there in the Gospel of John. Thus that was either picked from tradition or Matthew. Yet he drops Nathaniel in two instances.

    I just elaborated a bit because I feel you had kind of touched on something significant.

    And finally, I agree. Of course Papias knew the Gospel of John.

    Peace.
     
  2. Vouthon

    Vouthon Dominus Deus tuus ignis consumens est
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,728
    Ratings:
    +4,198
    Religion:
    Catholic Christianity
    Great post!

    On that point about 'revelation being closed' after the conclusion of Apostolic Age but our understanding of it being ongoing, we of course call this "development of doctrine".

    As a dogmatic constitution of the Second Vatican Council explained (1965):


    The tradition which comes from the apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down.

    This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts, through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through episcopal succession the sure gift of truth.

    This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts, through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through episcopal succession the sure gift of truth.

    For, as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her


    (Dei Verbum 8)​


    This is the Catholic way of being, as Cardinal and saint John Henry Newman noted in the nineteenth century: "a true development retains the essential idea of the subject from which it has proceeded" (241)

    Tradition is organic, it grows from the same and eternal source which is its seed.

    St.Vincent of Lérins wrote concerning doctrinal development in the fifth century:

    Therefore, let there be growth and abundant progress in understanding, knowledge, and wisdom, in each and all, in individuals and in the whole Church, at all times and in the progress of ages, but only with the proper limits".

     
  3. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    40,208
    Ratings:
    +14,298
    Religion:
    Judaism
    I'm not sure I was hoping for you to "connect with his work," simply to respond to his observation.

    Again, this is not a personal area of interest. That said, let me add that, if one's main reason manifests as a highly speculative maybe, one's case seems a little less compelling.

    You should also report it. Plagiarism, and suggestions of plagiarism, should be taken very seriously.

    I understand the inference much as I understood your previous "maybe" and consider them to be not dissimilar.

    Thanks for the commentary.
     
  4. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,174
    Ratings:
    +2,787
    Not understood at all. I think. Nice.
     
  5. adrian009

    adrian009 Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    10,414
    Ratings:
    +9,652
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    There is a reasonable case to be made for two Johns, John the Apostle and John the Presbyter. I would need to carefully study 'all' the relevant texts, which I haven't got round to yet. Whatever the outcome, I have no problem with it.
     
  6. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,174
    Ratings:
    +2,787
    Brother. Before you study the evidence, if you had already decided there is a reasonable case, that's going nowhere.

    Bon Voyage.
     
Loading...