This is a good article. Click here for more information.

Gospel of John

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Gospel of John,[Notes 1] the fourth of the gospels, gives a highly schematic account of the ministry of Jesus, with seven "signs" culminating in the raising of Lazarus (foreshadowing the resurrection of Jesus) and seven "I am" discourses culminating in Thomas's proclamation of the risen Jesus as "my Lord and my God",[1] followed by a conclusion setting out its purpose: "that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name."[2][3] Like the three other gospels it is anonymous, although it identifies an unnamed "disciple whom Jesus loved" as the source of its traditions.[4][5]

Though Christianity started as a movement within Judaism, it gradually separated from Judaism because of mutual opposition between the two religions.[6] John reached its final form around AD 90–110,[7] most likely within a "Johannine community",[8][9] but the reconstruction of this community, and therefore the social, religious and historical context that give rise to it, has presented scholars with considerable difficulties.[10] The discourses seem to be concerned with issues of the church–synagogue debate at the time of composition,[11] and the community appears to define itself primarily in contrast to Judaism, rather than as part of a wider Christian community.[Notes 2]

It is closely related in style and content to the three Johannine epistles, and most scholars treat the four books, along with the Book of Revelation, as a single corpus of Johannine literature, albeit not from the same author.[12]

Composition and setting[edit]

Authorship, date and sources[edit]

The gospel of John reached its final form around AD 90–110.[7] The closest the gospel comes to identifying its author is John 21:24-25, which states: "This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true; but there are also many other things that Jesus did; if all of them were written down, I suppose that the world itself would not contain the books that would be written."[8] This implies that the core of the gospel relies on the testimony (perhaps written) of the Beloved Disciple (the "disciple who is testifying"), collected, preserved and reshaped by a community of followers (the "we" of the passage), and finally a single follower (the "I") who was responsible for the final gospel, rearranging material and perhaps adding the final chapter and other passages.[8] An early Christian tradition identified the "beloved disciple" as John the Apostle, but most scholars have abandoned this or hold it only tenuously.[13] Given the gospel's complex history there may have been more than one place of composition, and while the author was familiar with Jewish customs and traditions, his frequent clarification of these implies that he wrote for a mixed Jewish/Gentile or Jewish context outside Palestine.[14]

The majority of scholars agree that none of the gospels contain eyewitness accounts, although Richard Bauckham has recently argued that John's gospel preserves eyewitness testimony via the Beloved Disciple, whom he sees as a disciple but not one of the Twelve.[15][16][17] The author may have drawn on a "signs source" (a collection of miracles) for chapters 1-12, a "passion source" for the story of Jesus's arrest and crucifixion, and a "sayings source" for the discourses, but these hypotheses are much debated.[18] He seems to have known some version of Mark and Luke, as he shares with them some items of vocabulary and clusters of incidents arranged in the same order,[19][20] but key terms from those gospels are absent or nearly so, implying that if he did know them he felt free to write independently.[20] The Hebrew scriptures were an important source,[21] with 14 direct quotations (versus 27 in Mark, 54 in Matthew, 24 in Luke), and their influence is vastly increased when allusions and echoes are included[22] - the purpose of these is to identify Jesus as God's envoy, but the majority of John's Old Testament quotations do not agree exactly with any known version of the Jewish scriptures.[23]

Setting: the Johannine community debate[edit]

For much of the 20th century scholars interpreted John within the paradigm of a Johannine community,[24] meaning that the gospel sprang from a late 1st century Christian community excommunicated from the Jewish synagogues on account of its belief in Jesus as the promised Jewish messiah.[25] This interpretation, which saw the community as essentially sectarian and standing outside the mainstream of early Christianity, has been increasingly challenged in the first decades of the 21st century,[26] and there is currently considerable debate over the social, religious and historical context of the gospel.[10] Nevertheless, the Johannine literature as a whole (made up of the gospel, the three Johannine epistles, and Revelation), reveals a community holding itself distinct from the Jewish culture from which it arose while cultivating an intense devotion to Jesus, the definitive revelation of a God with whom they were in close contact through the Paraclete.[27]

Structure and content[edit]

Jesus giving the Farewell Discourse to his 11 remaining disciples, from the Maestà of Duccio, 1308–1311.

The majority of scholars see four sections in John's gospel: a prologue (1:1–18); an account of the ministry, often called the "Book of Signs" (1:19–12:50); the account of Jesus' final night with his disciples and the passion and resurrection, sometimes called the "book of glory" (13:1–20:31); and a conclusion (20:30-31); to these is added an epilogue which most scholars believe did not form part of the original text (Chapter 21).[28][29]

  • The prologue informs readers of the true identity of Jesus, the Word of God through whom the world was created and who took on human form;[30] he came to the Jews and the Jews rejected him, but "to all who received him (the circle of Christian believers), who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God."[31]
  • Book of Signs (ministry of Jesus): Jesus is baptized, calls his disciples, and begins his earthly ministry.[32] He travels from place to place informing his hearers about God the Father in long discourses, offering eternal life to all who will believe, and performing miracles which are signs of the authenticity of his teachings, but this creates tensions with the religious authorities (manifested as early as 5:17–18), who decide that he must be eliminated.[32][33]
  • The Book of Glory tells of Jesus's return to his heavenly father: it tells how he prepares his disciples for their coming lives without his physical presence and his prayer for himself and for them, followed by his betrayal, arrest, trial, crucifixion and post-resurrection appearances.[33]
  • The conclusion sets out the purpose of the gospel, which is "that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name."[2]
  • Chapter 21, the addendum, tells of Jesus' post-resurrection appearances in Galilee, the miraculous catch of fish, the prophecy of the crucifixion of Peter, and the fate of the Beloved Disciple.[2]

The structure is highly schematic: there are seven "signs" culminating in the raising of Lazarus (foreshadowing the resurrection of Jesus), and seven "I am" sayings and discourses, culminating in Thomas's proclamation of the risen Jesus as "my Lord and my God" (the same title, dominus et deus, claimed by the Emperor Domitian, an indication of the date of composition).[1]


The Rylands Papyrus the oldest known New Testament fragment, dated to about 125.


John's "high Christology" depicts Jesus as divine, preexistent, and identified with the one God,[34] talking openly about his divine role and echoing Yahweh's "I Am that I Am" with seven "I Am" declarations of his own:[35]


In the prologue, John identifies Jesus as the Logos (Word). In Ancient Greek philosophy, the term logos meant the principle of cosmic reason. In this sense, it was similar to the Hebrew concept of Wisdom, God's companion and intimate helper in creation. The Hellenistic Jewish philosopher Philo merged these two themes when he described the Logos as God's creator of and mediator with the material world. According to Harris, the evangelist adapted Philo's description of the Logos, applying it to Jesus, the incarnation of the Logos.[35]


The portrayal of Jesus' death in John is unique among the four Gospels. It does not appear to rely on the kinds of atonement theology indicative of vicarious sacrifice (cf. Mark 10:45, Romans 3:25) but rather presents the death of Jesus as his glorification and return to the Father. Likewise, the three "passion predictions" of the Synoptic Gospels (Mark 8:31, 9:31, 10:33–34 and pars.) are replaced instead in John with three instances of Jesus explaining how he will be exalted or "lifted up"(John 3:14, 8:28, 12:32). The verb for "lifted up" (Greek: ὑψωθῆναι, hypsōthēnai) reflects the double entendre at work in John's theology of the cross, for Jesus is both physically elevated from the earth at the crucifixion but also, at the same time, exalted and glorified.[36]


Among the most controversial areas of interpretation of John is its sacramental theology. Scholars' views have fallen along a wide spectrum ranging from anti-sacramental and non-sacramental, to sacramental, to ultra-sacramental and hyper-sacramental.[37] Scholars disagree both on whether and how frequently John refers to the sacraments at all, and on the degree of importance he places upon them. Individual scholars' answers to one of these questions do not always correspond to their answer to the other.[38]

According to Rudolf Bultmann, there are three sacramental allusions: one to baptism (3:5), one to the Eucharist (6:51–58), and one to both (19:34). He believed these passages to be later interpolations, though most scholars now reject this assessment. Some scholars on the weaker-sacramental side of the spectrum deny that there are any sacramental allusions in these passages or in the gospel as a whole, while others see sacramental symbolism applied to other subjects in these and other passages. Oscar Cullmann and Bruce Vawter, a Protestant and a Catholic respectively, and both on the stronger-sacramental end of the spectrum, have found sacramental allusions in most chapters. Cullmann found references to baptism and the Eucharist throughout the gospel, and Vawter found additional references to matrimony in 2:1–11, anointing of the sick in 12:1–11, and penance in 20:22–23. Towards the center of the spectrum, Raymond Brown is more cautious than Cullmann and Vawter but more lenient than Bultmann and his school, identifying several passages as containing sacramental allusions and rating them according to his assessment of their degree of certainty.[38]

Most scholars on the stronger-sacramental end of the spectrum assess the sacraments as being of great importance to the evangelist. However, some scholars who find fewer sacramental references, such as Udo Schnelle, view the references that they find as highly important as well. Schnelle in particular views John's sacramentalism as a counter to Docetist anti-sacramentalism. On the other hand, though he agrees that there are anti-Docetic passages, James Dunn views the absence of a Eucharistic institution narrative as evidence for an anti-sacramentalism in John, meant to warn against a conception of eternal life as dependent on physical ritual.[38]


In comparison to the synoptic gospels, the Fourth Gospel is markedly individualistic, in the sense that it places emphasis more on the individual's relation to Jesus than on the corporate nature of the Church.[38][39] This is largely accomplished through the consistently singular grammatical structure of various aphoristic sayings of Jesus throughout the gospel.[38][Notes 3] According to Richard Bauckham, emphasis on believers coming into a new group upon their conversion is conspicuously absent from John.[38] There is also a theme of "personal coinherence", that is, the intimate personal relationship between the believer and Jesus in which the believer "abides" in Jesus and Jesus in the believer.[39][38][Notes 4] According to C. F. D. Moule, the individualistic tendencies of the Fourth Gospel could potentially give rise to a realized eschatology achieved on the level of the individual believer; this realized eschatology is not, however, to replace "orthodox", futurist eschatological expectations, but is to be "only [their] correlative."[40] Some have argued that the Beloved Disciple is meant to be all followers of Jesus, inviting all into such a personal relationship with Christ. Beyond this, the emphasis on the individual's relationship with Jesus in the Gospel has suggested its usefulness for contemplation on the life of Christ.[41]

John the Baptist[edit]

John's account of the Baptist is different from that of the synoptic gospels. In this gospel, John is not called "the Baptist."[42] The Baptist's ministry overlaps with that of Jesus; his baptism of Jesus is not explicitly mentioned, but his witness to Jesus is unambiguous.[42] The evangelist almost certainly knew the story of John's baptism of Jesus and he makes a vital theological use of it.[43] He subordinates the Baptist to Jesus, perhaps in response to members of the Baptist's sect who regarded the Jesus movement as an offshoot of their movement.[44]

In John's gospel, Jesus and his disciples go to Judea early in Jesus' ministry before John the Baptist was imprisoned and executed by Herod. He leads a ministry of baptism larger than John's own. The Jesus Seminar rated this account as black, containing no historically accurate information.[45] According to the biblical historians at the Jesus Seminar, John likely had a larger presence in the public mind than Jesus.[46]


In the first half of the 20th century, many scholars, primarily including Rudolph Bultmann, have forcefully argued that the Gospel of John has elements in common with Gnosticism.[44] Christian Gnosticism did not fully develop until the mid-2nd century, and so 2nd-century Proto-Orthodox Christians concentrated much effort in examining and refuting it.[47] To say John's gospel contained elements of Gnosticism is to assume that Gnosticism had developed to a level that required the author to respond to it.[48] Bultmann, for example, argued that the opening theme of the Gospel of John, the pre-existing Logos, along with John's duality of light versus darkness in his Gospel were originally Gnostic themes that John adopted. Other scholars, e.g. Raymond E. Brown have argued that the pre-existing Logos theme arises from the more ancient Jewish writings in the eighth chapter of the Book of Proverbs, and was fully developed as a theme in Hellenistic Judaism by Philo Judaeus.[49] The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran verified the Jewish nature of these concepts.[50] April DeConick has suggested reading John 8:56 in support of a Gnostic theology,[51] however recent scholarship has cast doubt on her reading.[52]

Gnostics read John but interpreted it differently from the way non-Gnostics did.[53] Gnosticism taught that salvation came from gnosis, secret knowledge, and Gnostics did not see Jesus as a savior but a revealer of knowledge.[54] Barnabas Lindars asserts that the gospel teaches that salvation can only be achieved through revealed wisdom, specifically belief in (literally belief into) Jesus.[55]

Raymond Brown contends that "The Johannine picture of a savior who came from an alien world above, who said that neither he nor those who accepted him were of this world,[56] and who promised to return to take them to a heavenly dwelling[57] could be fitted into the gnostic world picture (even if God's love for the world in 3:16 could not)."[58] It has been suggested that similarities between John's gospel and Gnosticism may spring from common roots in Jewish Apocalyptic literature.[59]

Comparison with other writings[edit]

A Syriac Christian rendition of St. John the Evangelist, from the Rabbula Gospels.

Johannine literature[edit]

The Gospel of John and the three Johannine epistles exhibit strong resemblances in theology and style; the Book of Revelation has also been traditionally linked with these, but differs from the gospel and letters in style and even theology.[60]

Synoptic gospels[edit]

The Gospel of John is significantly different from the synoptic gospels, with major variations in material, theological emphasis, chronology, and literary style.[61] There are also some discrepancies between John and the Synoptics, some amounting to contradictions.[61] The gospel forms the core of an emerging canon of Johannine works, the Johannine corpus, consisting of the gospel, the three Johannine letters, and the Apocalypse, all coming from the same theological background and opposed[citation needed] to the "Petrine corpus."

In the Synoptics, the ministry of Jesus takes a single year, but in John it takes three, as evidenced by references to three Passovers. Events are not all in the same order: the date of the crucifixion is different, as is the time of Jesus' anointing in Bethany and the cleansing of the Temple occurs in the beginning of Jesus' ministry rather than near its end.[61]

Many incidents from John, such as the wedding in Cana, the encounter of Jesus with the Samaritan woman at the well, and the raising of Lazarus, are not paralleled in the synoptics, and most scholars believe the author drew these from an independent source called the "signs gospel", the speeches of Jesus from a second "discourse" source,[62][20] and the prologue from an early hymn.[63] The gospel makes extensive use of the Jewish scriptures:[62] John quotes from them directly, references important figures from them, and uses narratives from them as the basis for several of the discourses. The author was also familiar with non-Jewish sources: the Logos of the prologue (the Word that is with God from the beginning of creation), for example, was derived from both the Jewish concept of Lady Wisdom and from the Greek philosophers, John 6 alludes not only to the exodus but also to Greco-Roman mystery cults, and John 4 alludes to Samaritan messianic beliefs.[64]

John lacks scenes from the Synoptics such as Jesus' baptism,[65] the calling of the Twelve, exorcisms, parables, and the Transfiguration. Conversely, it includes scenes not found in the Synoptics, including Jesus turning water into wine at the wedding at Cana, the resurrection of Lazarus, Jesus washing the feet of his disciples, and multiple visits to Jerusalem.[61]

In the fourth gospel, Jesus' mother Mary, while frequently mentioned, is never identified by name.[66][67] John does assert that Jesus was known as the "son of Joseph" in 6:42. For John, Jesus' town of origin is irrelevant, for he comes from beyond this world, from God the Father.[68]

While John makes no direct mention of Jesus' baptism,[65][61] he does quote John the Baptist's description of the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove, as happens at Jesus' baptism in the Synoptics. Major synoptic speeches of Jesus are absent, including the Sermon on the Mount and the Olivet Discourse,[69] and the exorcisms of demons are never mentioned as in the Synoptics.[65][70] John never lists all of the Twelve Disciples and names at least one disciple, Nathanael, whose name is not found in the Synoptics. Thomas is given a personality beyond a mere name, described as "Doubting Thomas".[71]

Jesus is identified with the Word ("Logos"), and the Word is identified with theos ("god" in Greek);[72] no such identification is made in the Synoptics.[73] In Mark, Jesus urges his disciples to keep his divinity secret, but in John he is very open in discussing it, even referring to himself as "I AM", the title God gives himself in Exodus at his self-revelation to Moses. In the Synoptics, the chief theme is the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven (the latter specifically in Matthew), while John's theme is Jesus as the source of eternal life and the Kingdom is only mentioned twice.[61][70] In contrast to the synoptic expectation of the Kingdom (using the term parousia, meaning "coming"), John presents a more individualistic, realized eschatology.[74][75][Notes 5]

In the Synoptics, quotations from Jesus are usually in the form of short, pithy sayings; in John, longer quotations are often given. The vocabulary is also different, and filled with theological import: in John, Jesus does not work "miracles" (Greek: δῠνάμεις, romanizeddynámeis, sing. δύνᾰμῐς, dýnamis), but "signs" (Greek: σημεῖᾰ, romanized: sēmeia, sing. σημεῖον, sēmeion) which unveil his divine identity.[61] Most scholars consider John not to contain any parables.[77] Rather it contains metaphorical stories or allegories, such as those of the Good Shepherd and of the True Vine, in which each individual element corresponds to a specific person, group, or thing. Other scholars consider stories like the childbearing woman (16:21) or the dying grain (12:24) to be parables.[Notes 6]

According to the Synoptics, the arrest of Jesus was a reaction to the cleansing of the temple, while according to John it was triggered by the raising of Lazarus.[61] The Pharisees, portrayed as more uniformly legalistic and opposed to Jesus in the synoptic gospels, are instead portrayed as sharply divided; they debate frequently in John's accounts. Some, such as Nicodemus, even go so far as to be at least partially sympathetic to Jesus. This is believed to be a more accurate historical depiction of the Pharisees, who made debate one of the tenets of their system of belief.[78]

Historical reliability[edit]

The teachings of Jesus found in the synoptic gospels are very different from those recorded in John, and since the 19th century scholars have almost unanimously accepted that these Johannine discourses are less likely than the synoptic parables to be historical, and were likely written for theological purposes.[79] By the same token, scholars usually agree that John is not entirely without historical value: certain sayings in John are as old or older than their synoptic counterparts, his representation of the topography around Jerusalem is often superior to that of the synoptics, his testimony that Jesus was executed before, rather than on, Passover, might well be more accurate, and his presentation of Jesus in the garden and the prior meeting held by the Jewish authorities are possibly more historically plausible than their synoptic parallels.[80]


Bede translating the Gospel of John on his deathbed, by James Doyle Penrose, 1902. Depicts the Venerable Bede as an elderly man with a long, white beard, sitting in a darkened room and dictating his translation of the Bible, as a younger scribe, sitting across from him, writes down his words. Two monks, standing together in the corner of the room, look on.
Bede translating the Gospel of John on his deathbed, by James Doyle Penrose, 1902.

The gospel has been depicted in live narrations and dramatized in productions, skits, plays, and Passion Plays, as well as in film. The most recent such portrayal is the 2014 film The Gospel of John, directed by David Batty and narrated by David Harewood and Brian Cox, with Selva Rasalingam as Jesus. The 2003 film The Gospel of John, was directed by Philip Saville, narrated by Christopher Plummer, with Henry Ian Cusick as Jesus.

Parts of the gospel have been set to music. One such setting is Steve Warner's power anthem "Come and See", written for the 20th anniversary of the Alliance for Catholic Education and including lyrical fragments taken from the Book of Signs. Additionally, some composers have made settings of the Passion as portrayed in the gospel, most notably the one composed by Johann Sebastian Bach, although some verses are borrowed from Matthew.

See also[edit]


  1. ^ Greek: Εὐαγγέλιον κατὰ Ἰωάννην, romanizedEuangélion katà Iōánnēn; also called the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, or simply John.
  2. ^ Chilton & Neusner 2006, p. 5: "by their own word what they (the writers of the New Testament) set forth in the New Testament must qualify as a Judaism. ... [T]o distinguish between the religious world of the New Testament and an alien Judaism denies the authors of the New Testament books their most fiercely held claim and renders incomprehensible much of what they said."
  3. ^ Bauckham (2015) contrasts John's consistent use of the third person singular ("The one who ..."; "If anyone ..."; "Everyone who ..."; "Whoever ..."; "No one ...") with the alternative third person plural constructions he could have used instead ("Those who ..."; ""All those who ..."; etc.). He also notes that the sole exception occurs in the prologue, serving a narrative purpose, whereas the later aphorisms serve a "paraenetic function".
  4. ^ See John 6:56, 10:14–15, 10:38, and 14:10, 17, 20, and 23.
  5. ^ Realized eschatology is a Christian eschatological theory popularized by C. H. Dodd (1884–1973). It holds that the eschatological passages in the New Testament do not refer to future events, but instead to the ministry of Jesus and his lasting legacy.[76] In other words, it holds that Christian eschatological expectations have already been realized or fulfilled.
  6. ^ See Zimmermann 2015, pp. 333–60.



  1. ^ a b Witherington 2004, p. 83.
  2. ^ a b c Edwards 2015, p. 171.
  3. ^ Burkett 2002, p. 215.
  4. ^ Reddish 2011, pp. 13.
  5. ^ Burkett 2002, p. 214.
  6. ^ Lindars 1990, p. 59.
  7. ^ a b Lincoln 2005, p. 18.
  8. ^ a b c Reddish 2011, p. 41.
  9. ^ Bynum 2012, p. 15.
  10. ^ a b Bynum 2012, p. 7,12.
  11. ^ Lindars 1990, p. 53.
  12. ^ Harris 2006, p. 479.
  13. ^ Lindars, Edwards & Court 2000, p. 41.
  14. ^ Scholz 2009, p. 168.
  15. ^ Edwards 2015, p. ix.
  16. ^ Eve 2016, p. 135.
  17. ^ Porter & Fay 2018, p. 41.
  18. ^ Reddish 2011, p. 187-188.
  19. ^ Lincoln 2005, pp. 29–30.
  20. ^ a b c Fredriksen 2008, p. unpaginated.
  21. ^ Valantasis, Bleyle & Haugh 2009, p. 14.
  22. ^ Yu Chui Siang Lau 2010, p. 159.
  23. ^ Menken 1996, p. 11-13.
  24. ^ Lamb 2014, p. 2.
  25. ^ Kostenberger 2006, p. 72.
  26. ^ Lamb 2014, p. 2-3.
  27. ^ Attridge 2006, p. 125.
  28. ^ Moloney 1998, p. 23.
  29. ^ Bauckham 2008, p. 126.
  30. ^ Aune 2003, p. 245.
  31. ^ Aune 2003, p. 246.
  32. ^ a b Van der Watt 2008, p. 10.
  33. ^ a b Kruse 2004, p. 17.
  34. ^ Hurtado 2005, p. 51.
  35. ^ a b Harris 2006, pp. 302–10.
  36. ^ Robert Kysar, "John: The Maverick Gospel" (Louisville: Westminster John Knox), 1976, pp. 49–54
  37. ^ Hans Boersma; Matthew Levering, eds. (2015). The Oxford Handbook of Sacramental Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 83. ISBN 9780191634185.
  38. ^ a b c d e f g Bauckham 2015.
  39. ^ a b Moule 1962, p. 172.
  40. ^ Moule 1962, p. 174.
  41. ^ Shea, SJ, Henry J. (Summer 2017). "The Beloved Disciple and the Spiritual Exercises". Studies in the Spirituality of Jesuits. 49 (2).
  42. ^ a b Cross & Livingstone 2005.
  43. ^ Barrett 1978, p. 16.
  44. ^ a b Harris 2006.
  45. ^ Funk & Jesus Seminar 1998, pp. 365–440.
  46. ^ Funk & Jesus Seminar 1998, p. 268.
  47. ^ Olson 1999, p. 36.
  48. ^ Kysar 2005, pp. 88ff.
  49. ^ Brown 1997.
  50. ^ Charlesworth, James H. "The Historical Jesus in the Fourth Gospel: A Paradigm Shift?." Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 8.1 (2010): 42
  51. ^ DeConick, April D. "Who is Hiding in the Gospel of John? Reconceptualizing Johannine Theology and the Roots of Gnosticism." in Histories of the Hidden God: Concealment and Revelation in Western Gnostic, Esoteric, and Mystical Traditions. (2013) 13–29.
  52. ^ Llewelyn, Stephen Robert, Alexandra Robinson, and Blake Edward Wassell. "Does John 8:44 Imply That the Devil Has a Father?: Contesting the Pro-Gnostic Reading." Novum Testamentum 60.1 (2018): 14–23.
  53. ^ Most 2005, pp. 121ff.
  54. ^ Skarsaune 2008, pp. 247ff.
  55. ^ Lindars 1990, p. 62.
  56. ^ John 17:14
  57. ^ John 14:2–3
  58. ^ Brown 1997, p. 375.
  59. ^ Kovacs 1995.
  60. ^ Van der Watt 2008, p. 1.
  61. ^ a b c d e f g h Burge 2014, pp. 236–37.
  62. ^ a b Reinhartz 2011, p. 168.
  63. ^ Perkins 1993, p. 109.
  64. ^ Reinhartz 2011, p. 171. See also: Jonathan Bourgel, " John 4:4–42: Defining A Modus Vivendi Between Jews And The Samaritans", Journal of Theological Studies 69 (2018), pp. 39–65 (
  65. ^ a b c Funk, Hoover & Jesus Seminar 1993, pp. 1–30.
  66. ^ Williamson 2004, p. 265.
  67. ^ Michaels 1971, p. 733.
  68. ^ Fredriksen 2008.
  69. ^ Pagels 2003.
  70. ^ a b Thompson 2006, p. 184.
  71. ^ Walvoord, John F. (1985). The Bible Knowledge Commentary. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books. p. 313.
  72. ^ Ehrman 2005.
  73. ^ Carson, D. A. (1991). The Pillar New Testament Commentary: The Gospel According to John. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eardmans Publishing Co. p. 117.
  74. ^ Moule 1962, pp. 172–74.
  75. ^ Sander 2015.
  76. ^ Ladd & Hagner 1993, p. 56.
  77. ^ Barry 1911.
  78. ^ Neusner 2003, p. 8.
  79. ^ Sanders 1995, pp. 57, 70–71.
  80. ^ Theissen & Merz 1998, pp. 36–37.


External links[edit]

Online translations of the Gospel of John:

Gospel of John
Preceded by
Gospel of
New Testament
Books of the Bible
Succeeded by
of the Apostles