Index

Back

Next

A small fragment of papyrus, discovered in 1920 at Elephantine, near the Aswan dam in Southern Egypt, has proved to be the oldest known fragment of the NT in existence. It has been dated to c.125 CE, and is shown to have writing on both sides, (ie from a 'codex' manuscript), from St John's Gospel, ch 18. This has proved beyond all doubt now, that the Fourth Gospel had been written some time before this copy was made, and probably in the last years of the tumultuous 1st cent.CE.

The 1^st cent.CE had begun with the Second-Temple era of Judaism still in full swing, with the aristocratic priests living somewhat precariously with the Roman authorities after the death of Herod the Great. Among the many new movements of the time, John Baptist and Jesus, along with other similar leaders had been killed, and the Christian Community had come into being. Its message had travelled quickly, and spread around the Mediterranean, thanks to the missionary work of Paul, and others. Half way through this same century, the Jewish rebellion, and Roman reprisals, resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem, and much of the Jewish religion. Christians escaped from Jerusalem, and went to Pella, and it is possible that other groups emigrated too.

It is the hypothesis of this story, to suggest that the 'Community of the Fourth Gospel' was one of these, and which emigrated to Ephesus, taking with them their own leader who had taught them his understanding of the Person and work of Jesus, the Messiah, the fullest revelation possible of God Himself, and the fulfilment of Judaism in the world. Why?

• Internal evidence from the Gospel text suggests that this Gospel has developed from a Christian group which had little or no contact with others, not even with the Christian 'pillars of the Church' in Jerusalem, until it moved out into the Diaspora somewhat later.
• External evidence from the 2^nd cent Bishop Papias of Hierapolis, speaks of two Johns, the gospel writer, and the 'Elder', and 'two tombs at Ephesus, each of which is 'John's'. (It is because of the confusion of so many 'Johns', that it is easier to refer to the Gospel as the '4G', the Fourth Gospel).
• Another 2^nd cent Bishop, Irenaeus of Lyons in S France, wrote, 'Then John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned on his breast, himself produced his gospel while he was living at Ephesus in Asia'. This suggests that the unknown writer was named John, and is to be identified with the 'Beloved Disciple', or the 'disciple whom Jesus loved', who is mentioned five times only, in the Fourth Gospel, during the last stay of Jesus in Jerusalem.
• Another author wrote that the Church leader in Ephesus was 'from the priestly caste in Jerusalem, and lived to a great age'. If this is accurate, he would have been well educated in all the Hebrew literature, the Wisdom literature, and in all things hellenised and philosophical. The author of the Fourth Gospel was all of these things, and a Southerner, who knew his way accurately around Jerusalem, - and therefore was certainly not 'John the son of Zebedee', the Galilean fisherman.

The hypothesis continues, based on a careful reading of the Gospel text: from ch 1, that John Baptist's work was in the south, near Bethany, attracting attention from the Jewish priests, levites and Pharisees, and where Jesus was one of his many disciples. After baptising Jesus, John advised his disciples to change their allegiance to Jesus. Verse 37 records two who did. One was named Andrew, but the other remains unnamed. Is this the modesty of the disciple-author? Andrew, and his brother Simon Peter, followed Jesus to Galilee, as the Synoptics all assert, but the 'other' seems to have been unable to go with them. This disciple stayed in the south, but met up enthusiastically with Jesus on frequent visits to Jerusalem. The Fourth Gospel suggests that Jesus's public life lasted much longer than the few months of the Synoptics, which do not account for the many friends, and places of hospitality open to him in and near the city of Jerusalem.

If this disciple was of the priestly caste, he would have been based in Jerusalem at the Temple. He would have been a highly respected, aristocratic, and influential man, and maybe even one of several who took serious note of all he heard from, and of, Jesus. Certainly the author of the 4G was a man of deep intellectual and spiritual sensitivity. When eventually, in ch 12, the crowds in Jerusalem heard that Jesus was coming, after raising Lazarus from the dead, they went out from the city to meet him with palm branches, and shouts of acclamation, after which Jesus found and rode a donkey. The 'disciple that Jesus loved' was certainly present, in addition to the Twelve, at the Last Supper, witnessing, and understanding what Jesus was doing when he washed the disciples' feet, and as an aristocratic person, reclining very closely to Jesus at the meal, ch 13. In ch 18.15-16, after the arrest of Jesus in the garden, Simon Peter and 'another disciple, ... known to the high priest' followed. Simon was left outside, but his aristocratic companion was able to speak to the woman at the gate, and he was allowed into the courtyard. At the Cross, in the absence of the Twelve, and even of Peter who was too ashamed to appear, it was to this Beloved Disciple that Jesus commended the care of his mother. On the day of resurrection, Peter and the Beloved One went together to the tomb, and in ch 21, the epilogue to the Gospel, they were both present with others, including 'the sons of Zebedee', at the Sea of Tiberias/Galilee.

Such an intimate disciple was well-placed to lead a community of believers in his home area, and sufficiently authoritative to feel independent from the Galilean 'pillars'. He made no reference to them, as Paul did.

When the simmering troubles with Rome became very serious, perhaps they emigrated to Ephesus. Did some of them have relatives, or business connections there?

In Ephesus, after 70 CE, the Beloved Disciple's Community would have met, and become open to Gentile converts, and possibly have come into contact with Paul's Church there. Paul's writings, and the Gospel of Mark, would have become known, alongside their own stories and tradition of Jesus.

When all Jewish Christians were finally excommunicated from the synagogues, they were all put to the difficult test, - to stay with the new faith, or be pulled back to their former, and familiar roots. Many did revert, and earned all the Gospel's polemical anger against 'the Jews', and 'their Law'.

Here the two greatest theologians of the NT come together in agreement, Paul, and the Beloved Disciple, preaching that Jesus had burst open the 'chains' of the Law.

Then the predominantly Gentile group, without the restraining influence of Jewish heritage, began to misunderstand the Jewish nature of Jesus's pre-existent messiahship as taught by their leader, saying that this Son of God had come down to earth like a Greek hero from Mt Olympus, and never been truly 'human'. (This is the beginning of the 'Docetic heresy' in the 2^nd cent Gentile Church, believing that Jesus had merely 'seemed' to be human).

Finally, the Beloved Disciple, leader of the 'Johannine Community', put together his gospel, selected from various pieces he had already written over the years, for his own people at the end of the 1^st cent CE. He was attempting to keep the allegiance of his former Jewish members, and correct the mistakes of the newer Gentile members, describing them all as the branches of the vine, which is Jesus, ch 15.

It may be that he died before its final publication, leaving his great friend and assistant, John the Elder, to add the last touches, eg ch 19.35, and ch 21.

The Fourth Gospel is strikingly different from the Synoptic three which all follow the structure of Mark's story.

There is no birth narrative, only a magnificent Prologue, declaring that Jesus was pre-existent, and the agent of God's creation. There is no account of the baptism of Jesus, no calling and listing of 'the Twelve', no parables, no long ministry in Galilee, no account of Peter's discovery of Jesus's true identity or the Transfiguration, no institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper, and no account of a trial of Jesus by the Sanhedrin. There is, however, much valued information about Jesus and his teaching which is not found anyhere else, eg the wedding at Cana, the time Jesus spent in Samaria, the raising of Lazarus, and the feet-washing at the Last Supper. The whole gospel reads like 'a seamless robe', and often it is impossible to tell if its words are those of Jesus, or of the Gospel writer. It reflects a different tradition, but describes the same events surrounding the lives, and teachings, of John Baptist and Jesus.

The first story in ch 2 is of the wedding at Cana, the revealing of Jesus's 'glory', and the statement that his disciples 'believed in him'. It is the first of seven miraculous 'signs' and written to draw attention to something important. The hidden significance here is in the large jars of water, ready for the Jewish rites of purification. The Gospel announces that Judaism, with all its rituals, is to be transformed by Jesus into the fine wines of the messianic banquet at the apocalyptic Eschaton, (Isaiah 25.6-8). It calls to mind associations of the 'marriage' of YHWH, the Bridegroom, and Israel, the bride, - now to become a reality.

It is followed by Jesus, back in Jerusalem, and cleansing the Temple with a 'whip of cords'. In the discussion that followed, the events of 70 CE and the resurrection on the third day make sense of Jesus's words, 'Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up', to the pupils of the Gospel's author.

Both stories point to the passing of the 'old', and arrival of the 'new' in Christ.

Nicodemus, in ch 3, another disciple from the south, approached Jesus as if he were another prophet like Moses, but in vv 13-15 Jesus exploded that idea, claiming to be the apocalyptic heavenly Son of Man who descended from heaven to enable all believers to have eternal life. (ie everyone in the Community, whether or not they were descendants of Abraham, Jews or Gentiles). After spending more time working alongside the Baptist, Jesus went to the old Canaanite capital city area of Shechem, where his meeting with the woman of Samaria is told with excellent storytelling and much irony. From the water of Cana, even the water of the patriarchal Jacob's well, (water symbolising the Law of Moses), is still inferior to the 'living water' that Jesus can offer. Sadly, it was the Samarians who believed, and invited Jesus to stay with them, - not the Jews! Maybe it was these people who were the original members of the Fourth Gospel community?

The healing of the blind man at the pool of Bethesda at Jerusalem, in ch 5, has many similarities with events in the Synoptics. It records the beginning of Jewish offence concerning the claims of Jesus, but enables the author to lay out the highest Christological claims for Jesus in the whole Gospel, vv 19-30.

Ch 6 begins with another, and different tradition, of the feeding of the five thousand. It leads into a long discourse with the Jews in Capernaum, contrasting the manna given by Moses to their ancestors in the wilderness, with the Bread of Life, Jesus's own life. Again the incredulous Jews rejected his claim, but Simon Peter made his own declaration of faith, similarly to the account in Mk 8, Mtth 16, and Lk 9, whilst the author's community recognised the Eucharistic nature of their on-going relationship with the Risen Christ.