JOHN
440
JOHN
Like Tatian, who apostatized about 172 and joined
the Gnostic sect of the Encratites, several other here-
tics of the second century also supply indirect testi-
mony concerning the Fourth Gospel. Basilides ap-
peals to John, i, 8, and ii, 4. Valentine seeks support
for his theories of the aeons in expressions taken from
John; his pupil Heracleon composed, about 160, a
commentary on the Fourth Gospel, while Ptolemy,
another of his followers, gives an explanation of the
prologue of the Evangelist. Marcion preserves a por-
tion of the canonical text of the Gospel of St. John
(xiii, 4-15; xxxiv, 15, 19) in his own apocryphal gos-
pel. The Montanists deduce their doctrine of the
Paraclete mainly from John, xv and xvi. Similarly
in his "True Discourse" (about 178) the pagan phil-
osopher C'elsus bases some of his statements on pas-
sages of the Fourth Gospel.
On the other hand, indirect testimony concern- ing this Gospel is also supplied by the oldest ec- clesiastical liturgies and the monuments of early Christian art. As to tlie former, we find from the very beginning texts from the Fourth Gospel used in all parts of the Church, and not infrequently with special predilection. Again, to take one example, the raising of Lazarus depicted in the Catacombs forms, as it were, a monumental commentary on the eleventh chapter of the Gospel of St. John.
The Testimony of the Gospel Itself. — The Gospel it- self also furnishes an entirely intelligible solution of the question of authorship.
(1) In the first place from the general character of the work we are enabled to draw some infer- ences regarding its author. To judge from the lan- guage, the author was a Palestinian Jew, who was well acquainted with the Hellenic Greek of the upper classes. He also displays an accurate knowledge of the geographical and social conditions of Palestine, even in his slightest incidental references. He must have enjoyed personal intercourse with the Saviour and must even have belonged to the circle of his inti- mate friends. The very style of his chronicle shows the writer to have been an eyewitness of most of the events. Concerning the Apostles John and James the author shows a thoroughly characteristic reserve. He never mentions their names, although he gives those of most of the Apostles, and once only, and then quite incidentally, speaks of "the sons of Zebedee" (xxi, 2). On several occasions, when treating of incidents in which the Apostle John was concerned, he seems in- tentionally to avoid mentioning his name (John, i, 37- 40; xviii, 15, 16; cf. xx, 3-10). He speaks of John the precursor nine times without giving him the title of " the Baptist", as the other Evangelists invariably do to " distinguish him from the Apostle. All these indications point clearly to the conclusion that the Apostle John must have been the author of the Fourth Gospel.
(2) Still clearer grounds for this view are to be found in the express testimony of the author. Having men- tioned in his account of the Crucifixion that the disci- ple wliom Jesus loved stood beneath the Cross beside the mother of Jesus (John, xix, 26 sqq.), he adds, after telling of the Death of Christ and the opening of His side, the solemn assurance: "And he that saw it hath given testimony ; and his testimony is true. And he knoweth that he saith true: that you also may be- lieve" (xi.x, 35). According to the admission of all, John himself is the "di.sciple whom the Lord loved". Hi.s testimony is contained in the Gospel which for many consecutive years he has announced by word of mouth and which he now sets down in writing for the instruction of the faithful. He assures us, not merely that this testimony is true, but that he was a personal witness of its truth. In this manner he identifies himself with the disciple beloved of the Lord who alone could give such testimony from intimate knowl- edge.
Similarly the author repeats this testimony at the
end of his Gospel. After again referring to the disciple
whom Jesus loved, he immediately adds the words:
"This is that disciple who giveth testimony of these
things, and hath written these things; and we know
that his testimony is true" (John, xxi, 24). As the
next verse shows, his testimony refers not merely to
the events just recorded but to the whole Gospel. It
is more in accordance with the text and the general
style of the Evangelist to regard these final words as
the author's own composition; should we prefer, how-
ever, to regard this verse as the addition of the first
reader and disciple of the Apostle, the text constitutes
the earliest and most venerable evidence of the Jo-
hannine origin of the Fourth Gospel (cf, M. Lepin in
"Revue Biblitjue", new series, V, 1908, pp. 89-91).
(3) Finally we can obtain evidence concerning the author from the Gospel itself, in a third way, by com- paring his work with the three Epistles, which have re- tained their place among the Catholic Epistles as the writings of the Apostle John. We may here take for granted as a fact admitted by the majority of the critics, that these Epistles are the work of the same writer, and that the author was identical with the au- thor of the Gospel. In fact the arguments based on the unity of style and language, on the uniform Johan- nine teaching, on the testimony of Christian antiquity, render any reasonable doulit of the common author- ship impossible. At the beginning of the Second and Third Epistles the author styles himself simply "the presbyter" — evidently the title of honour by which he was commonly known among the Christian commu- nity. On the other hand, in his First Epistle, he em- phasizes repeatedly and with great earnestness the fact that he was an eyewitness of the facts concerning the life of Christ to which he (in his Gospel) had borne testimony among the Christians: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the word of life: for the life was manifested; and we have seen and do bear witness, and declare unto you the life eternal, which was with the Father, and hath appeared to us: that which we have seen and have heard, we declare unto you" (I John, i, 1-3; cf. iv, 14). This "presbyter", who finds it sufficient to use such an honorary title without qualification as his proper name, and was like- wise an eye- and earwitness of the incidents of the Saviour's life, can be none other than the Presbyter John mentioned by Papias, who can in turn be none other than John the Apostle (cf. John the Evan- gelist, Saint).
We can, therefore, maintain with the utmost cer- tainty that John the Apostle, the favourite disciple of Jesus, was really the author of the Fourth Gospel.
IV. Circumstances op the Compcsition. — Pass- ing over the intimate circumstances with which early legend has clothed the composition of the Fourth Gospel, we shall discuss briefly the time and place of composition, and the first readers of the Gospel.
As to the date of its composition we possess no cer- tain historical information. According to the general opinion, the Gospel is to be referred to the last decade of the first century, or to be still more precise, to 96 or one of the succeeding years. The grounds for this opinion are briefly as follows: (1) the Fourth Gospel was composed after the three Synoptics; (2) it was written after the death of Peter, since the last chapter — especially xxi, 18-19 — presupposes tin- death of the Prince of the Apostles; (3) it was also written alter the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, for the Evangelist's references to the Jews (cf. particularly xi, 18; xviii, 1; xix, 41) seem to indicate that the end of the city and of the people as a nation is already come; (4) the text of xxi, 23, appears to imply that John was already far advanced in years when he wrote the Gospel; (5) those who denied the Divinity of
