Gospel of John

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For other uses, see Gospel of John (disambiguation).
New Testament
This box: view • talk • edit

The Gospel of John (literally, According to John; Greek, Κατὰ Ἰωάννην, Kata Iōannēn) is the fourth gospel in the canon of the New Testament, traditionally ascribed to John the Evangelist. Like the three synoptic gospels, it contains an account of some of the actions and sayings of Jesus of Nazareth, but differs from them in ethos and theological emphases. The Gospel appears to have been written with an evangelistic purpose, primarily for Greek-speaking Jews who were not believers:[1] "these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name"(John 20:30-31). A second purpose was to counter criticisms or unorthodox beliefs of Jews, John the Baptist's followers, and those who believed Jesus was only spirit and not flesh.[2]

Of the four gospels, John presents the highest Christology, describing him as the Logos who is the Arche (a Greek term for "existed from the beginning" or "the ultimate source of all things"), teaching at length about his identity as savior, and possibly declaring him to be God.[3]

Compared to the Synoptic Gospels, John focuses on Jesus' mission to bring the Logos ("Word", "Wisdom", "Reason" or "Rationality") to his disciples. Only in John does Jesus talk at length about himself, including a substantial amount of material Jesus shared with the disciples only. Certain elements of the synoptics (such as parables, exorcisms, and possibly the Second Coming) are not found in John.

Since "the higher criticism" of the 19th century, historians have questioned the gospel of John as a reliable source of information about the historical Jesus.[4][5] J. D. G. Dunn comments: "few scholars would regard John as a source for information regarding Jesus' life and ministry in any degree comparable to the Synoptics".[6] Most scholars regard the work as anonymous,[7][8][9] and date it to 90–100.

Contents

[edit] Narrative summary (structure and content of John)

Gospel of John
This box: view • talk • edit

After the prologue (1:1–5), the narrative of the gospel begins with verse 6, and consists of two parts. The first part (1:6-ch. 12) relates Jesus' public ministry from the time of his baptism by John the Baptist to its close. In this first part, John emphasizes seven of Jesus' miracles, always calling them "signs." The second part (ch. 13–21) presents Jesus in dialogue with his immediate followers (13–17) and gives an account of his Passion and Crucifixion and of his appearances to the disciples after his Resurrection (18–20). In Chapter 21, the "appendix", Jesus restores Peter after his denial, predicts Peter's death, and discusses the death of the "beloved disciple".

Raymond E. Brown, a scholar of the Johannine community, labelled the first and second parts the "Book of Signs" and the "Book of Glory", respectively.[10]

The major events covered by the Gospel of John include:

Hymn to the Word

Book of Signs, Seven Signs

Book of Glory, Last Teachings and Death

[edit] Date and authorship

Main article: Authorship of the Johannine works

[edit] Authorship

A series of articles on

"John" in the Bible

Johannine literature
Gospel of John · First Epistle of John · Second Epistle of John · Third Epistle of John · Revelation · Authorship

Names
John the Apostle · Disciple whom Jesus loved  · John the Presbyter · John the Evangelist · John of Patmos

Communities
Twelve Apostles · The Early Church

Related Literature
Apocryphon of John · Egerton Gospel · Homosexual reading · Logos · Signs Gospel

This box: view • talk • edit
John the Evangelist, by Carlo Crivelli, c. 1475.
John the Evangelist, by Carlo Crivelli, c. 1475.

The authorship has been disputed since at least the second century, with mainstream Christianity traditionally holding that the author was John the Apostle, son of Zebedee. Several other authors have historically been suggested, including Papias, John the Presbyter and Cerinthus, though many apologetic Christian scholars still hold to the conservative view that ascribes authorship to John the Apostle. Most modern experts conclude the author to be an unknown non-eyewitness.[11]

The text itself is unclear about the issue. John 21:20–25 contains information that could be construed as autobiographical. Conservative scholars generally assume that first person "I" in verse 25, the disciple in verse 24 and the disciple whom Jesus loved (also known as the Beloved Disciple) in verse 20 are the same person;[12][13] they further identify all three descriptors with the Apostle John through a combination of external and internal evidence.[14] Critics point out that the abrupt shift from third person to first person in vss. 24–25 indicates that the author of the epilogue, who is supposed a third-party editor, claims the preceding narrative is based on the Beloved Disciple's testimony, while he himself is not the Beloved Disciple.[15][16]

Ancient testimony is similarly conflicted. Attestation of Johannine authorship can be found as early as Irenaeus.[14] Eusebius wrote that Irenaeus received his information from Polycarp, who is said to have received it from the Apostles directly.[14] Charles E. Hill argues that there is a solid early orthodox tradition of authorship: the tradition that an apostle of Jesus wrote the Gospel and can be attested to as early as the first two decades of the second century, and there are many Church Fathers in the remainder of the second century that ascribe the text to John the Apostle.[17] Martin Hengel and Jorge Frey similarly argue for John the Presbyter as the author of the text.[citation needed] Hill goes on to propose that Ignatius, Polycarp, Papias’ elders, and Hierapolis' Exegesis of the Lord’s Oracles possibly all quote from the Gospel of John.

Epiphanius, however, takes note of an Early Christian sect, the Alogi, who believed the Gospel was actually written by one Cerinthus, a second-century Gnostic.[18] Corroborating this evidence is a quotation by Eusebius of Caesarea (History of the Church 7.25.2) in which Dionysius of Alexandria (mid-third century) claims that the Apocalypse of John (known commonly as the Book of Revelation), but not the Gospel of John, was believed by some before him (7.25.1) to also have been written by Cerinthus. This discussion of the Alogi represents the only instance in which both the Book of Revelation and the Gospel of John were specifically attributed to Cerinthus.[18] Hill asserts that, at that time, the Gospel of John was never attributed to Cerinthus by the established orthodoxy; that Eusebius was only stating a theory that he had heard; and that Eusebius himself believed the Gospel to have been written by the Apostle John.[19]

Starting in the 19th century, critical scholarship has further questioned the apostle John's authorship, arguing that the work was written decades after the events it describes. The critical scholarship argues that there are differences in the composition of the Greek within the Gospel, such as breaks and inconsistencies in sequence, repetitions in the discourse, as well as passages that clearly do not belong to their context, and these suggest redaction.[20]

Raymond E. Brown, a biblical scholar who specialized in studying the Johannine community, summarizes a prevalent theory regarding the development of this gospel.[21] He identifies three layers of text in the Fourth Gospel (a situation that is paralleled by the synoptic gospels): 1) an initial version Brown considers based on personal experience of Jesus; 2) a structured literary creation by the evangelist which draws upon additional sources; and 3) the edited version that readers know today (Brown 1979).

Among scholars, Ephesus in Asia Minor is a popular suggestion for the gospel's origin.[2]

[edit] Date

Most scholars agree on a range of c. 90–100 for when the gospel was written, though dates as early as the 60s or as late as the 140s have been advanced by a small number of scholars. Justin Martyr quoted from the gospel of John, which would also support that the Gospel was in existence by at least the middle of the second century,[22] and the Rylands Library Papyrus P52, which records a fragment of this gospel, is usually dated between 125 and 160 CE.[23]

The traditional view is supported by reference to the statement of Clement of Alexandria that John wrote to supplement the accounts found in the other gospels (Eusibius, Ecclesiastical History, 6.14.7). This would place the writing of John's gospel sufficiently after the writing of the synoptics.

Conservative scholars consider internal evidences, such as the lack of the mention of the destruction of the temple and a number of passages that they consider characteristic of an eye-witness (John 13:23ff, 18:10, 18:15, 19:26–27, 19:34, 20:8, 20:24–29), sufficient evidence that the gospel was composed before 100 and perhaps as early as 50–70. Barrett suggests an earliest date of 90, based on familiarity with Mark’s gospel, and the late date of a synagogue expulsion of Christians (which is a theme in John).[24] Morris suggests 70, given Qumran parallels and John’s turns of phrase, such as "his disciples" vs. "the disciples".[25] John A.T. Robinson proposes an initial edition by 50–55 and then a final edition by 65 due to narrative similarities with Paul.[26]

There are critical scholars who are of the opinion that John was composed in stages (probably two or three), beginning at an unknown time (50–70?) and culminating in a final text around 95–100. This date is assumed in large part because John 21, the so-called "appendix" to John, is largely concerned with explaining the death of the "beloved disciple", supposedly the leader of the Johannine community that would have produced the text. If this leader had been a follower of Jesus, or a disciple of one of Jesus' followers, then a death around 90–100 is reasonable.

[edit] Textual history and manuscripts

The Rylands Papyrus is the earliest manuscript fragment found of John's Gospel; dated to about 125.
The Rylands Papyrus is the earliest manuscript fragment found of John's Gospel; dated to about 125.

The earliest known manuscripts of the New Testament is a fragment from John, Rylands Library Papyrus P52. A scrap of papyrus roughly the size of a business card discovered in Egypt in 1920 (now at the John Rylands Library, Manchester, accession number P52) bears parts of John 18:31–33 on one side and John 18:37–38 on the other. Most texts list the date of this manuscript to c. 125.[27] The difficulty of fixing the date of a fragment based solely on paleographic evidence allows for a range of dates that extends from before 100 to well into the second half of the second century. P52 is small, and although a plausible reconstruction can be attempted for most of the fourteen lines represented, nevertheless the proportion of the text of the Gospel of John for which it provides a direct witness is necessarily limited, so it is rarely cited in textual debate.[28] Other notable early manuscripts include Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75.

Much current research on the textual history of the Gospel of John is being done by the International Greek New Testament Project.

[edit] Source criticism

Further information: Source criticism

Source criticism is the practice of deducing an author's or redactor's sources, especially in Biblical criticism.

[edit] Signs gospel

In 1941 Rudolf Bultmann suggested[29] that the author of John depended in part on an oral miracles tradition or manuscript account of Christ's miracles that was independent of, and not used by, the synoptic gospels. This hypothetical "Signs Gospel" is alleged to have been circulating before 70. Its traces can be seen in the remnants of a numbering system associated with some of the miracles that appear in the Gospel of John: all of the miracles that are mentioned only by John occur in the presence of John; the "signs" or semeia (the expression is uniquely John's) are unusually dramatic; and they are accomplished in order to call forth faith (see John 12:37). These miracles are different both from the rest of the "signs" in John, and from the miracles in the synoptic gospels, which occur as a result of faith. Bultmann's conclusion that John was reinterpreting an early Hellenistic tradition of Jesus as a wonder-worker, a "magician" within the Hellenistic world-view, was so controversial that heresy proceedings were instituted against him and his writings. (See more detailed discussions linked below.)

[edit] Egerton gospel

The mysterious Egerton Gospel appears to represent a parallel but independent tradition to the Gospel of John. According to scholar Ronald Cameron, it was originally composed some time between the middle of the first century and early in the second century, and it was probably written shortly before the Gospel of John.[30] Robert W. Funk, et al, places the Egerton fragments in the 2nd century, perhaps as early as 125, which would make it as old as the oldest fragments of John.[31]

[edit] Characteristics of the Gospel of John

The Gospel of John is easily distinguished from the three Synoptic Gospels, which share a considerable amount of text. John omits about 90% of the material in the synoptics. The synoptics describe much more of Jesus' life, miracles, parables, and exorcisms. However, the materials unique to John are notable, especially in their effect on modern Christianity.

[edit] Christology

John portrays Jesus Christ as "a brief manifestation of the eternal Word, whose immortal spirit remains ever-present with the believing Christian."[32] The gospel gives far more focus to the mystical relation of the Son to the Father. Many have used his gospel for the development of the concept of the Trinity while the Synoptic Gospels focused less directly on Jesus as the Son of God. John includes far more direct claims of Jesus being the only Son of God than the Synoptic Gospels. The gospel also focuses on the relation of the Redeemer to believers, the announcement of the Holy Spirit as the Comforter (Greek Paraclete), and the prominence of love as an element in the Christian character.

Some critics have maintained that the opening Hymn to the Word declares that the Logos is "god" or "a god" (Greek: theos, without the article) and was with "God" (Greek: pros ton theon), but not that the Logos is God (Greek: ho theos).[33] The translators of the New International Version (and Today's New International Version), the New American Standard Bible, the Amplified Bible, the New Living Translation, the King James Version, Young's Literal Translation, the Darby Translation, and the Wycliffe New Testament, to name a few, all disagree with these critics.

[edit] Jews

The Gospel’s treatment of the role of the Jewish authorities in the Crucifixion has given rise to allegations of anti-Semitism. The Gospel often employs the title "the Jews" when discussing the opponents of Jesus. The meaning of this usage has been the subject of debate, though critics of the “anti-Semitic” theory cite that the author most likely considered himself Jewish and was probably speaking to a largely Jewish community. Hence it is argued that "the Jews" properly refers to the Jewish religious authorities (see: Sanhedrin), and not the Jewish people as a whole. It is because of this controversy that some modern English translations, such as Today's New International Version, remove the term "Jews" and replace it with more specific terms to avoid anti-Semitic connotations, citing the above argument. Most critics of these translations, conceding this point, argue that the context (since it is obvious that Jesus, John himself, and the other disciples were all Jews) makes John's true meaning sufficiently clear, and that a literal translation is preferred.

Other critics go further, arguing that the text displays a shift in emphasis away from the Roman provincial government, which actually carried out the execution, and to the Jewish authorities as a technique used to render a developing Christianity more palatable in official circles. Nevertheless, these passages have been historically used by some Christian groups to justify the persecution of Jews.

[edit] Gnostic elements

Though not commonly understood as Gnostic, John has elements in common with Gnosticism.[34] Gnostics must have read John because it is found with Gnostic texts. The root of Gnosticism is that salvation comes from gnosis, secret knowledge. The nearly five chapters of the "farewell discourses" (John 13, 18) Jesus shares only with the Twelve Apostles. Jesus pre-exists birth as the Word (Logos). This origin and action resemble a gnostic aeon (emanation from God) being sent from the pleroma (region of light) to give humans the knowledge they need to ascend to the pleroma themselves. John's denigration of the flesh, as opposed to the spirit, is a classic Gnostic theme.

It has been suggested that similarities between John's Gospel and Gnosticism may spring from common roots in Jewish Apocalyptic literature.Kovacs, Judith L. (1995).[35]

[edit] Differences from the Synoptic Gospels

See also: Omissions in the Gospel of John

John is significantly different from the Synoptic Gospels in many ways. Some of the differences are:

  • The Gospel of John contains 4 visits by Jesus to Jerusalem, each with a Passover celebration. This chronology suggests Jesus' public ministry lasted 3 years. In the synoptic gospels, Jesus makes one trip to Jerusalem in time for the Passover observance.
  • The Kingdom of God is only mentioned twice in John (3:3–5). In contrast, the other gospels repeatedly use the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven as important concepts. John's Jesus claims a kingdom of his own, not of this world: 18:36. See also New Covenant (theology).
  • John does not contain any parables, that is poetic stories each illustrating a single message or idea.[36] Rather it contains metaphoric stories or allegories, such as The Shepherd and The Vine, in which each individual element corresponds to a specific group or thing. The UBS Greek New Testament[37] titles John 10:1–6 as "The Parable of the Sheepfold", but John 10:7 continues as a metaphor: "I am the gate".
  • The saying "He who has ears, let him hear" is absent from John.
  • The healings of demon-possessed people are never mentioned as in the Synoptics.
  • The Synoptics contain a wealth of stories about Jesus' miracles and healings, but John does not have as many of those stories; John tends to elaborate more heavily on its stories than do the Synoptics.
  • Major synoptic speeches of Jesus are absent, including all of the Sermon on the Mount and the Olivet discourse and the instructions that Jesus gave to his disciples when he sent them out throughout the country to heal and preach (as in Matthew 10 and Luke 10). Instead the major speeches according to John are at the Sea of Galilee 6:22–71, the temple 7:14–8:59, and the last supper 13–17.
  • Jesus driving the money changers from the temple appears near the beginning of the work. In the Synoptics this occurs late in Jesus' ministry.
  • Most of the action in John takes place in Iudaea Province and Jerusalem; only a few events occur in Galilee, and of those, only the feeding of the multitude (6:1–16) and the trip across the Sea of Galilee (6:17–21) are also found in the Synoptics.
  • According to the New American Bible[38], the story of the adultress (John 8:1–11) is missing from the best early Greek manuscripts. When it does appear it is at different places: here, after John 7:36 or at the end of this gospel. It can also be found after Luke 21:38.
  • The crucifixion of Jesus is recorded as Nisan 14 (19:14), the day of preparation for the Passover, about noon, in contrast to the synoptic Nisan 15. The difference led to schism in the early church (see Quartodecimanism). This would mean there were two sabbath days between Jesus' crucifixion and the morning of his resurrection as the Passover festival had additional Sabbaths.[citation needed]
  • The earthquake and the darkening of the sky, prominent in the Synoptics, are missing.
  • Jesus does not utter eschatological prophecies.

[edit] Characteristics unique to John

[edit] Critical scholarship on the differences between John and the synoptics

Since the advent of critical scholarship, John's historical importance has been considered less significant than the synoptic traditions by some scholars. The scholars of the 19th century concluded that the Gospel of John had little historical value. Over the next two centuries scholars such as Bultmann and Dodd looked closer and began finding historically important parts of John. Many scholars today believe that parts of John represent an independent historical tradition from the synoptics, while other parts represent later traditions.[39] The scholars of the Jesus Seminar still assert that there is little historical value in John, and consider nearly every Johannine saying of Jesus to be nonhistorical.[40] However, most scholars agree that John is a very important document on Christian theology.

[edit] History

John was written somewhere near the end of the first century, probably in Ephesus, in Anatolia. The tradition of John the Apostle was strong in Anatolia, and Polycarp of Smyrna reportedly knew him. Like the previous gospels, it circulated separately until Irenaeus proclaimed all four gospels to be scripture.

In the early church, John's reference to Jesus as the eternal Logos was a popular definition of Jesus, defeating the rival view that Jesus had been born a man but had been adopted as God's Son. The gospel's description of Jesus' divinity was fundamental to the developing doctrine of the Trinity.

In the second century, Montanus of Phrygia launched a movement in which he claimed to be the Paraclete promised in John.

Jerome translated John into its official Latin form, replacing various older translations.

Although very much in line with many stories in the Synoptic Gospels and probably primitive (the Didascalia Apostolorum definitely refers to it and it was probably known to Papias), the Pericope Adulterae is not part of the original text of the Gospel of John.[41] The evidence for this view does not convince all scholars.[42]

When Bible criticism developed in the 19th century, John came under increasing criticism as less historically reliable than the synoptics.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ Colin G. Kruse, The Gospel According to John: An Introduction and Commentary, Eerdmans (2004), page 21. ISBN 0802827713
  2. ^ a b Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985.
  3. ^ A detailed technical discussion can be found in Raymond E. Brown, "Does the New Testament call Jesus God?" Theological Studies 26 (1965): 545–73
  4. ^ Gospel of Saint John, in Catholic Encyclopedia
  5. ^ "In particular, the fourth Gospel, which does not emanate or profess to emanate from the apostle John, cannot be taken as an historical authority in the ordinary meaning of the word. The author of it acted with sovereign freedom, transposed events and put them in a strange light, drew up the discourses himself, and illustrated 22 great thoughts by imaginary situations. Although, his work is not altogether devoid of a real, if scarcely recognisable, traditional element, it can hardly make any claim to be considered an authority for Jesus’ history; only little of what he says can be accepted, and that little with caution. On the other hand, it is an authority of the first rank for answering the question, What vivid views of Jesus’ person, what kind of light and warmth, did the Gospel disengage?" Adolf von Harnack [1]
  6. ^ James D. G. Dunn, Jesus Remembered, Eerdmans (2003), page 165
  7. ^ Harris, Stephen L.. Understanding the Bible: a reader's introduction, 2nd ed. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. page 302.
  8. ^ Delbert Burkett, An Introduction to the New Testament and the Origins of Christianity, Cambridge University Press, (2002), page 215.
  9. ^ F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John, Eerdmans (1994), page 1.
  10. ^ Studies in John
  11. ^ Brown, Raymond Edward; Paul J Achtemeier (1978). Mary in the New Testament. New York: Paulist Press, p. 198. ISBN 0809121689. 
  12. ^ A Historical Introduction to the New Testament
  13. ^ Bible.org: Exegetical Commentary on John 21
  14. ^ a b c Bible.org: The Gospel of John: Introduction, Argument, Outline
  15. ^ The Gospel of John
  16. ^ Gospel of John
  17. ^ Hill, Charles E. (2004). The Johannine Corpus in the Early Church. Oxford University Press, p. 473. ISBN 9780199291441. 
  18. ^ a b Panarion 51.3.1–6
  19. ^ Charles E. Hill. The Johannine Corpus in the Early Church Oxford Press p.[citation needed] ISBN 978-0199291441
  20. ^ Ehrman 2004, p. 164–5
  21. ^ Brown, Raymond E. (1997). Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible, p. 363–4. ISBN 0-385-24767-2. 
  22. ^ Justin Martyr NTCanon.org. Retrieved April 25, 2007.
  23. ^ Nongbri, Brent, 2005. "The Use and Abuse of P52: Papyrological Pitfalls in the Dating of the Fourth Gospel." Harvard Theological Review 98:23–52.
  24. ^ Barrett, C. K. The Gospel According to St. John., p.127–128
  25. ^ Morris, L. The Gospel According to John p.59
  26. ^ Robinson, J. A. T. Redating the Gospels, pp. 284, 307
  27. ^ by Bruce M. Metzger (1992). The text of the New Testament: its transmission, corruption, and restoration. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press, p.56. ISBN 0-19-507297-9. 
    • Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland. The Text of the New Testament an Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, p.99. ISBN 0-8028-4098-1. 
  28. ^ Tuckett, p. 544; http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn/ManuscriptsPapyri.html#P52; http://www.historian.net/P52.html.
  29. ^ Das Evangelium des Johannes, 1941 (translated as The Gospel of John: A Commentary, 1971)
  30. ^ Ronald Cameron, editor. The Other Gospels: Non-Canonical Gospel Texts, 1982
  31. ^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. page 543.
  32. ^ Harris, Stephen L.. Understanding the Bible: a reader's introduction, 2nd ed. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. page 304.
  33. ^ Ehrman, Bart D.. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. HarperCollins, 2005. ISBN 978-0-06-073817-4; See also Raymond E. Brown's Commentary on the Gospel of John.
  34. ^ Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985.
  35. ^ Now Shall the Ruler of This World Be Driven Out: Jesus’ Death as Cosmic Battle in John 12:20–36. Journal of Biblical Literature 114(2), 227–247.
  36. ^ Catholic Encyclopedia: Parables. Retrieved on 2008-02-01.
  37. ^ edited by Kurt Aland, Bruce M. Metzger and other scholars
  38. ^ Catholic Book Publishing Co., New York, 1970
  39. ^ Brown 1997, p. 362–364
  40. ^ Jesus Seminar
  41. ^ Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
  42. ^ "If it is not an original part of the Fourth Gospel, its writer would have to be viewed as a skilled Johannine imitator, and its placement in this context as the shrewdest piece of interpolation in literary history!" The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text with Apparatus: Second Edition, by Zane C. Hodges (Editor), Arthur L. Farstad (Editor) Publisher: Thomas Nelson; ISBN-10: 0840749635

[edit] Further reading

  • Ehrman, Bart D. (2004). The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. New York: Oxford. ISBN 0-19-515462-2. 
  • Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John Anchor Bible, 1966, 1970
  • Raymond E. Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple Paulist Press, 1979
  • Robin M. Jensen, The Two Faces of Jesus, Bible Review October 2002, p42
  • J.H. Bernard & A.H. McNeile, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary On The Gospel According To St. John. Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1953.
  • Robert Murray M'Cheyne Bethany – Discovering Christ's Love in Times of Suffering When Heaven Seems Silent, (a study of John 12) Diggory Press, ISBN 978-1846857027

[edit] External links

Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Wikibooks
Wikibooks has more on the topic of

Online translations of the Gospel of John:

Related articles:

Gospel of John
Preceded by
Luke		 New Testament
Books of the Bible		 Succeeded by
Acts
v • d • e
Books of the Bible
Major Divisions
Genesis · Exodus · Leviticus · Numbers · Deuteronomy · Joshua · Judges · Ruth · 1-2 Samuel · 1-2 Kings · 1-2 Chronicles · Ezra · Nehemiah · Esther · Job · Psalms · Proverbs · Ecclesiastes · Song · Isaiah · Jeremiah · Lamentations · Ezekiel · Daniel · Hosea · Joel · Amos · Obadiah · Jonah · Micah · Nahum · Habakkuk · Zephaniah · Haggai · Zechariah · Malachi
Catholic & Orthodox: Baruch & Letter of Jeremiah · Additions to Daniel (Susanna, Song of the Three Children, Bel & the Dragon)  · 1 Esdras · 2 Esdras · Additions to Esther · Judith · 1 Maccabees · 2 Maccabees  · Sirach  · Tobit · Wisdom  · Orthodox: 3 Maccabees · 4 Maccabees · Odes  · Prayer of Manasseh · Psalm 151 · Syriac Peshitta only: 2 Baruch  · Psalms 152–155 · Ethiopian Orthodox only: 4 Baruch · Enoch · Jubilees · 1-3 Meqabyan
Matthew • Mark • Luke • John • Acts • Romans • 1 Corinthians • 2 Corinthians • Galatians • Ephesians • Philippians • Colossians • 1 Thessalonians • 2 Thessalonians • 1 Timothy • 2 Timothy  • Titus  • Philemon • Hebrews • James • 1 Peter • 2 Peter • 1 John • 2 John • 3 John • Jude • Revelation
Canon
More Divisions
Translations
Vulgate · Luther · Wyclif · Tyndale · KJV · Modern English Bibles · Debate · Dynamic vs. Formal · JPS  · RSV  · NASB  · Amp  · NAB  · NEB  · TLB  · GNB  · NIV  · NJB  · NRSV  · REB  · NLT  · Msg
Manuscripts
See also
Category · Portal · WikiProject