Interpretation of the Gospel of John

Evidence from Ancient Christian Tradition about the Origin of the Fourth Gospel Reason and purpose of writing the Gospel Plan and Contents of the Gospel of John Objections to the Authenticity of John's Gospel Self-Testimony of the Fourth Gospel Language and presentation of the fourth Gospel Commentaries on the Gospel of John and other writings that have this Gospel as their subject Chapter 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 The conviction of the Orthodox Church that the writer of the fourth Gospel was the beloved disciple of Christ, the Apostle John, is based on the solid testimony of ancient Christian church tradition. First of all, Saint Irenaeus of Lyons in his “Refutation of Gnosis” (about 185), referring to the tradition of the Asia Minor Church, to which he belonged by his upbringing, says that the Lord’s disciple John wrote the Gospel in Ephesus. He also cites excerpts from the Gospel of John to refute the teachings of the Valentinian heretics. There are hints in the letters of St. Ignatius of Antioch that he knew the Gospel of John. Thus, he says that Christ did nothing without the Father (Magn. 7:1; cf. John 5:19), speaks of the bread of life, which is the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 10:16; cf. John 6:51), of the Spirit who knows where He is going and from where he comes (Phil. 7, 1; cf. John 3:8), of Jesus as the door (Phil. 9:1; cf. John 10:9). Justin Martyr, who lived in Ephesus before settling in Rome, not only in his teaching about the Logos adheres to the teaching of the Gospel of John, but says that his teaching is based on the “memoirs of the apostles,” that is, obviously, on the Gospels (Dial. 100, 4 and Apol. 67, 3). He mentions the word of Jesus to Nicodemus about regeneration (Apol. 61; cf. John 3ff.). Around the same time (approximately 60 years of the 2nd century), the Montanists formally based their teaching that the Comforter Spirit speaks through them on the Gospel of John. The attempt of their enemies - the Alogs - to attribute the 4th Gospel, as having served as a formal support for heretics, to the heretic Kerinthos did not have any success and only served as a reason to testify to the faith of the Church in the origin of the 4th Gospel precisely from John (Irenaeus of Lyons. “Against Heresies”, III, 11, 1). In the same way, the attempt of the Gnostics to use different terms from the Gospel of John did not shake the Church’s faith in the authenticity of this Gospel. In the era of Marcus Aurelius (161–180) both in the Church of Asia Minor and outside it, the 4th Gospel is universally recognized as the work of the Apostle John. So the acts of Karp and Papila, Theophilus of Antioch, Melito, Apollinaris of Hierapolis, Tatian, Athenagoras (ancient Latin and Syriac translations already have the Gospel of John) - all are obviously well acquainted with the Gospel of John. Saint Clement of Alexandria even speaks about the reason for which John wrote his Gospel (Eusebius, “Church History,” VI, 14, 7). The Muratorian Fragment also testifies to the origin of the Gospel of John (see Analects, ed. Preyshen, 1910, p. 27). Thus, the Gospel of John existed in Asia Minor, undoubtedly, from the beginning of the 2nd century and was read, and around the middle of the 2nd century it found its way into other areas where Christians lived, and gained respect as the work of the Apostle John. Given this state of affairs, it is not at all surprising that in many of the works of apostolic men and apologists we do not yet encounter quotations from the Gospel of John or hints at its existence. But the very fact that the student of the heretic Valentine (who came to Rome around 140), Heracleon, wrote a commentary on the Gospel of John indicates that the Gospel of John appeared much earlier than the second half of the 2nd century, since, undoubtedly, it would be quite strange to write an interpretation of a work that had only recently appeared. Finally, the testimonies of such pillars of Christian science as Origen (III century), Eusebius of Caesarea and Blessed Jerome (IV century) about the authenticity of the Gospel of John clearly indicate that there cannot be anything unfounded in the church tradition about the origin of the fourth Gospel. Where the Apostle John was from, nothing definite can be said about this. All that is known about his father, Zebedee, is that he and his sons James and John lived in Capernaum and were engaged in fishing on a fairly large scale, as indicated by the fact that he had workers (Mark 1:20). A more outstanding personality is Zebedee’s wife, Salome, who belonged to those women who accompanied Christ the Savior and from their own means acquired what was required to support a fairly large circle of Christ’s disciples, who made up His almost constant retinue (Luke 8:1-3; Mark 15:41). She shared the ambitious desires of her sons and asked Christ to fulfill their dreams (Matthew 20:20). She was present from afar when the Savior was taken down from the cross (Matthew 27:55 et seq.) and participated in the purchase of aromas for anointing the body of the buried Christ (Mark 16:1; cf. Luke 23:56). The family of Zebedee was, according to legend, related to the family of the Blessed Virgin: Salome and the Blessed Virgin were sisters - and this tradition is in full accordance with the fact that the Savior, while He was about to betray His Spirit to the Father at any moment, hanging on the cross, entrusted the Blessed Virgin to the care of John (see comments on John 19:25). This relationship can also explain why it was out of all the disciples that James and John laid claim to the first places in the Kingdom of Christ (Matthew 20:21). But if James and John were nephews of the Blessed Virgin, then they were also related to John the Baptist (cf. Luke 1:36), whose preaching should therefore have been of particular interest to them. All these families were imbued with one pious, truly Israeli mood. This is evidenced, by the way, by the fact that all the names that the members of these families bore were real Jewish ones without any admixture of Greek or Latin nicknames. From the fact that James is mentioned everywhere before John, we can confidently conclude that John was younger than James, and tradition also calls him the youngest among the apostles. John was no more than 20 years old when Christ called him to follow Him, and the tradition that he lived to see the reign of Emperor Trajan (reign 98–117) is not improbable: John was then about 90 years old. Soon after the call to follow Him, Christ called John to a special, apostolic ministry, and John became one of the 12 apostles of Christ. Because of his special love and devotion to Christ, John became one of the closest and most trusted disciples of Christ, and even the most beloved. He was honored to be present at the most important events in the life of the Savior, for example at His Transfiguration, at the prayer of Christ in Gethsemane, etc. In contrast to the Apostle Peter, John lived a more internal, contemplative life than an external, practically active one. He observes more than he acts, he often immerses himself in his inner world, discussing in his mind the greatest events that he was called to witness. His soul hovers more in the heavenly world, which is why from ancient times he adopted the symbol of the eagle in church icon painting (Bazhenov, pp. 8–10). But sometimes John also showed ardor of soul, even extreme irritability: this was when he stood up for the honor of his Teacher (Luke 9:54; Mark 9:38–40). The ardent desire to be closer to Christ was also reflected in John’s request to grant him and his brother the first positions in the glorious Kingdom of Christ, for which John was ready to go with Christ to suffer (Matthew 20:20–28). For this ability for unexpected impulses, Christ called John and James “sons of thunder” (Mark 3:17), predicting at the same time that the preaching of both brothers would irresistibly, like thunder, act on the souls of listeners. After Christ’s ascension into heaven, the Apostle John, together with the Apostle Peter, acts as one of the representatives of the Christian Church in Jerusalem (Acts 3:1 et seq.; Acts 2:4, 8:14–25). At the Apostolic Council in Jerusalem in the winter of 51–52, John, together with Peter and the primate of the Jerusalem Church, James, recognized the Apostle Paul’s right to preach the Gospel to the pagans, without obliging them at the same time to observe the Law of Moses (Gal. 2:9). Already at that time, therefore, the significance of the Apostle John was great. But how it must have increased when Peter, Paul and James died! Having settled in Ephesus, John occupied the position of leader of all the churches of Asia for another 30 years, and of the other disciples of Christ around him, he enjoyed exceptional respect from the believers. Tradition tells us some details about the activities of the Apostle John during this period of his stay in Ephesus. Thus, it is known from legend that he annually celebrated the Christian Easter at the same time as the Jewish Passover and observed fasting before Easter. Then one day he left a public bath, seeing the heretic Kerinthos there. “Let’s run away,” he said to those who came with him, “so that the bathhouse does not collapse, because Kerinthos, the enemy of truth, is in it.” How great was his love and compassion for people, this is evidenced by the story of the young man whom John converted to Christ and who, in his absence, joined a gang of robbers. John, according to the legend of Saint Clement of Alexandria, himself went to the robbers and, meeting the young man, begged him to return to the good path. In the very last hours of his life, John, no longer able to speak long speeches, only repeated: “Children, love one another!” And when his listeners asked him why he repeated everything the same, “the apostle of love” - such a nickname was established for John - answered: “Because this is the commandment of the Lord, and if only it were fulfilled, that would be enough.” Thus, a will that does not allow any compromise between a holy God and a sinful world, devotion to Christ, love of truth, combined with compassion for unfortunate brothers - these are the main character traits of John the Theologian, which are imprinted in Christian tradition. John, according to legend, testified his devotion to Christ through suffering. Thus, under Nero (reign 54–68) he was brought in chains to Rome and here he was first forced to drink a cup of poison, and then, when the poison did not work, he was thrown into a cauldron of boiling oil, from which, however, the apostle also did not suffer. During his stay in Ephesus, John had to, by order of Emperor Domitian (reign 81–96), go to live on the island. Patmos, located 40 geographical miles southwest of Ephesus. Here, in mysterious visions, the future destinies of the Church of Christ were revealed to him, which he depicted in his Apocalypse. On about. Patmos the Apostle remained until the death of Emperor Domitian (96), when, by order of Emperor Nerva (reign 96–98), he was returned to Ephesus. John died, probably in the 7th year of the reign of Emperor Trajan (105 AD), having reached the age of one hundred. According to the Muratorian canon, John wrote his Gospel at the request of the Asia Minor bishops, who wanted to receive instruction from him in faith and piety. Clement of Alexandria adds to this that John himself noticed some incompleteness in the stories about Christ contained in the first three Gospels, which speak almost only of the “bodily”, i.e. about external events from the life of Christ, and therefore he himself wrote the “Spiritual Gospel”. Eusebius of Caesarea, for his part, adds that John, having reviewed and approved the first three Gospels, still found in them insufficient information about the beginning of Christ’s activity. Blessed Jerome says that the reason for writing the Gospel was the emergence of heresies that denied the coming of Christ in the flesh. Thus, based on what has been said, we can conclude that when John wrote his Gospel, on the one hand, he wanted to fill the gaps he noticed in the first three Gospels, and on the other hand, to give believers (primarily Greek Christians 1) weapons to fight the emerging heresies. As for the evangelist himself, he defines the purpose of his Gospel as follows: “These are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and by believing you may have life in His name” (John 20:31). It is clear that John wrote his Gospel in order to give Christians support for their faith in Christ precisely as the Son of God, because only with such faith can one achieve salvation or, as John puts it, have life in oneself. And the entire content of the Gospel of John is fully consistent with this intention expressed by its writer. In fact, the Gospel of John begins with the conversion of John himself to Christ and ends with the confession of faith of the Apostle Thomas (Chapter 21 is an addition to the Gospel made later). Throughout his entire Gospel, John wants to depict the process by which he and his co-apostles came to faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, so that the reader of the Gospel, following the actions of Christ, would gradually understand that Christ is the Son of God... The readers of the Gospel already had this faith, but it was weakened in them by various false teachings that distorted the concept of the incarnation of the Son of God. At the same time, John could have had in mind the clarification of the duration of Christ’s public service to the human race: according to the first three Gospels, it turned out that this activity lasted just over one year, and John explains that it lasted over three years 2. The Evangelist John, in accordance with the goal that he set for himself when writing the Gospel, undoubtedly had his own special narrative plan, not similar to the traditional presentation of the story of Christ common to the first three Gospels. John does not simply report the events of the gospel history and the speech of Christ in order, but makes a selection from them, primarily before the rest of the Gospels, putting in first place everything that testified to the divine dignity of Christ, which in his time was subject to doubt. Events from the life of Christ are reported in John in a well-known light, and all are aimed at clarifying the main position of the Christian faith - the Divinity of Jesus Christ. In the prologue to the Gospel (John 1:1–18), John first of all speaks about the divine dignity of Christ and about the attitude of people towards Him, some of whom did not believe Him, while others accepted Him. This idea about the different attitudes of people towards the incarnate Word, the idea of ​​the struggle between faith and unbelief, runs through the entire Gospel of John. The very narrative of Christ’s activity begins with His speech to the disciples of John the Baptist, who had previously testified three times that Jesus is the Messiah and the Son of God. Christ first reveals to His disciples His omniscience (John 1:19–51), and then His omnipotence (John 2:1–11) and then after some time in Jerusalem appears as the ruler of the church, i.e. Messiah (John 2:12–22). Official representatives of Judaism immediately show their hostile attitude towards Christ, which over time should degenerate into open persecution of Christ, but the common people, apparently, feel an attraction to the appeared Light, fueled, however, by the miracles that Christ performed this time in Jerusalem (John 2:23-25). An example of a bearer of such faith is the Pharisee Nicodemus, to whom Christ revealed the greatness of His face and His mission (John 3:1–21). In view of this attitude towards Christ on the part of the Jews, John the Baptist again and for the last time already testified to His high dignity before his disciples, threatening those who did not believe in Christ with the wrath of God (John 3:22–36). After this, after spending about eight months in Judea, Christ departs for a while to Galilee, and along the way, in the Samaritan region, he converts the population of an entire Samaritan town to faith (John 4:1-44). In Galilee, He receives a rather warm welcome, since the Galileans witnessed the miracles that Christ performed in Jerusalem on the Easter holiday. Christ, however, declares such faith to be insufficient (John 4:45–54). However, according to John, Christ during His stay in Galilee, which apparently lasted about seven or eight months - until the Feast of Tabernacles (Jewish holiday in John 5:1), lived with His family, without preaching the Gospel. He obviously wants, first of all, to proclaim the Gospel in Judea and for this he goes to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles. Here, regarding the healing He performed on the Sabbath, representatives of Judaism begin to accuse Him of violating the Law of Moses, and when Christ, to justify His act, pointed out to them His special rights as the Son of God, equal with God the Father, the hatred of the Jews for Him was expressed in the measures they planned to eliminate Christ, which, however, this time were not carried out due to the strong impression undoubtedly made by what Christ said here in defense of His Messianic dignity in speech (John 5:1–47). From this place John begins to depict the struggle that the official representatives of Judaism waged against Christ - a struggle that ended with the decision of the Jewish authorities to “take Christ” (John 11:57). Not accepted a second time in Judea, Christ again withdrew to Galilee and began to perform miracles, of course, while preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. But here, too, Christ’s teaching about Himself as such a Messiah, Who came not to restore the earthly Kingdom of Judea, but to found a new Kingdom - spiritual, and to impart eternal life to people, arms the Galileans against Him, and only a few disciples remain near Him, namely the 12 apostles, whose faith is expressed by the Apostle Peter (John 6:1-71). Having spent both Easter and Pentecost this time in Galilee, due to the fact that in Judea the enemies were just waiting for an opportunity to seize and kill Him, Christ only on the Feast of Tabernacles went to Jerusalem again - this is already the third trip there - and here again appeared before the Jews with the affirmation of His divine messengership and origin. The Jews again rebel against Christ. But Christ, nevertheless, on the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles boldly declares His high dignity - that He is the giver of the truth of the water of life, and the servants sent by the Sanhedrin cannot fulfill the assignment given to them - to capture Christ (John 7). Then, after forgiving the sinful wife (John 8:1–11), Christ denounces the Jews’ unbelief in Him. He calls Himself the Light of the world, and they, His enemies, are the children of the devil - the ancient murderer. When, at the end of his speech, He pointed to His eternal existence, the Jews wanted to stone Him as a blasphemer, and Christ disappeared from the church, where His altercation with the Jews took place (John 8). After this, Christ healed a man born blind on the Sabbath, and this further strengthened the hatred of Jesus among the Jews (John 9). Nevertheless, Christ boldly calls the Pharisees mercenaries, who do not value the well-being of the people, and Himself as the true Shepherd, Who lays down His life for His flock. This speech arouses a negative attitude towards it in some, and some sympathy in others (John 10:1-21). Three months after this, on the feast of the renewal of the church, a clash occurs again between Christ and the Jews and Christ retires to Perea, where many Jews who believed in Him also follow Him (John 10:22–42). The miracle of the resurrection of Lazarus, which testified to Christ as the giver of resurrection and life, arouses faith in Christ in some, and a new explosion of hatred towards Christ in others of Christ’s enemies. Then the Sanhedrin makes the final decision to put Christ to death and declares that anyone who knows about the whereabouts of Christ should immediately report this to the Sanhedrin (John 11:57). After more than three months, which Christ spent not in Judea, He again appeared in Judea and near Jerusalem, in Bethany, was present at a friendly evening, and a day after that, solemnly entered Jerusalem as the Messiah. The people greeted Him with delight, and the Greek proselytes who came to the holiday expressed a desire to talk with Him. All this prompted Christ to announce out loud to everyone around Him that He would soon give Himself up to death for the true good of all people. John concludes this section of his Gospel with the statement that although the majority of the Jews did not believe in Christ, despite all His miracles, there were some who believed among them (John 12:37–43). Having depicted the gap that occurred between Christ and the Jewish people, the evangelist now depicts the attitude towards the apostles. At the last, Last Supper, Christ washed His disciples’ feet like a simple servant, thereby showing His love for them and at the same time teaching them humility (John 13). Then, in order to strengthen their faith, He speaks about His upcoming departure to God the Father, about their future position in the world and about His subsequent upcoming meeting with them. The apostles interrupt His speech with questions and objections, but He constantly leads them to think that everything that will soon happen will be useful both for Him and for them (John 14-16). In order to finally calm the anxiety of the apostles, Christ, in their presence, prays to His Father that He would take them under His protection, saying at the same time that the work for which Christ was sent has now been completed and that, therefore, the apostles will only have to proclaim this to the whole world (John 17). John devotes the last section of his Gospel to depicting the story of the suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Here we are talking about the capture of Christ by soldiers in Gethsemane and the denial of Peter, the trial of Christ by spiritual and temporal authorities, the crucifixion and death of Christ, the piercing of Christ’s side with a warrior’s spear, the burial of Christ’s body by Joseph and Nicodemus (John 18–19) and, finally, the appearance of Christ to Mary Magdalene, ten disciples and then Thomas along with other disciples a week after the resurrection ( John 20:1–29 ). A conclusion is attached to the Gospel, which indicates the purpose of writing the Gospel - strengthening faith in Christ in the readers of the Gospel (John 20:30-31). The Gospel of John also contains an epilogue, which depicts the appearance of Christ to seven disciples at the Sea of ​​Tiberias, when the restoration of the Apostle Peter to his apostolic dignity followed. At the same time, Christ predicts to Peter his fate and the fate of John (John 21). Thus, John developed in his Gospel the idea that the incarnate Only Begotten Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, was rejected by His people, among whom He was born, but nevertheless gave grace and truth, and the opportunity to become children of God to the disciples who believed in Him. This content of the Gospel is conveniently divided into the following sections. First section: Testimony of Christ of John the Baptist - before the first manifestation of the greatness of Christ (John 1:19–2:11). Second Section: The Beginning of Christ's Public Ministry (John 2:12–4:54). Third section: Jesus is the Giver of eternal life, in the fight against Judaism (John 5:1–11:57). Fourth section: From the last week before Easter (John 12). Fifth section: Jesus with his disciples on the eve of His suffering (John 13–17). Section Six: The Glorification of Jesus through Death and Resurrection (John 18–20). From what has been said about the structure and content of the Gospel of John, one can see that this Gospel contains a lot of things that distinguish it from the first three Gospels, which are called synoptic due to the similarity of the image of the person and activity of Jesus Christ given in them. Thus, the life of Christ in John begins in heaven... The story of the birth and childhood of Christ, with which the evangelists Matthew and Luke introduce us, John passes over in silence. In the majestic prologue of the Gospel, John, this eagle between the evangelists, who has adopted this symbol in church iconography, takes us straight into infinity with a bold flight. Then he quickly descends to earth, but even here in the incarnate Word he gives us signs of the divinity of the Word. Then John the Baptist appears in the Gospel of John. But this is not a preacher of repentance and judgment, as we know him from the Synoptic Gospels, but a witness of Christ as the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). Evangelist John says nothing about the baptism and temptation of Christ. The evangelist looks at the return of Christ from John the Baptist with His first disciples to Galilee as the beginning of a sermon about the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven. In the Gospel of John, the chronological and geographical scope of activity is not at all the same as that of the weather forecasters. John touches on the Galilean activity of Christ only at its highest point - the story of the miraculous feeding of the five thousand and the conversation about the bread of heaven. Then only in depicting the last days of Christ’s life does John converge with the weather forecasters. The main place of Christ's activity, according to the Gospel of John, is Jerusalem and Judea. John differs even more from the Synoptic evangelists in his portrayal of Christ as a Teacher. Among the latter, Christ appears as a popular preacher, as a teacher of morality, expounding to the simple inhabitants of Galilean cities and villages in the most accessible form for them the teaching about the Kingdom of God. As a benefactor of the people, He walks through Galilee, healing every disease in the people surrounding Him in whole crowds. In John, the Lord appears either before individuals, such as Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman, or in the circle of His disciples, or, finally, before priests, scribes and other Jews knowledgeable in the matter of religious knowledge, making speeches about the divine dignity of His person. At the same time, the language of His speeches becomes somewhat mysterious, and we often encounter allegories here. The miracles in the Gospel of John also have the character of signs, i.e. serve to explain the main provisions of Christ’s teaching about His Divinity. More than a hundred years have passed since German rationalism directed its blows at the Gospel of John to prove its inauthenticity. However, it was only from the time of Strauss that the real persecution of this greatest testimony to the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ began. Under the influence of Hegel's philosophy, which did not allow the possibility of the realization of an absolute idea in an individual, Strauss declared John's Christ a myth, and the entire Gospel a tendentious fiction. Following him, the head of the new Tübingen school F.X. Baur traced the origins of the 4th Gospel to the second half of the 2nd century, when, as he believes, reconciliation began between the two opposing movements of the Apostolic Age - Petrinism and Paulinism. John's Gospel, according to Baur, was a monument of reconciliation between both of these directions. It aimed to reconcile the various disputes that were taking place at that time (around 170) in the Church: Montanism, Gnosticism, the doctrine of the Logos, Easter disputes, etc., and for this it used the material contained in the first three Gospels, making everything dependent on one idea of ​​​​the Logos. This view of Baur wanted to be developed and substantiated by his students - Schwegler, Kestlin, Zeller and others, but, in any case, nothing came of their efforts, as even such a liberal critic as Harnack admits. The early Christian Church was not at all the arena of the struggle between Petrinism and Paulinism, as the latest church historical science has shown. However, the newest representatives of the New Tübingen school G.I. Holtzmann, Hilgenfeld, Volkmar, Kreyenbühl (his work in French: “The 4th Gospel”, vol. I, 1901 and vol. II, 1903) still deny the authenticity of the Gospel of John and the reliability of the information contained in it, and most of them are attributed to the influence of Gnosticism. Thoma attributes the origin of the Gospel to the influence of Philonism, Max Müller to the influence of Greek philosophy 3. Since the New Tübingen school still could not help but take into account the evidence about the authenticity of the Gospel of John, which dates back to the very first decades of the 2nd century AD, it tried to explain the origin of such evidence with something like the self-hypnosis of those ancient church writers who have the said evidence. It’s just that a writer, like Saint Irenaeus, read the inscription: “The Gospel of John” - and immediately it was established in his memory that this really is the Gospel belonging to the beloved disciple of Christ... But most critics began to defend the position that by “John,” the author of the 4th Gospel, the entire ancient Church meant “prester John,” whose existence is mentioned by Eusebius of Caesarea. This is what Busse and Harnack think, for example. Others (Jülicher) consider the author of the 4th Gospel to be some disciple of John the Theologian. But since it is quite difficult to admit that at the end of the 1st century there were two Johns in Asia Minor - an apostle and a presbyter - who enjoyed equally enormous authority, some critics began to deny the presence of the Apostle John in Asia Minor (Lutzenberger, Feim, Schwartz, Schmiedel). Not finding it possible to find a substitute for the Apostle John, modern criticism, however, agrees that the 4th Gospel could not have originated from the Apostle John. Let us see how grounded are the objections that modern criticism raises to refute the general church conviction in the authenticity of the 4th Gospel. When analyzing the critics’ objections to the authenticity of the Gospel of John, we will necessarily have to talk about the reliability of the information reported in the 4th Gospel, because in support of their view of the origin of the 4th Gospel not from John, criticism points to the unreliability of various facts cited in the Gospel of John and to the general improbability of the idea that is created on the basis of this Gospel about the person and activity of the Savior 4 . Feim, followed by many other critics, points out that according to the Gospel of John, Christ “was not born, was not baptized, did not experience any internal struggle or mental suffering. He knew everything from the beginning, shining with pure divine glory. Such a Christ does not correspond to the conditions of human nature.” But all this is wrong: Christ, according to John, became flesh (John 1:14) and had a Mother (John 2:1), and there is a clear indication of His acceptance of baptism in the speech of John the Baptist (John 1:29–34). The fact that Christ experienced an internal struggle is clearly stated in John 12:27, and the tears He shed at the tomb of Lazarus testify to His spiritual suffering (John 11:33–35). As for the foreknowledge that Christ reveals in the Gospel of John, it is completely consistent with our faith in Christ as the God-man. Further, critics point out that the 4th Gospel does not seem to recognize any gradualism in the development of the faith of the apostles: the initially called apostles, from the very first day of their acquaintance with Christ, become completely confident in His messianic dignity (John 1). But critics forget that the disciples fully believed in Christ only after the first sign at Cana (John 2:11). And they themselves say that they believed in the Divine origin of Christ only when Christ told them a lot about Himself in a farewell conversation (John 16:30). Then, if John says that Christ went to Jerusalem from Galilee several times, whereas, according to the synoptics, it apparently turns out that He visited Jerusalem only once on the Passover of Passion, then we must say about this that, firstly, from the synoptic Gospels we can conclude that Christ was in Jerusalem more than once (see Luke 10:30), and secondly, most correctly, of course, it denotes the chronological sequence of events it was the Evangelist John, who wrote his Gospel after the Synoptics and, naturally, had to come to the idea of the need to supplement the insufficient chronology of the Synoptics and depict in detail the activity of Christ in Jerusalem, which was known to him, of course, much better than to any of the Synoptics, two of whom did not even belong to the 12. Even the Apostle Matthew could not know all the circumstances of Christ’s activity in Jerusalem, because, firstly, he was called relatively late (John 3:24; cf. Matthew 9:9), and secondly, because Christ sometimes went to Jerusalem secretly (John 7:10), without being accompanied by the entire crowd of disciples. John, undoubtedly, was given the honor of accompanying Christ everywhere. But most of all doubts regarding reliability are aroused by the speeches of Christ, which are cited by the Evangelist John. Christ in John, according to critics, speaks not as a practical folk teacher, but as a subtle metaphysician. His speeches could only have been “composed” by a later “writer” who was influenced by the views of Alexandrian philosophy. On the contrary, the speeches of Christ among the weather forecasters are naive, simple and natural. Therefore, the 4th Gospel is not of apostolic origin. Regarding this statement of criticism, first of all, it must be said that it overly exaggerates the difference between the speeches of Christ in the Synoptics and His speeches in John. You can point out about three dozen sayings, which are given in the same form by both the weather forecasters and John (see John 2:19 and Matthew 26:61; John 3:18 and Mark 16:16; John 5:8 and Luke 5:24). And then the speeches of Christ given by John should have differed from those given by the weather forecasters, since John set himself the goal of acquainting his readers with the activities of Christ in Judea and Jerusalem - this center of rabbinic education, where Christ had before Him a completely different circle of listeners than in Galilee. It is clear that the Galilean speeches of Christ, cited by the weather forecasters, could not be devoted to such sublime teachings as the subject of the speeches of Christ spoken in Judea. Moreover, John cites several speeches of Christ, spoken by Him in the circle of His closest disciples, who, of course, were much more capable of understanding the mysteries of the Kingdom of God than ordinary people. It is also necessary to take into account the fact that the Apostle John, by his nature, was predominantly inclined to be interested in the mysteries of the Kingdom of God and the high dignity of the face of the Lord Jesus Christ. No one was able to assimilate in such completeness and clarity Christ’s teaching about Himself as John, whom Christ therefore loved more than His other disciples. Some critics argue that all the speeches of Christ in John are nothing more than a disclosure of ideas contained in the prologue of the Gospel and, therefore, composed by John himself. To this it must be said that, rather, the prologue itself can be called the conclusion that John made from all the speeches of Christ cited by John. This is evidenced, for example, by the fact that the root concept of the prologue “Logos” is not found in the speeches of Christ with the meaning that it has in the prologue. As for the fact that only John cites the speeches of Christ, which contain His teaching about His divine dignity, then this circumstance cannot be of particular significance as proof of the contradiction that supposedly exists between the weather forecasters and John in the teaching about the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. After all, the weather forecasters also have sayings of Christ, in which a clear indication of His divine dignity is made (see Matt. 20:18, 28:19, 16:16, etc.). And besides, all the circumstances of the birth of Christ and the numerous miracles of Christ reported by the weather forecasters clearly testify to His divine dignity. They also point out their monotony in relation to the content as evidence of the idea that Christ’s speeches were “composed” in John. Thus, the conversation with Nicodemus depicts the spiritual nature of the Kingdom of God, and the conversation with the Samaritan woman depicts the universal nature of this Kingdom, etc. If there is some uniformity in the external structure of speeches and in the method of proving thoughts, this is explained by the fact that the speeches of Christ in John are intended to explain the mysteries of the Kingdom of God to the Jews, and not to the inhabitants of Galilee, and therefore naturally take on a monotonous character. They say that the speeches given by John do not stand in connection with the events described in the Gospel of John. But such a statement does not correspond to reality at all: it is in John that every speech of Christ has a solid support for itself in previous events, one might even say that it is caused by them. Such, for example, is the conversation about heavenly bread, spoken by Christ regarding the saturation of the people with earthly bread (John 6). They further object: “How could John remember such extensive, difficult in content and dark speeches of Christ until his ripe old age?” But when a person pays all his attention to one thing, it is clear that he already observes this “one thing” in all its details and imprints it firmly in his memory. It is known about John that among the disciples of Christ and in the Apostolic Church he did not have a particularly active role and was more of a silent companion of the Apostle Peter than an independent figure. He turned all the ardor of his nature - and he really had such a nature (Mark 9) - all the abilities of his outstanding mind and heart to reproduce in his consciousness and memory the greatest personality of the God-man. From this it becomes clear how he could subsequently reproduce in his Gospel such extensive and profound speeches of Christ. In addition, the ancient Jews were generally able to remember very long conversations and repeat them with literal accuracy. Finally, why not assume that John could have recorded individual conversations of Christ for himself and then used what was written down? They ask: “Where could John, a simple fisherman from Galilee, receive such a philosophical education as he reveals in his Gospel? Isn’t it more natural to assume that the 4th Gospel was written by some Gnostic or Christian from the Greeks, brought up on the study of classical literature? The answer to this question is as follows. Firstly, John does not have the strict consistency and logical structure of views that distinguish Greek philosophical systems. Instead of dialectics and logical analysis, John is dominated by a synthesis characteristic of systematic thinking, reminiscent of Eastern religious and theological contemplation rather than Greek philosophy (Prof. Muretov. The authenticity of the Lord’s conversations in the 4th Gospel. Right review, 1881. September, p. 65 et seq.). It can therefore be said that John writes as an educated Jew, and the question of where he could receive such a Jewish education is resolved quite satisfactorily by the consideration that John’s father was a fairly wealthy man (he had his own workers) and therefore both of his sons, James and John, could receive a good education for that time in one of the rabbinical schools in Jerusalem. What also confuses some critics is the similarity that is noticed both in the content and style of Christ’s speeches in the 4th Gospel and in the 1st Epistle of John. It seems as if John himself composed the Lord’s speeches... To this it must be said that John, having joined the ranks of Christ’s disciples in his earliest youth, naturally assimilated His ideas and the very manner of their expression. Then, the speeches of Christ in John do not represent a literal reproduction of everything that Christ said on one occasion or another, but only an abbreviated rendering of what Christ actually said. Moreover, John had to convey the speeches of Christ, spoken in Aramaic, in Greek, and this forced him to look for turns and expressions that were more appropriate to the meaning of Christ’s speech, so that naturally the coloring that was characteristic of the speech of John himself was obtained in the speeches of Christ. Finally, there is an undoubted difference between the Gospel of John and his 1st Epistle, namely, between the speech of John himself and the speeches of the Lord. Thus, the salvation of people through the Blood of Christ is often spoken of in the 1st Epistle of John and is silent in the Gospel. As for the form of presentation of thoughts, in the 1st Epistle we find short, fragmentary instructions and maxims everywhere, and in the Gospel - whole large speeches. In view of all that has been said, in contrast to the assertions of criticism, one can only agree with those positions expressed by Pope Pius X in his “Syllabus” of July 3, 1907, where the Pope recognizes as heresy the assertion of modernists that the Gospel of John is not history in the proper sense of the word, but mystical speculations about the life of Christ, and that it is not the true testimony of the Apostle John about the life of Christ, but a reflection of those views on the person of Christ that existed in the Christian Church by the end of the 1st century AD. The author of the Gospel clearly identifies himself as a Jew. He knows all Jewish customs and views, especially the views of the then Judaism on the Messiah. Moreover, he speaks about everything that happened in Palestine at that time as an eyewitness. If he seems to separate himself from the Jews (for example, he says “the holiday of the Jews” and not “our holiday”), then this is explained by the fact that the 4th Gospel was undoubtedly written already when the Christians were completely separated from the Jews. In addition, the Gospel was written specifically for pagan Christians, which is why the author could not talk about the Jews as “his” people. The geographical position of Palestine at that time is also outlined in the highest degree accurately and thoroughly. This cannot be expected from a writer who lived, for example, in the 2nd century. As a witness to the events that took place in the life of Christ, the author of the 4th Gospel further shows himself in the special chronological accuracy with which he describes the time of these events. It designates not only the holidays on which Christ went to Jerusalem - this is important for determining the duration of Christ's public ministry 5, but even the days and weeks before and after this or that event and, finally, sometimes the hours of events. He also speaks with precision about the number of persons and objects in question. The details that the author reports about the various circumstances of the life of Christ also give reason to conclude that the author was an eyewitness to everything that he describes. Moreover, the features with which the author characterizes the leaders of that time are so clear that only an eyewitness could indicate them, moreover, he well understood the differences that existed between the Jewish parties of that time. The fact that the author of the Gospel was an apostle from among the 12 is clearly evident from the memories that he reports about many circumstances of the inner life of the circle of the 12. He knows well all the doubts that worried the disciples of Christ, all their conversations among themselves and with their Teacher. At the same time, he calls the apostles not by the names by which they later became known in the Church, but by those that they bore in their friendly circle (for example, he calls Bartholomew Nathanael). The author’s attitude towards weather forecasters is also remarkable. He boldly corrects the testimony of the latter in many points as an eyewitness, who also has a higher authority than them: only such a writer could speak so boldly, without fear of condemnation from anyone. Moreover, this was undoubtedly an apostle from among those closest to Christ, since he knows much that was not revealed to the other apostles (see John 6:15, 7:1). Who was this student? He does not call himself by name and, however, identifies himself as the beloved disciple of the Lord (John 13:23, 21:7, 20–24). This is not the Apostle Peter, because Peter is called by name everywhere in the 4th Gospel and is directly different from the unnamed disciple. Of the closest disciples, then two remained - James and John, the sons of Zebedee. But it is known about Jacob that he did not leave the Jewish country and suffered martyrdom relatively early (in 41). Meanwhile, the Gospel was undoubtedly written after the Synoptic Gospels and, probably, at the end of the 1st century. Only John alone can be recognized as the apostle closest to Christ, who wrote the 4th Gospel. Calling himself “another student,” he always adds to this expression the definite article (ὁ μαθητής), clearly saying that everyone knew him and could not confuse him with anyone else. Out of his humility, he also does not call his mother, Salome, and his brother Jacob by name (John 19:25, 21:2). Only the Apostle John could have done this, for any other writer would certainly have mentioned at least one of the sons of Zebedee by name. They object: “But the Evangelist Matthew found it possible to mention his name in his Gospel” (Matthew 9:9)? Yes, but in the Gospel of Matthew, the personality of the writer completely disappears in the objective depiction of the events of the Gospel history, while the 4th Gospel has a pronounced subjective character, and the writer of this Gospel, realizing this, wanted to leave in the shadows his own name, which was already asking everyone to remember. Both the language and presentation of the 4th Gospel clearly indicate that the writer of the Gospel was a Palestinian Jew, not a Greek, and that he lived at the end of the 1st century. In the Gospel, first of all, there are direct and indirect references to places in the sacred books of the Old Testament (this can also be seen in the Russian edition of the Gospel with parallel passages). Moreover, he knows not only the translation of the Seventy, but also the Hebrew text of the Old Testament books (cf. John 19:37 and Zech. 12:10 according to the Hebrew text). Then, “the special plasticity and imagery of speech, which constitute an excellent feature of the Jewish genius, the arrangement of the members of the sentence and their simple construction, the striking detail of the presentation, reaching the point of tautology and repetition, the speech is short, abrupt, the parallelism of members and whole sentences and antithesis, the lack of Greek particles in the connection of sentences” and much more clearly indicate that the Gospel was written by a Jew, not a Greek (Bazhenov. “Characteristics of the fourth Gospels", p. 374). Member of the Vienna Academy of Sciences D.G. Müller (D.H. Müller) in his abstract “Das Johannes-Evangelium im Lichte der Strophentheorie” (Wien, 1909) even makes, and very successfully, an attempt to divide the most important speeches of Christ contained in the Gospel of John into stanzas and concludes with the following: “After finishing my work on the Talk on the Mount, I also examined the Gospel of John, which in content and style is so differs from the Synoptic Gospels, but to my great surprise I found that the laws of stanzas prevail here to the same extent as in the speeches of the prophets, in the Discourse on the Mount and in the Koran.” Doesn't this fact indicate that the writer of the Gospel was a real Jew, brought up by studying the prophets of the Old Testament? The Jewish flavor in the 4th Gospel is so strong that anyone who knows Hebrew and has the opportunity to read the Gospel of John in a Hebrew translation will certainly think that he is reading the original and not a translation. It is clear that the writer of the Gospel thought in Hebrew and expressed himself in Greek. But this is exactly how the Apostle John should have written, who from childhood was accustomed to thinking and speaking in Hebrew, but studied Greek in adulthood. The Greek language of the Gospel was undoubtedly original, and not a translation: both the testimony of the Church Fathers and the lack of evidence from those critics who for some reason want to claim that the Gospel of John was originally written in Hebrew - all this is quite enough to be confident in the originality of the Greek language of the 4th Gospel. Although the author of the Gospel has few terms and expressions of the Greek language in his dictionary, these terms and expressions are as valuable as a large gold coin, which is usually used to pay large owners. In terms of its composition, the language of the 4th Gospel has a general κοινή διάλεκτος character. In places there are Hebrew, Latin words and some terms unique to this Gospel. Finally, some words in John are used in a special sense, not characteristic of other New Testament writings (for example, Λόγος, ἀγαπάω, ἰουδαῖοι, ζωή, etc., the meaning of which will be indicated when explaining the text of the Gospel). With regard to etymological and syntactic rules, the language of the 4th Gospel in general does not differ from the rules of κοινή διάλεκτος, although there are some features here (for example, the use of the article, the composition of the predicate in the plural with a singular subject, etc.). Stylistically, the Gospel of John is distinguished by the simplicity of its phrase construction, approaching the simplicity of ordinary speech. Here we see everywhere short, fragmentary sentences connected by a few particles. But these brief expressions often produce an unusually strong impression (especially in the prologue). To give special power to a well-known expression, John puts it at the beginning of the phrase, and sometimes the sequence in the structure of speech is not even observed (for example, John 7:38). The reader of the Gospel of John is also struck by the extraordinary abundance of dialogues in which this or that thought is revealed. As for the fact that in the Gospel of John, in contrast to the Synoptic Gospels, there are no parables, this phenomenon can be explained by the fact that John did not consider it necessary to repeat those parables that were already reported in the Synoptic Gospels. But he has something reminiscent of these parables - these are allegories and various images (for example, figurative expressions in a conversation with Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman or, for example, a real allegory about the good shepherd and the door to the sheepfold). In addition, Christ probably did not use parables in His conversations with educated Jews, and it is these conversations that John mainly cites in his Gospel. The form of the parable was not suitable for the content of the speeches of Christ spoken in Judea: in these speeches Christ spoke about His divine dignity, and for this the form of images and parables was completely inappropriate - it is inconvenient to enclose dogmas in parables. The disciples of Christ could also understand the teachings of Christ without parables. Of the ancient works devoted to the study of the Gospel of John, the first in time is the work of Valentinian Heracleon (150–180), fragments of which were preserved by Origen (there is also a special edition by Brooke). This is followed by a very detailed commentary by Origen himself, which, however, has not survived in its entirety (ed. Preyshen, 1903). Next come 88 conversations on the Gospel of John, belonging to St. John Chrysostom (in Russian, translated by the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, 1902). The interpretation of Theodore of Mopsuetsky in Greek has survived only in fragments, but now a Latin translation of the Syriac text of this work has appeared, almost reproducing everything in full. The interpretation of St. Cyril of Alexandria was published in 1910 at the Moscow Theological Academy. Then there are 124 conversations on the Gospel of John, belonging to St. Augustine (in Latin). Finally, the interpretation of the Gospel of John, belonging to Blessed Theophylact (translation at the Kazan Theological Academy), deserves attention. Of the new interpretations of Western theologians, the works of Tolyuk (1857), Meyer (1902), Luthardt (1876), Godet (1903), Keil (1881), Westcott (1882), Shants (1885), Knabenbauer (1906), Schlatter (1902), Loisy (1903), Heitmuller (in I. Weiss in “New Testament Scriptures”, 1907), Zahn (1908), Holtzman (1908). Of the most outstanding works of Western scientists, the so-called. The works of the critical school are devoted to the Gospel of John: Bretschneider, Weiss, Schwegler, Bruno, Bauer, Baur, Hilgenfeld, Keim, Thom, Jacobsen, O. Holtzmann, Wendt, Freyenbühl, I. Reville, Grill, Wrede, Scott, Wellhausen and others. The last major work of the critical school is the work: “Spitta”. Das Johannes evangelium als Quelle der Geschichte Jesu. Gottingen, 1910. In the apological direction, the following people wrote about the Gospel of John: Black, Stier, Weiss, Edersheim (“The Life of Jesus the Messiah”, the first volume of which was translated into Russian), Shastan, Delph, P. Ewald, Nesgen, Kluge, Kamerlinck, Schlatter, Stanton, Drummond, Sunday, Smith, Barth, Goebel, Lepen. 6 But even these works must be used with caution... In Russian theological literature there are many explanations of the Gospel of John and individual articles and brochures related to the study of this Gospel. In 1874, the first edition of the work of Archimandrite (later bishop) Mikhail (Luzin) was published under the title: “The Gospel of John in Slavic and Russian dialects with prefaces and detailed explanatory notes.” In 1887, “An Experience in Studying the Gospel of St. John the Theologian” by Georgy Vlastov appeared, in two volumes. In 1903, a popular explanation of the Gospel of John was published, compiled by Archbishop Nikanor (Kamensky), and in 1906, “Interpretation of the Gospel”, compiled by B.I. Gladkov, in which the Gospel of John is also popularly explained. There are also popular explanations for the Gospel of John: Eusebius, Archbishop of Mogilev (in the form of conversations on Sundays and holidays), Archpriests Mikhailovsky, Bukharev and some others. The most useful guide for familiarizing yourself with what was written about the Gospel of John before 1893 is “Collection of articles on interpretative and edifying reading of the Four Gospels” by M. Barsov. Subsequent literature up to 1904 on the study of the Gospel of John is indicated by Prof. Bogdashevsky in the Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia, vol. VI, p. 836–837 and partly prof. Sagarda (ibid., p. 822). Among the latest Russian literature on the study of the Gospel of John, the following dissertations deserve special attention: I. Bazhenova “Characteristics of the Fourth Gospel from the point of view of content and language in connection with the question of the origin of the Gospel”, 1907; D. Znamensky “The Teaching of the Holy Apostle John the Theologian in the Fourth Gospel about the Person of Jesus Christ”, 1907; prof. Theological “Public Ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ”, 1908, part 1. This is proven by the fact that the Gospel often provides an explanation of Jewish words and customs (for example, John 11:38–42, 4:9, 5:28, etc.). It is not possible to accurately determine the time and place of writing of the Gospel of John. It is only likely that the Gospel was written in Ephesus, at the end of the 1st century. An example of a critical attitude towards the Gospel of John is the book by O.P., translated into Russian in 1910. Flader - “The Rise of Christianity”, p. 154–166. Evidence of the integrity of the Gospel will be given in its place, when explaining the text of the Gospel. The chronology of the life of Jesus Christ according to the Gospel of John looks like this. After receiving baptism from John, Christ remains for some time near the Jordan and here calls His first disciples (John 1). Then He goes to Galilee, where he lives until Easter (John 2:1-11). On Easter He comes to Jerusalem, this is the first Passover during His public ministry (John 2:12–3:21). Then Christ, after this Passover, probably in April, leaves Jerusalem and remains in the land of Judea until the end of December (John 3:22–4:1). By January, Christ comes through Samaria to Galilee (John 4:43–54) and lives here for quite a long time: the entire end of winter and summer. On Easter (a hint of it is made in John 4:35) - the second Passover during His public activity - He, apparently, did not go to Jerusalem. Only on the Feast of Tabernacles (John 5:1) He appears again in Jerusalem, where he probably stayed for a very short time. He then spends several months in Galilee (John 6:1). At Easter this year (John 6:4) Christ again did not go to Jerusalem; this is the third Easter of His public ministry. At the Feast of Tabernacles He appears in Jerusalem (John 7–10:21), then spends two months in Perea and in December, for the feast of the renewal of the church, comes again to Jerusalem (John 10:22). Then Christ soon leaves again for Perea, from where he appears for a short time in Bethany (John 11). From Bethany until the fourth Passover He remains in Ephraim, from where He comes on the last Passover, the fourth, to Jerusalem, in order to die here at the hands of enemies. Thus, John mentions the four Easter holidays, within which lies the history of the public ministry of Jesus Christ, which apparently lasted more than three years. The latest is Lepin's work. La valeur historique du VI-e Evangile 2 vol. Paris, 1910, 8 franc. You might be interested in: