Snowstorm Thoughts on the Two Johns

Jack and Katy at  Glacier NP Montana  July, 2012,
Credit:  Tim Schuessler

The Pope's book on the infancy narratives of Jesus is out just in time for Christmas.   I look forward to reading it. But  I'm snowed in today in Wisconsin, and thanks to Jimmy Akin I'm coming back to my thoughts on  the first of the Pope's three books on Jesus, which I read last summer.  

For anyone who needs a "pep talk" on the historical value of the Gospel of John,  check out Pope Benedict XVI's discussion of that Gospel in his first Jesus book,  Jesus of Nazareth Vol. 1 (Doubleday 2007).   In chapter 8 the Pope talks about the two Johns. 


At page 225 the Pope cites John 19:35 and  defends the Apostle John as the eyewitness who authored the Gospel, but he says "the complexity of the Gospel's redaction raises further questions."  P. 225.  How does the text get into its final form?   Citing other scholars who speak of references in Eusebius quoting Papias whose writings are lost, the Pope sees "Presbyter John" as the author of what was told to him by the Apostle John.  Both lived in Ephesus and were part of "the Johannine school" which traced its origins to the Apostle but in which "'Presbyter John' presided  as the ultimate authority."  P.  226.     Papias did not know the Apostle,  but he did know Presbyter John.  

Thanks to these traces of  Papias which we find in Eusebius we can see how through this mysterious Presbyter John the Gospel of John with its powerful  claim to be "eyewitness testimony"  may have come down to us after the synoptic Gospels were written.  Critics say that the Apostle would have been dead by the time his Gospel was written, and that means the writer is presenting stories and traditions that you can't tie to the words and deeds of Jesus.   But if the Presbyter and perhaps other younger associates who were part of the Johannine school, who were close to the eyewitness (the Apostle),  put the  teachings of the Apostle  into final form, that timing  problem is solved.  This argument based on the two Johns, which the Pope beautifully presents, is an excellent push back against those who would have us doubt the historicity of the Gospel of John.  

With this understanding of the two  Johns you can move on to a study of this fascinating question:  Who is the "beloved disciple" whom we see  in the Gospel of John?   Some say it was Lazarus, or some other disciple who was not an apostle.   The text does not say. See chapter 15  of  Jesus and the Eyewitnesses  (Eerdmans 2006) by Richard Bauckham.   I believe the beloved disciple was the Apostle John himself.     But that question will have to be the subject of another post.