Gospel of John

The recto of Rylands Library Papyrus P52 from ...
The recto of Rylands Library Papyrus P52 from the Gospel of John via Wikipedia

The Gospel of John is the fourth Gospel of the New Testament, probably written around 90 CE. John is normally separated from the first three synoptic gospels due to its portrayal of Christ as the Son of God, the divine Word, and also because of its coverage of Christ’s teachings and life.

While most bible scholars see its authorship as anonymous (or as composed by a Johannine community), it’s often believed to have been written by John the son of Zebedee, the “beloved disciple” of Jesus (John 21:24).

Probably because of its ambiguous origins, each generation of bible scholars seems have a new idea as to just who wrote it.

Scholars also believe that existing religious tensions (between Jews who didn’t accept Christ as the Messiah vs. all those who did) most likely contributed to its formation.

This post needs more content. Why not help us out and expand it? Please remember that copying and pasting large amounts of material from Wikipedia (or some other online encyclopedia) is not what Earthpages.ca is about. We want a fresh view, from you… not from your copy and paste editor!


Michael Clark, Ph.D.


  1. Lets compare what the Bible says to what you wrote:

    Jn 21:24: “This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.” — THAT is what the Bible says.

    Clearly NO ONE is identified in this verse. While this verse does identify the unnamed “disciple whom Jesus loved” as the author of the work this verse most certainly does NOT say who this person was and it never even mentions John.

    Yet you falsely implied that this verse would justify teaching the man-made tradition that says this person was John for you wrote: “Though anonymous, it’s often believed to have been written by John the son of Zebedee, the “beloved disciple” of Jesus (John 21:24).”

    Man-made tradition aside, the truth is there is not even a single verse of scripture that would justify teaching the John idea. The John tradition is founded on NON-BIBLE sources and it is unbiblical. The facts in the Biblical record prove that whoever this person was he was not John.


What are you thinking?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.