The Gospel of John

The Fourth gospel was written by John, the soo of Zebedee and Salome, who was originally a fisherman of Galilee, and brother of James; and we may suppose, was the younger of the brothers, as he is generally mentioned last, and is commonly reported to have been the youngest of all Christ’s disciples. They were plain, uneducated men, as their occupation sufficiently indicates. Probably they had been disciples of Jolm the Baptist, and some have conjectured that John the Evangelist was one of the two, to whom John the Baptist pointed out Jesus, and who went after him to his lodging. The other we know was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother; and John, in other cases, has concealed his own name, where any thing is mentioned, which could be interpreted to his honour.

Why these two brothers were surnamed Boanerges, by the Lord, does not clearly appear, unless we suppose that the names were prophetic of the manner of their preaching, when commissioned as apostles. But there are no facts recorded, from which any inference can be drawn, in relation to this subject. Jhhn has been long celebrated for his aflfectionate temper and for the suavity of his manners, which appear very remarkably in all his writinsjs; but there is no evidence that he was naturally of a meek temper. The facts in the g;ospel history would seem to indicate, that both be and his brother were of a fiery temper, and very ambitious by nature; and some have supposed, that their surname had relation to this ardour of temper, but this is not very probable.

We know that John was the bosom friend of •Jesus, the disciple whom he loved with a peculiar ajSecfion; and that he was admitted to all those soent’S of a very interesting nature, from which most of the other disciples were excluded.

It is also certain, that he was present at the crucliixion; stood near the cross in company with Mary the mother of our Lord; and that he remained at the place until the body of Jesus, now dead, was pierced with a spear. On the morning of the resurrection, John visited the sepulchre, in company with Peter, and wis present when Christ made His first appearance to the Eleven; and when he manifested himself to his disciples, at the sea of Tiberias.

After Pentecost, he was with Peter in the temple, when the lame man was healed; accompanied Peter also to Samaria, and wa.*? present at the council of Jerusalem.

From the book of Revelation we learn, that thus evangelist was for a time an exile in the island of Patmos, for the testimony of Jesus, where he was favoured with wonderful visions and communications from the Lord.

It seems to have been intimated to him by his Lord, at the sea of Tiberias, that be should survive the destruction of Jerusalem; for, when Peter asked, Lord what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto hinif if I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? which saying gave rise to an opinion among the disciples, that, that disciple should not die; Yet Jesus said not unto him, he shall not die, but if I xoill, that he tarry till I come, luhat is that to thee? And this accords very well with the testimonies of the ancients,, who inform us that John lived to a great age,

iRENiEUs, in two places of his work against Heretics, says, “That John lived to the time of Trajan,” which will bring us down to A.D. 98.

EusEBius understands Clement of Alexandria to say the same thing.

Origen also testifies, <’ That John having lived Jong in Asia, was buried at Ephesus.”

FoLTCRATES, who wrote in the second century, and was bishop of Ephesus, asserts, “That John was buried in that city.”

Jerome, in his book of Illustrious Men, and in his work against Jovinian, sa) s, “That the apos. tie John lived in Asia to the time of Trajan 5 and dying; at a sjreat ag;e, in the sixty -eighth year of our Lord’s passion, was buried near the city of Ephesus.” This account would bringdown the death of John to A. D. 100, in which year, it if= placed by this writer, in his Chronicon.

The testimonies for the genuineness of the gospel of John, are as full and satisfactory as could be desired.

Irenjeus tells us,” That the evangelist John designed, by his Gospel to confute the errors, which Cerinthus had infused into the minds of the people, and had been infused by those who were called Nicolaitons; and to convince them, that there was one God, who made all things by his Word; and not as they imagined, one who was the Creator, and another, who was the Father of our Lord; one, who was the Son of the Creator, and another who was the Christ, who continued impassible, and descended upon Jesus, the Son of the Creator.”

Jerome fully confirms this testimony of Irenaeus, and says, ‘^* That when St. John was in Asia, where there arose the heresies of Ebion and Cerinthus, and others, who denied that Christ was come in the flesh; that is, denied his divine nature, whom he, in his Epistle calls Antichrists, and St. Paul frequently condemns, in his Epistles, he was forced by almost all the bishops of Asia, and the deputations of many other churches, to write more plainly concerning the divinity of our Saviour, and to soaraFoHt T 2 sis

in a discourse on the word, not more bold than happy,”

“It is related in ecclesiastical history, that John, when solicited by the brethren to writCyansweredy that he would not do it unless a public day of faS’ting and prayer was appointed to implore God’s assistance; which being done, and the solemnity being honoured with a satisfiictory revelation from God, he broke forth into these words, In the be-GIMilNG WAS THE WORD,” &C.

Jerome in his book of Illustrious Men, says, “John wrote a gospel at the desire of the bishops of Asi;i, against Cerinthus, and other heritics,especially liiedoctrine of the Ebionites,^ then springing up, who say, that Christ did not exist before the birth of Mary: for vvhir-h reason he was obliged to declare his divine nativity. Another reason of his writing is also n-entioned, which is, that after having read the volumes of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he expressed his appiobation of their history as true: bur observed, that they had recorded an account of but one year f our Lord’s ministry, even the last after the imprisonment of John, (the Bautist) in which alio he suffered. Omitting therefore that year, /”in a great measure) the history of which had been written by the .jther three, he related the Acts of the preceding time, before John was shut up in prison, as may appear to those who read the four Evangelists, which may serve to acei9

count, for the seeming diflerence between Joha ami tl)e rest”

AirorsTiNE, in conformity with the account of Jerome, says, “That this Evang<list wrote concerning the co-eternal divinity of Christ against heretics.”

Lampk has called in question these early testimonies re«if)ecting the occasion of writing this Gospel, and has attempted to prove by argument, that John had no view to any pariicular hereiics, in the coinnienrement of hip Gopil.

Laroner has taken the same side, and adduces several argumcnis in favour of Lanipf ’s opinifm. TiTMAN adopts the satue opinion But the probable reasonings if ingeni’ us mm, u hen opposed tip such a weight of ancit nt tcstimtmv, in relation to a matter o I tact, which occnrred at no lontc distance before their time, deserve very little coniiideration. And, indeed, after reading Lardner’s arguments, I must say, that ihey appear to me to have no high degree of plausibility.

That C’l RiN J nrjs lived in the time of the apostle John, and was knon to him, is evident from another tes’intony of Ike’jEV:^, which has been often (pioted. It is a stoiy, lhich he says, some iersuns in his time I ad fmm Polycahp, the disciple of John; which, is as follo»8, “John goins lo i certai’i b ttb .It Fphesus. a d perceivin;i that Cerinthus, that noted arch-hereplic, was in the bath, immediately leaped out, and said, Let us go home, lest the bath should fall down upon us, having in it such a heretic, as Ceriuthus, that enemy of truth.”

Augustine, moreover, asserts,” That John is the last of the Evaiig;eUsts. ‘^

Chrysostom supposes, that John did not write his gospel till after the destruction of Jerusalem.

Paulinus sayS, ‘’It had been handed down by tradition, that Jo’in survived all the other apostits, and wrote the last of the four Evangelists, and so as to C’infirm thtir most certain history.” Again, he observes, “That in the beginning of John’s gospel all heretics are confuted.”

CosMAs, of Alexandria, informs us, “That when John dwelt at Ephesus, there were deavered lo him by the faithful, the writings of the other three Evangelists. Receiving them he said, that what they had written was well written; but some things were omitted by them, which were needful to be related. And being desired by the faithful, he also published his writing, as a kind of supplement to the rest.”

Isidore of Seville, says, “That John wrote the last in Asia.”

Theophylact computed, that John wrote about two and thirty years after Christ’s Ascension.

EuTHYMius, says, “That this gospel was no written until long after the destruction of Jerusalem.”

Ntcephortts, “That John wrote ,last of all, about six and thirty years, after our Lord’s ascension to Heaven.”

Havingexhibited the testimonies of the ancients* it may not be amiss, to set down the opinions of some ot the moderns, relative to the time when this fjospel was written.

Mill, Fabricius, LeClerc, Jones, and many others, aojree that John wrote his gospel, about the year of our Lord, 97.

Wetstein thinks it mischt have been written about thirty two years after the ascension.

Basnagk and Lampe, are inclined to believe, that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem.

Whiston and Lardner adopt the same opinion.

The gospel of St. John is cited by Clement o Rome; by Uarnabas; by Ignatius; by Theo-PHiLus of Antioch; by Ikenus; and by Clement of Alexandria, in mote than forty instances. And by all those writers, who lived with, or immediately after the apostles, this gospel is appealed to, as inspired Scripture: and trie saine is the fact, in regard to Orioen, Jlrome, Augustine, and all the Fathers who came aft* r this period. Nearly the whole of this gcspel could be made u[) from the citations of the writers of the first four centuries.

It was never excluded from any church, or any catalogue of the books of the New Testament, and therefore possesses every evidence of being Canonical, which any reasonable man could demand.