Videos from Fr Claudio Doglio
Original voice in italian, with subtitles in English, Spanish, Portuguese & Cantonese
History of the Composition of the Fourth Gospel
Who is John, the theologian, the author of the fourth Gospel, and the symbolic writer who composed a beautiful spiritual gospel? The text does not specify or describe him, but ancient authors consistently identified him as the disciple John, son of Zebedee, and brother of James, one of the twelve apostles.
Some modern scholars question this identification because the author of the fourth Gospel is a highly knowledgeable man with substantial theological and literary insight. However, the Gospel account states that the apostle John was a young fisherman from the Sea of Galilee. As a result, researchers have searched for other possible authors, mainly those connected to Jerusalem and the priestly circles.
However, in my opinion, a recent hypothesis has addressed this difficulty and unified various possibilities. It suggests that the author of the fourth Gospel is John, one of the twelve apostles, son of Zebedee, and a priest in the Jerusalem temple. John is associated with the holy city’s cultured environment, the priestly family, and a tradition of notable literary experience.
Why, then, do we see him as a fisherman on the shores of the Lake of Galilee? Because the temple priests in Jerusalem were not occupied year-round with the sacred duties of the temple. They usually had another job, and perhaps John was not just a poor fisherman but the owner, or more precisely, the son of the owner, of a fishing business.
Based on studies and discoveries, it is reasonable to believe that a priestly family in Jerusalem might have engaged in business activities such as fishing. John was very youngduring the historical events involving Jesus. We do not know his exact age, but he could have been between 12 and 15, making him quite young.
He did not write the Gospel during Jesus’ lifetime, but the final version, which we now find in the editions of our Bibles and read as the fourth Gospel, was produced at the end of the 1st century. Doing the math quickly, if the year of Jesus’ death and resurrection is 30 and the Gospel ends around 100, then 70 years passed between the historical events and the completion of the text. It doesn’t mean John wrote it 70 years later. I mentioned the composition period is over because this work took a long time; 70 years is a lifetime. If we assume John was 15, add another 15 years, and he would be 85. That’s not an extraordinary age, as documented for other individuals who are a few years older or younger.
However, this meant that the fifteen-year-old spent the next 70 years of his life reflecting on his extraordinary experience as a young man—the presence of that remarkable man defined three years of his youth. With the intelligence and memory of a young man, John remembered much of what Jesus did and said from experience and recall, but he did not write it down immediately. It is not a fleeting text; it is a careful one.
Before writing it, John thought for a long time; he performed a symbolic operation, gathering all the details of his memory. He recalled many aspects of Jesus’ life—his character, words, actions, and his relationships with the disciples and the authorities in Jerusalem. He meditated privately and shared his meditations aloud with others. As he narrated, he immersed himself in the meaning of a particular text and deepened his understanding. He revisited the telling, gaining even more insight. Then, he revised his description to help the listener grasp the profound spiritual significance.
This operation lasted 70 years, and it’s likely the text wasn’t written all at once, with a single publication emerging after that period. Instead, it probably went through multipleeditions.
It’s a working hypothesis, an exciting one that has regained popularity thanks to an American scholar, Urban von Wahlde, who published an extensive commentary on the fourth Gospel in 2011. This 700-page volume begins with just the introduction, which includes a detailed reconstruction of three hypothetical editions of John.
The strength of this hypothesis, which he calls ‘genetics,’ lies in identifying the same text and emphasizing tensions in vocabulary, changes, and the reconstruction of three different works in the Gospel of John.
I try to explain myself more clearly. It is possible to imagine that in the early years, the disciple John not only meditated but also preached about the signs Jesus performed and started to write an account. This is what has traditionally been called the ‘Gospel of signs’ for over a century, which is part of John’s story where seven signs performed by Jesus are shown. These seven miraculous acts by Jesus are meant to symbolize his messianic work, through which Jesus reveals the face of God.
This is likely the earliest archaic edition, possibly written in a Semitic language, probably Hebrew, in Jerusalem during those early years. We can imagine it from the ’40s to the ’50s, in a very geographically and historically close environment to the events described. This first Joanine text serves as the foundation for further reflection.
Meanwhile, persecution erupted. The disciples of Jesus left Jerusalem. They traveled to Samaria and then to Antioch in Syria. The horizon widens, and understanding deepens. In this second phase, around the ’70s, when the Romans besiege Jerusalem and Christians are forced to flee, like many Jews, a new chapter begins; at the same time, significant progress is made in theological understanding.
These years have not been wasted. As he grew older, John gained a deeper understanding and expanded his Gospel, doubling its length. He revised parts of the text he had already written and added more details. For example, the story of miracles, which he always calls signs, is accompanied by discussions. After performing a sign, Jesus faces conflicts with the Jews, and this is where we see problematic terminology in John.
He often refers to the Jews as enemies of Jesus, and this usage is the origin of the almost derogatory tone that in our languages has the term ‘Jew.’ John does not refer to all members of the Jewish people as ‘Jews,’ but specifically to the group of authorities who persistently oppose Jesus. In the first edition texts, he mentions high priests, Pharisees, and scribes. The synoptic Gospels use similar terminology. When the text delves deeper, the term ‘Jews’ seems to denote a subset of those opponents who deny the validity of Jesus’s preaching. They neither believe in him nor accept him, or they outright oppose him. This shift is rooted in the historical reality of the mature opposition of the Christian community to the synagogue authorities, a group of stubborn Pharisees who sought to survive the disaster of Jerusalem’s destruction.
In this controversial climate, as noted, for example, in the Gospel of Matthew, John provides a thorough analysis and responds to Jewish controversies by offering deeper teachings from Jesus and elevating Christological discussion. This second edition, likely in Greek, seeks to be more accessible to a broader audience and presents Jesus with greater nuance.
By now, the understanding that this man is God has matured, and he presents himself as divine. This second edition, which shows clear signs of textual development, also caused issues because it inspired those who aimed to blend the Christian message with Greek culture. Especially the Gnostics and Christian Gnostic thought appeared to misinterpret John’s stance and believe that Jesus is only God, only man in appearance.
It might seem impossible to us, but for an ancient thinker, it was easier to imagine Jesus as a divine figure who looked like a man than to see him as fully human. After performing miraculous signs, ancient people, including intellectuals, might have claimed he was ‘god in human form.’ However, that human form was only a disguise. Think of the Odyssey: how many times Ulysses meets Athena without realizing it’s her because the goddess takes on different forms and gives him the right advice at the right time; she offers helpful guidance and then vanishes. Since ancient times, the Greeks have been used to divine appearances, and Jesus could easily be seen as one of those divine manifestations.
The Gnostic worldview holds that Jesus is a god who appears as a man and continues to affirm this belief. This perspective is dangerous. Meanwhile, John moves to Ephesus, the great capital of the Greek world, a Hellenistic city where Gnosticism was prevalent. It is precisely in the Johannine community of Ephesus that a schism, or internal division, occurs. John is compelled to write the first letter.
He must write a text to reaffirm that Jesus is a true man. He is God, but made flesh andhuman. He begins the first letter by saying: “What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen, what our hands have touched, to the Logos of life; because life was manifested, and we have seen it, and we testify, we announce that to you.” The antichrist is the one who denies that Jesus became man. It is an ‘antichrist’ position of opposition to Christ, to deny the flesh, and thus the third edition was born.
John, now elderly and 70 years removed from the historical events, picks up his book for the third time and revises it; for example, he adds a prologue that contains the mature and solemn affirmations of Johannine theology. ‘The Logos became flesh and dwelt among us; now we see his glory.’ Now, he gains a deeper understanding.
The third edition addresses possible Gnostic influences; it refines Christology and keeps it accurate: Jesus is both true God and true man. It’s likely that, besides this third edition, another revision was made influenced by the community itself because John built a community of followers; he has disciples who listen and follow, and collaborators who write and expand his teachings. These are individuals who think and reason; they are pastoral collaborators, similar to priests and deacons. They also preach, teach, and work alongside the elder witness, the disciple loved by Jesus.
It is only in this third edition that the writing of the disciple whom Jesus loved appears, because now we are at the end, when John becomes the ideal model and the standard for interpreting Jesus. Following the testimony of the disciple whom Jesus loved is essential for remaining faithful to the truth; otherwise, there is a risk of creating a Jesus that fits personal preferences. This specific danger existed in the Johannine community of Ephesus toward the end of the first century, and the final edition, the canonical one we now read, contains earlier layers.
This is a remarkable work that has evolved over time. It is very well organized with a clear structure, from a prologue to an epilogue, and two main sections: the Gospel of the Signs and the Gospel of the Hour, almost like two separate books linked at chapter 12. First, Jesus performs seven signs to demonstrate God’s action. Then, when his time comes, he entrusts the message to the disciples and carries out the event of his glory.
The cross marks the moment of the greatest revelation. And the witness, John, present at the foot of the cross, sees the water coming out of Christ’s side along with the blood and recognizes the gift of the Spirit—that Spirit that enables humans to meet God, that allows John to write a spiritual gospel. The eyewitness testifies and records these events, reflecting on them for 70 years so that you too may believe.