Who wrote the Gospel we call "John's"?

[polonius]

This seems like a question the answer to which is self-evident.

Not really. Was the gospel signed or does it state John wrote this gospel?

If not, how is it determined to have been written by John?

[otseng]

[Replying to post 88 by otseng]
Regarding your points here they remain speculative rather than conclusive.

I don't think it's conclusive either, but I do feel it's a much better possibility than John being the author.

I don't see any point absolutely proving Lazarus of Bethany to be the beloved disciple.

For one thing, it makes reading John (as well as other books) make much more sense. With the theory that TDWJL is John, things are a bit confusing.

Can I just clarify, are you suggesting Lazarus was one of the 12 Aposltes ?

No, Lazarus was not an apostle.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 88 by otseng]
Regarding your points here they remain speculative rather than conclusive.

I don't think it's conclusive either, but I do feel it's a much better possibility than John being the author.

Fair enough, I can't say I agree but that's probably because as one of Jehovah's Witnesses my approach it to always adopt the position that harmonize all four gospels accepting that all four are without error.


For example both Matthew and Mark number the 12 at the last supper, while John systematically refered to them as "the disciples" Luke refers to those at the meal as the "Apostles" and Mark refers to them as "The Twelve". Since a disciple is also an Apostle but all the disciples were not Apostles, our view is rather than conclude that there were others present not mentioned (introducing a wild card that cannot be substaniated of Mary Magdelene, Lazarus of Bethany, one of the shepherded that witnesses Jesus birth or whatever other theory may be flavour of the day...) it seems reasonable to conclude that the meal was indeed exclusive to Jesus most intimate aquaintences, namely only the 12 Apostles.

MARK 14:17-21

After evening had fallen, he came with the Twelve. And as they were reclining at the table and eating, Jesus said: “Truly I say to you, one of you who is eating with me will betray me.� They began to be grieved and to say to him one by one: “It is not I, is it?� He said to them: “It is one of the Twelve, the one dipping with me into the bowl.- NW

MATTHEW 26:20, 21

When evening came he was reclining at the table with the 12 disciples. While they were eating, he said: “Truly I say to you, one of you will betray me.� - NW

This not only harmonizes the four accounts but limits the identity of the Beloved disciple to one of the Aposltes which helps shed light on his possible identity.



JW

[otseng]

Fair enough, I can't say I agree but that's probably because as one of Jehovah's Witnesses my approach it to always adopt the position that harmonize all four gospels accepting that all four are without error.

The premise for my arguments is the entire Bible is authoritative, including the four gospels. I've attempted to provide scriptural support for all my arguments.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 93 by otseng]

So what is the scriptural basis that there wee more than the 12 with Jesus at the final supper? The gospels say there were 12 at the table with Jesus, what is the basis that there were 13? (ie The 12 plus .... Lazarus)

[tam]

Peace to you Otseng,

How does that become a 'most likely' occurrence? Matthew (considered to be an apostle) does not mention the feet washing. Would that mean he was not present for it or did he simply not mention it?

Perhaps "likely" than "most likely"?

I am sorry, but if I were going only by what is written (before my Lord had shown me anything on this matter), I still could not give that anything more than a 'possible'. It is speculation, with no supporting evidence in the text.

No mention of anyone other than the twelve at the table and eating with Christ. From the start all the way through to the end of the meal (including to the point where Judas is revealed and leaves).

Yes. And Lazarus is conspicuously absent from any book outside the fourth gospel. This name is not found elsewhere except in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.

Unless of course Lazarus is not his only name. Then he is indeed mentioned in all four gospels.

The reason Lazarus is not mentioned at the table (except in the fourth gospel) is the same reason he's not mentioned at all in the synoptic gospels - he was considered inconsequential by everyone else.

It is impossible that Lazarus was considered inconsequential. Christ raised him from the dead, Christ told the rest of the apostles, "Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep, but I am going there to wake him up."


He is the brother of Mary and Martha, and Christ stayed and ate with them when in Bethany, Christ called him friend, raised him from the dead. Even the Jews said of Christ about Lazarus: "See how he loved him." (John 11:36)

If a different disciple (not one of the twelve) had just entered the room to take the seat next to Christ, would that not indicate that one of the apostles had given up their seat next to Him?

Jesus didn't necessarily have to return to the same place after he washed their feet.

Also, if Lazarus = Simon the Leper = Simon the Zealot, then it would mean Jesus picked a leper as an apostle. This would be unlikely since lepers were considered outcasts.

Are you assuming that Simon/Lazarus was always sick? Or is it possible that he fell sick?

(Not that my Lord would not have known of course.)

Also, why didn't Jesus heal him of his leprosy? Jesus had healed several of leprosy, but he would not heal his own apostle?

Some Jews asked the same thing (John 11:37). I responded to this in post 29, with what Christ explains Himself in what is written (John 11:11, 14, 40-42).



Peace again to you and to your household!
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[otseng]

[Replying to post 93 by otseng]

So what is the scriptural basis that there wee more than the 12 with Jesus at the final supper? The gospels say there were 12 at the table with Jesus, what is the basis that there were 13? (ie The 12 plus .... Lazarus)

Actually, I never stated TDWJL ate the last supper with Jesus. I covered this here:
viewtopic.php?p=958288#958288

He arrives on the scene after supper was over.

Jhn 13:1-4 KJV - Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's [son], to betray him; Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God; He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 96 by otseng]

So you purpose that "Lazarus" was not in the room for the Passover but that he arrived in the room some time after Judas had left, took the favoured position at Jesus side and then for the rest of the evening there were the eleven faithful Apostles .... and Lazarus?

No that can't be right, there must have been all 13 in the room at some point for Jesus to point out the betrayer... so we still have 13 in the room at some point but the arrival of the thirteenth not noted by the writer... there is still food at the table and they are still reclined at the table.



JOHN 13:2

New International Version
The evening meal was in progress, and the devil had already prompted Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, to betray Jesus.

New Living Translation
It was time for supper, and the devil had already prompted Judas, son of Simon Iscariot, to betray Jesus.

English Standard Version
During supper, when the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him,

Berean Study Bible
The evening meal was underway, and the devil had already put into the heart of Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, to betray Jesus.

Berean Literal Bible
And supper taking place, the devil already having put into the heart of Judas son of Simon Iscariot that he should betray Him,

New American Standard Bible
During supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him,


Christian Standard Bible
Now when it was time for supper, the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas, Simon Iscariot’s son, to betray him.


Good News Translation
Jesus and his disciples were at supper. The Devil had already put into the heart of Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, the thought of betraying Jesus.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Now by the time of supper, the Devil had already put it into the heart of Judas, Simon Iscariot's son, to betray Him.

International Standard Version
By supper time, the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, to betray him.

NET Bible
The evening meal was in progress, and the devil had already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, that he should betray Jesus.

New Heart English Bible
And during the meal, the devil had already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And when it was supper he cast Satan into the heart of Yehuda son of Shimeon Scariota, so that he would betray him.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
While supper was taking place, the devil had already put the idea of betraying Jesus into the mind of Judas, son of Simon Iscariot.

New American Standard 1977
And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him,

American Standard Version
And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's'son , to betray him,

Darby Bible Translation
And during supper, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas [son] of Simon, Iscariote, that he should deliver him up,

English Revised Version
And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him,

Weymouth New Testament
While supper was proceeding, the Devil having by this time suggested to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, the thought of betraying Him, Jesus,

World English Bible
During supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him,

Young's Literal Translation
And supper being come, the devil already having put it into the heart of Judas of Simon, Iscariot, that he may deliver him up,

[otseng]

Unless of course Lazarus is not his only name. Then he is indeed mentioned in all four gospels.

Yes, if he had other names, then it's possible. Are you suggesting he had four ways he's referred to in the Bible?

Lazarus
The disciple whom Jesus loved
Simon the Leper
Simon the Zealot

Why would he need to be referred to in four ways?
Why is the story of Lazarus' resurrection not mentioned in the synoptic gospels if he was an apostle?

[polonius]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Simon the Leper is a biblical figure mentioned by the Gospels according to Matthew[1] and Mark.[2] These two books narrate how Jesus made a visit to the house of Simon the Leper at Bethany during the course of which a woman anoints the head of Jesus with costly ointment. Bethany was the home of Simon the Leper as well as Mary, Martha, and Lazarus.

Simon the Zealot (Acts 1:13, Luke 6:15) or Simon the Cananite or Simon the Cananaean (Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:18; Greek: Σίμων ο Κανανίτης; {{lang-cop|Classical Syriac: ܫܡܥܘܢ ܩܢܢ��‎)[3] was one of the most obscure among the apostles of Jesus. A few pseudepigraphical writings were connected to him, and the theologian and Doctor of the Church, Saint Jerome, does not include him in De viris illustribus written between 392–393 AD.[4]

Lazarus of Bethany, also known as Saint Lazarus or Lazarus of the Four Days, venerated in the Orthodox Church as (Righteous) Lazarus the Four Days Dead,[6] is the subject of a prominent miracle of Jesus in the Gospel of John, in which Jesus restores him to life four days after his death. The Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic traditions offer varying accounts of the later events of his life.

The phrase "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (Greek: � μαθητὴς ὃν ἠγάπα � Ἰησοῦς, ho mathētēs hon ēgap� ho Iēsous) or, in John 20:2, the disciple beloved of Jesus (Greek: ὃν �φίλει � Ἰησοῦς, hon ephilei ho Iēsous) is used six times in the Gospel of John,[1] but in no other New Testament accounts of Jesus. John 21:24[2] states that the Gospel of John is based on the written testimony of this disciple.
Since the end of the first century, the Beloved Disciple has been commonly identified with John the Evangelist.[3] Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature (the Gospel of John, First, Second, and Third Epistles of John, and the Book of Revelation) since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment. The authorship by John the Apostle is rejected by modern scholars.
Note: Harris, Stephen L. (1985). Understanding the Bible: a Reader's Introduction (2nd ed.). Palo Alto: Mayfield. p. 355. ISBN 978-0-87484-696-6. Although ancient traditions attributed to the Apostle John the Fourth Gospel, the Book of Revelation, and the three Epistles of John, modern scholars believe that he wrote none of them.

And there are four versions of the story. Two identify only as a woman the person performing the ablution of Jesus, one identifies her as a sinful woman, and the fourth identifies her as Mary, the sister of Lazarus.

And one describes Jesus’s head as being anointed,and three his feet.
Pick your favorite inspired fable!

[polonius]

[Replying to post 96 by otseng]

So you purpose that "Lazarus" was not in the room for the Passover but that he arrived in the room some time after Judas had left, took the favoured position at Jesus side and then for the rest of the evening there were the eleven faithful Apostles .... and Lazarus?

No that can't be right, there must have been all 13 in the room at some point for Jesus to point out the betrayer... so we still have 13 in the room at some point but the arrival of the thirteenth not noted by the writer... there is still food at the table and they are still reclined at the table.



JOHN 13:2

New International Version
The evening meal was in progress, and the devil had already prompted Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, to betray Jesus.

New Living Translation
It was time for supper, and the devil had already prompted Judas, son of Simon Iscariot, to betray Jesus.

English Standard Version
During supper, when the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him,

Berean Study Bible
The evening meal was underway, and the devil had already put into the heart of Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, to betray Jesus.

Berean Literal Bible
And supper taking place, the devil already having put into the heart of Judas son of Simon Iscariot that he should betray Him,

New American Standard Bible
During supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him,


Christian Standard Bible
Now when it was time for supper, the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas, Simon Iscariot’s son, to betray him.


Good News Translation
Jesus and his disciples were at supper. The Devil had already put into the heart of Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, the thought of betraying Jesus.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Now by the time of supper, the Devil had already put it into the heart of Judas, Simon Iscariot's son, to betray Him.

International Standard Version
By supper time, the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, to betray him.

NET Bible
The evening meal was in progress, and the devil had already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, that he should betray Jesus.

New Heart English Bible
And during the meal, the devil had already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And when it was supper he cast Satan into the heart of Yehuda son of Shimeon Scariota, so that he would betray him.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
While supper was taking place, the devil had already put the idea of betraying Jesus into the mind of Judas, son of Simon Iscariot.

New American Standard 1977
And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him,

American Standard Version
And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's'son , to betray him,

Darby Bible Translation
And during supper, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas [son] of Simon, Iscariote, that he should deliver him up,

English Revised Version
And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him,

Weymouth New Testament
While supper was proceeding, the Devil having by this time suggested to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, the thought of betraying Him, Jesus,

World English Bible
During supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him,

Young's Literal Translation
And supper being come, the devil already having put it into the heart of Judas of Simon, Iscariot, that he may deliver him up,

RESPONSE: Have you considered the possibility that the person (whoever that was who wrote the Gospel we call "John's" ) wasn't John and wasn't there?

How long after the event described was this gospel written?

And copying an error doesn't make it any less an error, so repeating it from different editions proves nothing about the accuracy of the fist copy.