Comments on: Jesus and the Eyewitnesses

By: Morne Marais

Morne Marais — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:35:08 +0000

Just got the book, first chapter exciting and informative. Have to agree with Kostenberger on authorship of John, if you have not got his BECNT commentary on John, I suggest you add it to your shelf.

By: luther m. walters

luther m. walters — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 22:03:43 +0000

the most likely solution for the author question is that JESUS dictated the 4th gospel to nathanael and nathanael wrote it down. at any rate the high christology in the 4th gospel could only come from JESUS.

By: luther m. walters

luther m. walters — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 21:57:31 +0000

nathanael is the bel. disc.. we know from john 21 that:

1. he sees JESUS from the boat when nobody else is able to identify who that is jn 1 nathanael is a true israelite and in those days a israelite is one who sees GOD. 2. peter jumps overboard without any questions because he knows he is truthful jn 1 “in whom is no guile 3. latter part of john 21 it states that he will see the coming
jn 1 “you will see the angels descending… every christian will see this coming because JESUS comes for GOD’S children when they die. MANY THINK THIS is THE 2ND COMING BUT IT IS NOT.

By: Coleen

Coleen — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:38:22 +0000

Well, I studied it out. The writer of John is definitely Lazarus. It is blindingly in your face when you read how much Jesus loved he and his sisters. Then you read how he went to their home, then you read, that he is there when Judas was to betray him. To me it was quite clear. Start at chapter 9 and read on, it will amaze you.
I read one writer who used the Bible to back up his position that it was Judas… I wondered if he even bothered to read the book of John. I did… so prove me wrong. You also see in there how people at times came to see Lazarus, because he had been raised from the dead, could be why John was attributed to john, but the beloved disciple was in fact Lazarus.

By: Colleen

Colleen — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:46:34 +0000

What Scipture supports there was a rumor that Christ was to return in their life time? To me it is threaded all throughout the Scriptures that He indeed was coming back in their life time. In Matthew 24 He specifically tells them when the last times will be. We have been so bound by tradition that we are locked into certain pardigmes as oppsed to actually looking for the truth. Read the Gospels with an open mind and you may be very surprised.
I’m studying out the Lazarus thing. It’s more than obvious that it is NOT John trying to be humble, because John had no humility writing Revelation, his name is stamped on it from the beginning. John’s name is not stamped on the “Book of John” Someone else wrote it, that is obvious, what to me at this time is not obvous is to who actually wrote it.

By: Richard Bauckham on Jesus and His eyewitnesses « From Age to Age the Same

Richard Bauckham on Jesus and His eyewitnesses « From Age to Age the Same — Sat, 09 Jun 2007 03:40:23 +0000

[...] Bauckham has recently written a book dealing with Jesus and his eyewitnesses. It won a Christianity Today book award for 2007. It’s called Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. Here is a recent interview about the book. I’m not sure about his views on the Gospel of John’s authorship (ie, am not sympathetic with him!). Andreas Kostenberger has a nice review (with a good argument against Bauckham for John’s authorship) here. [...]

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 15 May 2007 18:37:38 +0000

“Bauckham finds the Beloved Disciple’s anonymity throughout the Gospel an insurmountable obstacle to the apostolic authorship of John’s Gospel, since the “sons of Zebedee” are named; he believes the Beloved Disciple is one of the two unnamed disciples in that list.”

This is only one of many reasons against the idea that John was the unnamed “other disciple whom Jesus loved. And the Biblical evidence posted on thedisciplewhomjesusloved.com shows your claim that “…John’s Gospel, like the other three canonical Gospels, are founded on apostolic eyewitness testimony…” is clearly not based in scripture — since all the events where the other gospels specifically name John as being involved are missing from the book that you claim is his eyewitness testimony (i.e. the raising of Jairus’ daughter, the Mt. of Transifguration, the prayers of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane are not in the fourth gospel). Sorry but it is clear that scripture trumps circular reasoning on this question.

By: Bob MacDonald

Bob MacDonald — Thu, 03 May 2007 00:51:28 +0000

The BD was of the Jerusalem crowd not Gallilean. John Zebedee is ‘traditional’, but why not a John (even John Mark) of Jerusalem? Not one of the twelve. I hope you will ask your question on the upcoming colloquium.

By: Sure Lazarus wrote John, but who wrote Luke? « Lingamish

Sure Lazarus wrote John, but who wrote Luke? « Lingamish — Wed, 02 May 2007 16:22:55 +0000

[...] I continue to get an illicit pleasure out of Ben Witherington’s Was Lazarus the Beloved Disciple? Another post on the author of John (and this one is hot off the press) is Andreas Köstenberger’s critique of Richard Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. [...]

By: Jim Gordon

Jim Gordon — Wed, 02 May 2007 00:05:38 +0000

I agree wholeheartedly with your comments on the author of the Gospel of John. I don’t understand why he went off on this rabbit trail and why the editor permitted it. His main point is well taken and very much needed. The greatest weakness of the book is the same weakness most evangelical books on interpretation and hermenutics possess: the Holy Spirit is passed over quickly and lightly. After all, it must be our reasoning that pulls it all together, right?!
Surely, the memory of the authors and witnesses and their written records was all that was needed. Why would they need the Spirit’s gudiance and help? This is one thing that does not go without saying it! We must highlight the ministry of the Spirit in these matters or we’ll continue to rely on ourselves way too much and see the Bible as just another book.