Think Wink.

I have been reading Richard Bauckham’s arguments for John’s Gospel to be historiography, if not the most historiographical of all four canonical Gospels, in his book Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony. One of the things he debunks is the idea that John was written by someone or a community that is not John the Elder mentioned in Papias (this is not to be confused with John the son of Zebedee seen in the Synpotics). I just want to recount some of his arguments found in chapters 14-17 of the book.

In John 21:24-25 John uses the participle ὁ γράψας to show that he is the one who has written the Gospel. This aorist participle has been taken in a causative sense for decades to indicate that John, the Beloved Disciple, did not actually write this book but rather was “spiritually responsible” for this text. He caused it to be written. Yet what Bauckham notes is that this is rather unsupported does not fit the meaning of γράφω when used in this context–namely indicating authorship. Consider Paul’s use of γράφω in such contexts.

Romans 15:15, “But on some points I have written to you [ἔγραψα ὑμῖν] very boldly by way of reminder, because of the grace given me by God.”

1 Corinthians 4:14, “I do not write these things [γράφω ταῦτα] to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children.”

1 Corinthians 9:15, “But I have made no use of any of these rights, nor am I writing these things [ἔγραψα δὲ ταῦτα] to secure any such provision. For I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of my ground for boasting.”

1 Corinthians 14:37, “If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you [γράφω ὑμῖν] are a command of the Lord.”

Paul here is claiming to be the author of these two epistles. He is the one who writes the letters to Corinth and Rome and uses the verb γράφω to say so. Yet consider what is written in Romans 16:22, “I Tertius, who wrote this letter [ὁ γράψας τὴν ἐπιστολὴν], greet you in the Lord.” Paul says he wrote a letter that indeed he did not use a pen to write (cf. Galatians 6:11; 1 Peter 5:12). γράφω does not have to mean that John used the pen that wrote Gospel named after him, but the New Testament doesn’t use this verb in a causative sense that removes him from direct authorship. γράφω can mean, and often does, that John dictated his narrative to a secretary who put the words on the page in written form.

Another example found in the Gospel of John that points to γράφω meaning that John either physically wrote or dictated to a secretary is how it is used of Pilate in John 19:19 (the first time γράφω appears in John’s Gospel narrative) where we read, “Pilate also wrote [ἔγραψεν] an inscription and put it on the cross. It read, ‘Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.’” Here Pilate is said to be responsible for writing the inscription yet most likely he had someone actually pen the words on the tablet.

Bauckham notes that no evidence is given to prove the causative notion, that John is “spiritually responsible” for this text. It is merely asserted, then assumed, without any argumentation. It really makes it hard to believe that John 21:24-25 is saying that someone else was caused to write this narrative because they head of John and his stories about Jesus. It makes more sense to see this book written by John either by his own hand or by dictation to a secretary.

Something else that Bauckham notes is the use of “we” in John 21:24-25. Who is the we that is spoken of here? Bauckham here argues that this “we” is used as an idiom he calls “the ‘we’ of authoritative testimony’” (Eyewitnesses, 370-383) where the plural is used for the singular in the case of first person nouns and verbs. This was a practice in the 1st Century world and Bauckham cites Dionysius of Halicarnassus in his work Demosthenes where Dionysius moves from singular to plural in referring to himself as he concludes his work in a way that resembles John 21:24-25 (see the book for where the following quote comes from),