John summary

John. I’ve always liked John’s Gospel a lot (I’ll show you the stats in the next post) but on this reading I had to keep remining myself that this blog is for writing about the parts I like, not the parts I don’t like. Mainly, I didn’t like John’s treatment of Judas (cf Matt. 26:50 for one I do like). Related, I hate the way he mangled the story of the anointment of Jesus at Bethany (John 12:1-8). It also just feels a bit embellished and embroidered compared to the synpotic Gospels.


  1. I think it is important to keep in mind that John was an eyewitness to all of what was happening. Even more than Matthew since John was part of the Inner Three (Peter, James and John…See Matthew 17:1 for that). It is also important to see that John was writing from a “look back” perspective so when he says what he does about Judas it is because he already knows what happened. With the story of the anointment, John simply adds what Matthew and Mark do not, giving it a fuller treatment. Just some thoughts. Glad you are reading.

  2. Ivan said

    Dear Bill

    … hm … thanks for commenting but I’m afraid I am not swayed, although I should possibly see more clearly how John’s Gospel is coming from a different tradition from the other Gospels.

    Surely they were all writing from a “look back” perspective, that doesn’t differentiate John. In the annointment John also changes, the synoptics Gospels have the unnamed woman annoint Jesus’ head (controversial), John has her do his feet (normal).

RSS feed for comments on this post

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: