Differences in order between John and the synoptics.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Differences in order between John and the synoptics.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

I am here expanding upon an earlier post of mine. My thesis is simple: the differences in order or chronology between the three synoptic gospels and the gospel of John were very much noticed in the early church, often leading to serious conflicts between various groups. This is a list of the main differences which mattered to the early Christians.

1. Jesus' Movements After the Baptism

Key Johannine passage:

John 3.24: 24 For John had not yet been thrown into prison.

Patristic responses:

Latin (Anti-Marcionite) Prologue: The year, then, having been omitted in which the acts of the tribes were expounded, he narrated the events of the time prior, before John was shut up in prison, just as it can be made manifest to those who diligently read the four volumes of the gospels. This gospel, then, after the apocalypse was written was made manifest and given to the churches in Asia by John, as yet constituted in the body, as the Hieropolitan, Papias by name, disciple of John and dear [to him], transmitted in his Exoteric, that is, the outside five books. He wrote down this gospel while John dictated. Truly Marcion the heretic, when he had been disapproved by him because he supposed contrary things, was thrown out by John. He in truth carried writings or epistles sent to him from the brothers who were in Pontus, faithful in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Origen, Commentary on John 10.1-2: 1 .... The book begins at the words: "After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother and His brothers and His disciples, and there they abode not many days." The other three Evangelists say that the Lord, after His conflict with the devil, departed into Galilee. .... 2 The truth of these matters must lie in that which is seen by the mind. If the discrepancy between the Gospels is not solved, we must give up our trust in the Gospels, as being true and written by a divine spirit, or as records worthy of credence, for both these characters are held to belong to these works. Those who accept the four Gospels, and who do not consider that their apparent discrepancy is to be solved anagogically (by mystical interpretation), will have to clear up the difficulty, raised above, about the forty days of the temptation, a period for which no room can be found in any way in John's narrative; and they will also have to tell us when it was that the Lord came to Capernaum. If it was after the six days of the period of His baptism, the sixth being that of the marriage at Cana of Galilee, then it is clear that the temptation never took place, and that He never was at Nazara, and that John was not yet delivered up. .... Now, if we ask when Christ was first in Capernaum, our respondents, if they follow the words of Matthew, and of the other two, will say, "After the temptation, when, leaving Nazareth, He came and dwelt in Capernaum by the sea." But how can they show both the statements to be true, that of Matthew and Mark, that it was because He heard that John was delivered up that He departed into Galilee, and that of John, found there, after a number of other transactions, subsequent to His stay at Capernaum, after His going to Jerusalem, and His journey from there to Judaea, that John was not yet cast into prison, but was baptizing in Ænon near Salim?

Origen, Commentary on John 10.6: 6 These examples may be serviceable to illustrate statements not only about the Saviour, but about the disciples too, for here also there is some discrepancy of statement. For there is a difference in thought perhaps between Simon who is found by his own brother Andrew, and who is addressed You shall be called Cephas [in John 1.41], and him who is seen by Jesus when walking by the sea of Galilee, along with his brother, and addressed conjointly with that brother, "Come after Me, and I will make you fishers of men" [in the synoptics]. .... With John again the Pharisees know Jesus to be baptizing with His disciples, adding this to His other great activities; but the Jesus of the three does not baptize at all. John the Baptist, too, with the Evangelist of the same name, goes on a long time without being cast into prison. With Matthew, on the contrary, he is put in prison almost at the time of the temptation of Jesus, and this is the occasion of Jesus retiring to Galilee, to avoid being put in prison. But in John there is nothing at all about John's being put in prison.

Eusebius, History of the Church 3.24.6-12: 6 For Matthew, who had at first preached to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to other peoples, committed his Gospel to writing in his native tongue, and thus compensated those whom he was obliged to leave for the loss of his presence. 7 And when Mark and Luke had already published their Gospels, they say that John, who had employed all his time in proclaiming the Gospel orally, finally proceeded to write for the following reason. The three Gospels already mentioned having come into the hands of all and into his own too, they say that he accepted them and bore witness to their truthfulness; but that there was lacking in them an account of the deeds done by Christ at the beginning of his ministry. 8 And this indeed is true. For it is evident that the three evangelists recorded only the deeds done by the Savior for one year after the imprisonment of John the Baptist, and indicated this in the beginning of their account. 9 For Matthew, after the forty days' fast and the temptation which followed it, indicates the chronology of his work when he says: "Now when he heard that John was delivered up he withdrew from Judea into Galilee." 10 Mark likewise says: "Now after that John was delivered up Jesus came into Galilee." And Luke, before commencing his account of the deeds of Jesus, similarly marks the time, when he says that Herod, "adding to all the evil deeds which he had done, shut up John in prison." 11 They say, therefore, that the apostle John, being asked to do it for this reason, gave in his Gospel an account of the period which had been omitted by the earlier evangelists, and of the deeds done by the Savior during that period; that is, of those which were done before the imprisonment of the Baptist. And this is indicated by him, they say, in the following words: "This beginning of miracles did Jesus; and again when he refers to the Baptist, in the midst of the deeds of Jesus, as still baptizing in Aenon near Salim," where he states the matter clearly in the words: "For John was not yet cast into prison." 12 John accordingly, in his Gospel, records the deeds of Christ which were performed before the Baptist was cast into prison, but the other three evangelists mention the events which happened after that time.

Epiphanius, Panarion 51.4.5-10: 4.5 For they say against themselves — I prefer not to say, “against the truth” — that John’s books do not agree with the other apostles. And now they think they can attack his holy, inspired teaching. 6 “And what,” they argue, “did he say, ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.’ And, ‘The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, and we knew his glory, glory as of an only Son of a Father, full of grace and truth.’ 7 And immediately afterwards, ‘John bare witness and cried, saying, This he of whom I said unto you,’ and, ‘This is the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world.’ “And next he says, ‘They that heard him said, Rabbi, where dwellest thou?’ and in the same breath, 8 ‘On the morrow Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me.’ 9 And shortly thereafter he says, ‘And after three days there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee, and Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage supper, and his mother was there.’ 10 But the other evangelists say that he spent forty days in the wilderness tempted by the devil, and then came back and chose his disciples.

Epiphanius, Panarion 51.17.10-18.1, 6: 17.10 Then what has gotten into these people <who> have deceived their own minds and spewed this sect out on the world, that they reject the Gospel according to John? I was right to call their sect “Dumb”; they will not accept the divine Word who came from on high, the Word preached by John. 11 Not understanding the meaning of the Gospels they say, “Why have the other evangelists said that Jesus fled to Egypt from Herod, came back after his flight and remained at Nazareth, and then, after receiving the baptism, went into the wilderness, and returned after that, and after his return began to preach? 18.1 But the Gospel [issued] in John’s name lies,” they say. “After ‘The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us’ and a few other things, it says at once that there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee.” .... 6 But these people say that the Gospel according to John is noncanonical because it did not mention these events — I mean the events of the forty-day temptation — and they do not see fit to accept it, since they are misguided about everything, and mentally blind.

Epiphanius, Panarion 51.21.14-17: 14 Sectarians like these are confounded by the truth and accuracy of the sacred scriptures, especially by the agreement of the four Gospels. No one in his right mind would reject the fully accurate account the Holy Spirit has given through the sacred Gospels. 15 For even though they say that the evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke reported that the Savior was brought to the wilderness after his baptism, and that he spent forty days in temptation, and after the temptation heard of John’s imprisonment and went to live at Capernaum by the sea — 16 but [then go on to say] that John is lying because he did not speak of this but straight off of the Savior’s visit to John [the Baptist] and all the other things John says he did — [even if this is their argument], their entire ignorance of the Gospels’ exact words will be evident. 17 John the Evangelist indicates that before the arrest of John the Baptist the Lord went to him <again> after the days of the temptation. If John had been imprisoned, how could the Savior still return to him at the Jordan?

2. Length of Jesus' Ministry

Key Johannine passages:

John 2.13; 5.1; 6.4; 18.28: 2.13 And the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. .... 5.1 After these things there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. .... 6.4 Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand. .... 18.28 They led Jesus therefore from Caiaphas into the Praetorium, and it was early; and they themselves did not enter into the Praetorium in order that they might not be defiled, but might eat the Passover.

Patristic responses:

Melito of Sardis, fragment: For there is no need, to persons of intelligence, to attempt to prove, from the deeds of Christ subsequent to His baptism, that His soul and His body, His human nature like ours, were real, and no phantom of the imagination. For the deeds done by Christ after His baptism, and especially His miracles, gave indication and assurance to the world of the Deity hidden in His flesh. For, being at once both God and perfect man likewise, He gave us sure indications of His two natures: of His Deity, by His miracles during the three years that elapsed after His baptism; of His humanity, during the thirty similar periods which preceded His baptism, in which, by reason of His low estate as regards the flesh, He concealed the signs of His Deity, although He was the true God existing before all ages.

Irenaeus, Against Heresies 2.22.1, 3: 1 .... Moreover, they affirm that He suffered in the twelfth month [of His career], so that He continued to preach for one year after His baptism.... 3 But it is greatly to be wondered at, how it has come to pass that, while affirming that they have found out the mysteries of God, they have not examined the Gospels to ascertain how often after His baptism the Lord went up, at the time of the Passover, to Jerusalem, in accordance with what was the practice of the Jews from every land, and every year, that they should assemble at this period in Jerusalem, and there celebrate the feast of the Passover. First of all, after He had made the water wine at Cana of Galilee, He went up to the festival day of the Passover, on which occasion it is written, "For many believed in Him, when they saw the signs which He did," as John the disciple of the Lord records. Then, again, withdrawing Himself, He is found in Samaria; on which occasion, too, He convened with the Samaritan woman, and while at a distance, cured the son of the centurion by a word, saying, "Go thy way, thy son liveth." Afterwards He went up, the second time, to observe the festival day of the Passover in Jerusalem; on which occasion He cured the paralytic man, who had lain beside the pool thirty-eight years, bidding him rise, take up his couch, and depart. Again, withdrawing from thence to the other side of the sea of Tiberias, He there seeing a great crowd had followed Him, fed all that multitude with five loaves of bread, and twelve baskets of fragments remained over and above. Then, when He had raised Lazarus from the dead, and plots were formed against Him by the Pharisees, He withdrew to a city called Ephraim; and from that place, as it is written, "He came to Bethany six days before the Passover," and going up from Bethany to Jerusalem, He there ate the Passover, and suffered on the day following. Now, that these three occasions of the Passover are not included within one year, every person whatever must acknowledge. And that the special month in which the passover was celebrated, and in which also the Lord suffered, was not the twelfth, but the first, those men who boast that they know all things, if they know not this, may learn it from Moses. Their explanation, therefore, both of the year and of the twelfth month has been proved false, and they ought to reject either their explanation or the Gospel; otherwise [this unanswerable question forces itself upon them], how is it possible that the Lord preached for one year only?

Latin (Anti-Marcionite) Prologue: John the apostle, whom the Lord Jesus loved very much, last of all wrote this gospel, the bishops of Asia having entreated him, against Cerinthus and other heretics, and especially standing against the dogma of the Ebionites there who asserted by the depravity of their stupidity, for thus they have the appellation Ebionites, that Christ, before he was born from Mary, neither existed nor was born before the ages from God the father. Whence also he was compelled to tell of his divine nativity from the father. But they also bear another cause for his writing the gospel, because, when he had collected the volumes from the gospel of Matthew, of Mark, and of Luke, he indeed approved the text of the history and affirmed that they had said true things, but that they had woven the history of only one year, in which he also suffered after the imprisonment of John.

Epiphanius, Panarion 51.22.1-2: 1 Again, they also accuse the holy evangelist — or rather, they accuse the Gospel itself — because, they say, “John said that the Savior kept two Passovers over a two-year period, but the other evangelists describe one Passover.” 2 The boors do not even know that the Gospels not only acknowledge two Passovers as I have shown repeatedly, but that they speak of two earlier Passovers, and of that other Passover as well, on which the Savior suffered, — so that there are three Passovers, from the time of Christ’s baptism and first preaching, over three years, until the cross.

Epiphanius, Panarion 51.28.1-6: 1 Valentinus, first of all, is at once <exposed> as a fantasist, since he expects <to prove> to us, from the years of the Savior’s rearing and coming to manhood, that there are thirty aeons. He does not realize that the Savior did not live for only thirty years. 2 He was baptized in his thirtieth year at the age of twenty-nine years and ten months, on the twelfth of Athyr, as I said, the sixth before the Ides of November. And then, following his baptism which was <sixty days> before his birthday, <he passed> an acceptable year of the Lord in preaching, and another year, of opposition, after <the first> year, and [finally] seventy-four days of opposition. (3) Thus all the years of his incarnation, from his birth until his passion, amounted to thirty-two years and seventy-four days. But there were two years and 14 days [the text actually but mistakenly has 134] from the start <of his preaching in> the consulship of Silanus and Nerva. And Valentinus stands refuted, and the many who are as foolish as he. 4 The ones who reject John’s Gospel have also been refuted. (I may rightly call them “Dumb,” since they reject the Word of God — the Father’s Word who was proclaimed by John, and who came down from heaven and wrought salvation for us <by> the whole of his advent in the flesh.) 5 For from the consulships, the years, the witness of the prophet Isaiah, the Gospel according to Luke, the Gospel according to John, the Gospel according to Matthew, the Gospel according to Mark—in short, the misguided people have been refuted from every source, 6 since Christ did not live to see just one Passover over the period of a year from the start of his preaching, but actually lived through the periods of a little less than three consulships after his baptism by John.

Epiphanius, Panarion 51.30.14: 14 At all events, the Savior kept two Passovers after the beginning of his preaching and suffered on the third, and this ends the things I have by now said in great detail about days, months and consulships. And their erroneous argument has failed in every respect, since the Gospels are in agreement and no evangelist contradicts another.

3. Temple Cleansing

Key Johannine passages:

John 2.13-15; 3.24: 13 The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. 15 And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. .... 3.24 For John had not yet been thrown into prison.

Patristic response:

Origen, Commentary on John 10.15: 15 It is to be noted that John makes this transaction of Jesus with those He found selling oxen and sheep and doves in the temple His second work, while the other Evangelists narrate a similar incident almost at the end and in connection with the story of the passion. .... Three of the Gospels place these incidents, which we supposed to be the same as those narrated by John, in connection with one visit of the Lord to Jerusalem, while John, on the other hand, places them in connection with two visits which are widely separated from each other and between which were various journeys of the Lord to other places. I conceive it to be impossible for those who admit nothing more than the history in their interpretation to show that these discrepant statements are in harmony with each other. If any one considers that we have not given a sound exposition, let him write a reasoned rejoinder to this declaration of ours.

4. Order of Miracles

Key Johannine passages:

John 2.11; 4.54: 2.11 This beginning of His signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory, and His disciples believed in Him. .... 4.54 This is again a second sign that Jesus performed when He had come out of Judea into Galilee.

Patristic responses:

Eusebius, History of the Church 3.39.15a: 15a And the elder would say this: Mark, who had become the interpreter of Peter, wrote accurately, yet not in order [Rufinus: non tamen per ordinem], as many things as he remembered of the things either said or done by the Lord.

Muratorian Canon, lines 26-34a: What marvel, therefore, is it if John so constantly also in his epistles profers single points, saying about himself: What we saw with our eyes and heard with our ears and our hands handled, these things we wrote to you? For so not only an eyewitness and earwitness, but also a writer of all the miracles of the Lord, in order [per ordinem], he professes to be.

Origen, Commentary on John 10.10: 10 .... And this, also, we have noticed about Capernaum, that not only did the preaching, "Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand," begin there, but that according to the three Evangelists Jesus performed there His first miracles. None of the three, however, added to the first wonders which he records as done in Capernaum, that note attached by John the disciple to the first work of Jesus, "This beginning of His signs did Jesus in Cana of Galilee." For that which was done in Capernaum was not the beginning of the signs, since the leading sign of the Son of God was good cheer, and in the light of human experience it is also the most representative of Him. For the Word of God does not show forth His own beauty so much in healing the sick, as in His tendering the temperate draught to make glad those who are in good health and are able to join in the banquet.

5. Last Supper and Passover

Key Johannine passage:

John 13.1-2a: 1 Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He would depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. 2a During supper....

Patristic responses:

Chronicon Paschale: And Apollinarius [Claudius, a successor of Papias] also, the most hallowed bishop of Hierapolis of Asia, who was near apostolic times, in the volume concerning the Passover taught similar things, speaking thus: "There are some, then, who raise disputes about these things through ignorance, thus suffering from a pardonable circumstance, for ignorance does not admit of accusation but rather requires further teaching; and they say that on the fourteenth the Lord ate the lamb with the disciples, and that on the great day of Unleavened Bread he himself suffered, and they report Matthew as speaking thus, just as they opine. Wherefore their opinion is at discord with the law, and the gospels seem to be at variance against them." And again the same man in the same volume has written likewise: "The fourteenth is the true Passover of the Lord, the great sacrifice, the child of God instead of the lamb, the one bound, the one who has bound the strong, and the judge who has judged living and dead."

6. Diatessaron

Permit me an inference: Justin's alleged harmonizing of the three synoptics preceded the harmony of all four, called the Diatessaron, suggesting that the integration of John with the other three was a much greater task.

To such discrepancies some church fathers took the following attitude:

Tertullian, Against Marcion 4.2.2: 2 Of the apostles, therefore, John and Matthew first instill faith into us; whilst of apostolic men, Luke and Mark renew it afterwards. These all start with the same principles of the faith, so far as relates to the one only God the Creator and His Christ, how that He was born of the Virgin, and came to fulfil the law and the prophets. Never mind if there does occur some variation in the order of their narratives [si narrationum dispositio variavit], provided that there be agreement in the essential matter of the faith, in which there is disagreement with Marcion.

Yet the so-called Alogoi exploited the discrepancies against John, probably in order to pull the rug out from under the Montanists, for whom the Johannine sending of the Paraclete was of vital importance. Meanwhile, the yearly Quartodeciman paschal fast was secured at its termination upon the crucifixion of Christ just before the Passover feast (as in the gospel of John), against the synoptics, which suggested that the crucifixion took place after the Passover. And various Gnostic groups took it upon themselves to find symbolic importance in the single year of ministry that many read out of the synoptics, while their Catholic opponents used the gospel of John to prove a ministry of closer to three years.

These differences mattered a lot to the various factions of the second and third centuries.

Ben.

ETA:

Subject: The Gospel of Marcion Cannot Have Been Derived from the Gospel of Mark
Peter Kirby wrote: Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:38 pm
Secret Alias wrote: Sun Feb 02, 2020 12:29 pm Even Papias's statement has John lurking in the background when you think about it.
Good point. The Gospel of John is a stronger counterpoint to the Gospel of Mark in terms of order.

Multi-year ministry versus 1 year.

Jesus not yet 50, versus 30.

Jesus being crucified on the passover preparation day (therefore, no passover meal).

Also, the Gospel of John shows some concern for order (numbering the signs, for example).

Last but not least, the Gospel of John has long troubled people as having parts that seem "out of order" itself.

https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/ ... th-gospel/

One possible explanation is that this could represent tampering with the text of John's original order.

This tampering makes sense if the people incorporating John (as we know it) into their texts held a Synoptic to have the right order (unlike Papias).
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply