87
Q.
Why is the gospel of John so different?
Jarrod McKenna
A.
John’s gospel was written last. While some think this makes it less
potent, I think the opposite is true (as did radical Christian groups
like the early Quakers, who quoted it more than any other book).
The gospel of John has had longer to ferment and the imagery and archetypes
of the book are infused with what is fully revealed in the Incarnation, in a way
that is signifi cantly different from the other gospels. In John, Jesus is more
than teacher; Jesus is the revealer! John insists: Jesus is the judgment (Jn. 3:19).
Jesus is God’s future now (Jn. 11:25). Jesus is God (Jn. 10:30).
It’s for this reason that many have considered the apostle John to be the
fi rst Christian mystic, who presents us with the risen victorious victim of the
system, redeeming all of creation. In the gospel of John, God has moved into
the neighborhood (Jn. 1:14), taking the system (and its survival on the sacrifi ce
of the weak) down from the inside. In John’s gospel, Jesus warns that if we
don’t read the whole Bible through his life, we will study the scriptures “day
and night” yet still miss the life that God longs to give us (Jn. 5:39–40).
Jesus’ continual “I Am” statements confront us with the reality that Christ
not only saves us from our sin, but also in a sense saves God from our projec-
tions of violence and injustice. John’s gospel demands that any images of God
that do not look like a love that would wash the feet of an enemy who would
betray you (Jn. 13:15) be radically abandoned.
José F. Morales Jr.
A.
Probably the best way to answer this is by fi rst asking why Mat-
thew, Mark, and Luke are so similar.
Academic consensus says that Mark was written fi rst. Also,
scholars overwhelmingly agree that Matthew and Luke had copies of Mark’s
gospel when they were writing their versions. But as they wrote, they copied
large chunks of Mark when writing their versions. (Back then, it was OK to do
that. Now, it’s plagiarism!) John didn’t copy Mark.
This is not to say that Matthew and Luke are simply “extra-strength”
Mark. They reworked parts of what they used and added their own stuff. Each
of the three had a different portrayal of Jesus of Nazareth that they depicted in
their respective renditions.
John doesn’t borrow from Mark and therefore is substantially different
from the other three, though it should be noted that John’s gospel does have
much in common with them as well—for example, Jesus’ baptism, feeding the
multitude, and the crucifi xion.
Also, each writer had a different theological agenda for his writing,
and this shaped his telling of the story of Jesus. The evangelists were less