(2:13, 23; 5:1 7:37, etc.), circumcision, and the Sabbath (7:22, 23). He is also acquainted with the
marriage and burial rites (2:1–10; 11:17–44), with the character of the Pharisees and their influence
in the Sanhedrin, the relationship between Annas and Caiaphas. The objection of Bretschneider
that he represents the office of the high-priest as an annual office arose from a misunderstanding
of the phrase "that year" (11:49, 51 18:13), by which he means that memorable year in which Christ
died for the sins of the people.- The author was an eye-witness of most of the events narrated. This appears from his
life-like familiarity with the acting persons, the Baptist, Peter, Andrew, Philip, Nathanael, Thomas,
Judas Iscariot, Pilate, Caiaphas, Annas, Nicodemus, Martha and Mary, Mary Magdalene, the woman
of Samaria, the man born blind; and from the minute traits and vivid details which betray autopticity.
He incidentally notices what the Synoptists omit, that the traitor was "the son of Simon" ( 6:71;
12:4; 13:2, 26 at Thomas was called "Didymus" (11:16; 20:24 21:2); while, on the other hand, he
calls the Baptist simply "John" ( he himself being the other John), without adding to it the distinctive
title as the Synoptists do more than a dozen times to distinguish him from the son of Zebedee.^1077
He indicates the days and hours of certain events,^1078 and the exact or approximate number of persons
and objects mentioned.^1079 He was privy to the thoughts of the disciples on certain occasions, their
ignorance and misunderstanding of the words of the Master,^1080 and even to the motives and feelings
of the Lord.^1081
No literary artist could have invented the conversation of Christ with Nicodemus on the
mystery of spiritual regeneration (John 3), or the conversation with the woman of Samaria (John
4), or the characteristic details of the catechization of the man born blind, which brings out so
naturally the proud and heartless bigotry of the Jewish hierarchy and the rough, outspoken honesty
and common sense of the blind man and his parents (9:13–34). The scene at Jacob’s well, described
in John 4, presents a most graphic, and yet unartificial picture of nature and human life as it still
remains, though in decay, at the foot of Gerizim and Ebal: there is the well of Jacob in a fertile,
well-watered valley, there the Samaritan sanctuary on the top of Mount Gerizim, there the waving
grain-fields ripening for the harvest; we are confronted with the historic antagonism of Jews and
Samaritans which survives in the Nablus of to-day; there we see the genuine humanity of Jesus, as
he sat down "wearied with his journey," though not weary of his work, his elevation above the
rabbinical prejudice of conversing with a woman, his superhuman knowledge and dignity; there is
the curiosity and quick-wittedness of the Samaritan Magdalene; and how natural is the transition
from the water of Jacob’s well to the water of life, and from the hot dispute of the place of worship
(^1077) Johannes alsder Erzählende, in seinem Selbstbewusstsein, bedarf für den anderen Johannes des Beinamens nicht, ihm liegt
die Verwechslung ganz fern." Hase, Geschichte Jesu, p. 48. The former belief of the venerable historian of Jena in the fall
Johannean authorship of the fourth Gospel was unfortunately shaken in his conflict with the Tübingen giant, but he declares the
objections of Baur after all inconclusive, and seeks an escape from the dilemma by the untenable compromise that the oral
teaching of John a few years after his death was committed to writing and somewhat mystified by an able pupil. "Die Botschaft
hört er wohl, allein ihm fehlt der Glaube."
(^1078) John 1:29, 35, 39, 43; 2:1; 4:6, 40, 43, 52; 6:22; 7:14, 37; 11:6, 17, 39; 12:1, 12; 13:30; 18:28; 19:31; 20:1, 19, 26; 21:4.
(^1079) John 1:35; 2:6; 4:18; 6:9, 10, 19; 19:23, 39; 21:8, 11.
(^1080) John 2:17, 22; 4:27; 6:60; 12:16; 13:22, 28; 20:9; 21:12.
(^1081) John 2:24, 25; 4:1-3; 5:6; 6:6, 15; 7:1; 11:33, 38; 13:1, 3, 11, 21 16:19; 18:4; 19:28.
A.D. 1-100.