Reflections on the Trials of Jesus John says, was in reality an inspired prophecy; for Jesus would die not only
on behalf of the people, but so that he might gather together the scattered
children of God (:–). The last Passover is approaching, and large num-
bers are going up to Jerusalem in advance of it in order to purify themselves
(:). Meanwhile Jesus goes off to the desert, then to Bethany again, and
then makes his formal entry to the city (:–:).
What is beyond question is, first, that John presents to the reader an in-
comparably more detailed and circumstantial picture of Jewish life in Pales-
tine, punctuated by the annual rhythm of the festivals, than do the Synoptics.
He also represents the earthly activity of Jesus as reaching a series of pre-
liminary climaxes in Jerusalem, in close association with these festivals. As
indicated above, there is no way, logically speaking, in which we can distin-
guish between a ‘‘true’’ narrative and one which is plausible and evidently
related to a historical and social framework known from other evidence. On
the one hand,eitherwe must abandon altogether even the attempt to decide
questions of literal truth;orwe must conclude that nothing in any Gospel
has any claim to truth;orwe must choose. Either Jesus went only once to
Jerusalem, for the fatal Passover, or he went several times, for a succession of
festivals. Either we have no evidence at all which offers us any access to the
earthly life of Jesus, or we must choose between John and the Synoptics. The
only criterion of truth in the Gospels which a historian can offer is confor-
mity with the world as portrayed by Josephus, and what we have in John may
be no more than a convincing fiction. But, as we must choose, I suggest that
the narrative of Jesus’ ministry which brings us closest to the real world of
first-century Palestine is that of John.
This suggestion can be no more than that. It is not only that we cannot
prove, or disprove, the literal truth of any statements in the Gospels, or dem-
onstrate the validity of one narrative structure as against another. Nor can
we ever escape from our inability to distinguish a true story from a convinc-
ing literary construction. But since we can hardly fail towishto know more
about these events, whether we see them as embodying a divine revelation,
or merely the most important single turning point in world history, we both
may and should form hypotheses about where we should begin in thinking
about the life of Jesus. All of the available accounts give a very large place to
the story of how he came to be crucified. I will therefore suggest that if we
wish to consider these narratives, we should be open to the hypothesis that
the one to which we should give preference is that of John.