|
As expected when I first heard about it, this turns out to be another one of those "must have" books for the serious apologist. The reason is due to the book's uniqueness. Radical left-wing scholars (e.g. the Jesus Seminar) dismiss most of the material from John's Gospel as being pious fiction. On the other hand, many conservative scholars, while in some cases attributing a higher degree of historical credibility to John, often seem reluctant to use material from this Gospel in their historical studies. It was perhaps time, especially in light of recent literary and archaeological discoveries (e.g. Qumran), for a comprehensive defense of the essential historicity of this document, and Craig Blomberg, a specialist in examining New Testament historicity, took on this most significant task.
Following a necessary introductory section, the actual analysis, appropriately enough, begins with a discussion of authorship. Given that John was a (beloved?) disciple of Jesus, it is probable that he would have had been in a relatively unique position to report accurate history about Jesus, and would have had interest in doing so. If Johannine authorship can be established, then this alone would be enough to allow us to be very optimistic about the Gospel's essential historicity. Blomberg examines the external and internal evidence and builds a very compelling case in favor of Johannine authorship (so compelling in fact that it is, IMO, surprising that traditional authorship is under so much dispute in the scholarly world), with the exception of perhaps 21:24-25 (which may have been added by a later editor).
The commentary section that follows forms the bulk of the book. Blomberg progresses through the Gospel examining every passage and event, responding to typical objections to historicity and providing positive indicators in favor of it as well. One very helpful aspect that pervades Blomberg's analysis is his constant referrals to the Synoptic tradition. At virtually every turn, Blomberg demonstrates that the concepts found in John can also be found in the more widely accepted Synoptic tradition. Also of particular interest is the discussion in various places of how John seems to complement the Synoptics in regard to certain events. It appears that John often presupposes basic knowledge (by his readers) of some of the events narrated in the Synoptics, which, of course, would explain certain omissions and additions made by him. The literary issues are perhaps the most perplexing. Where exactly do Christ's words stop and John's theological reflections begin in various discourses? Blomberg's discussions on this issue prove to be valuable. I found the discussion of the miracles of Christ detailed in John's Gospel, especially the turning of water into wine at Cana and the resurrection of Lazarus, to be very helpful. The commentary on the post-Easter events also prove to be of value.
Blomberg closes his book with a helpful summary and discussion of the implications of his conclusions. It is particularly interesting that, according to Blomberg, the liberal critics that attack John do not interact (or interact very little) with relevant evangelical scholarship on the issue. Only through a balanced study of the evidence, both for and against, the historicity of John's Gospel can one reach an intellectually honest conclusion. Blomberg makes a very strong case for the essential historicity of the book, not being afraid to address the relevant questions and objections. For those seeking a comprehensive defense of John's Gospel, this is the place to look.
|
