John and the Synoptics: A Case Study of Gospel Parallels in John 12 & 13 (original) (raw)

The Relationship between John and the Synoptic Gospels

Since the beginning of the modern era, scholars have debated everything from the authorship of the fourth gospel to its purpose. Not uncommon among these debates has been that concerning the relationship between this gospel and the synoptic gospels. As D. M. Smith has noted, this particular debate stretches far back into history:

The Relationship Between John and the Synoptic Gospels Revisited

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 2023

In a 1998 JETS article, James Dvorak examined scholarly perspectives on the relationship between John's Gospel and the Synoptic Gospels. Since then, significant shifts in interpretation on this question merit a re-examination. In 1998, the perspective of most scholars reflected the long-held consensus throughout the twentieth century that John's Gospel was independent and separate from the Synoptics. Recent decades, however, have seen an increased openness to a closer relationship between them, especially with Mark but also with Luke and Matthew. In his evaluation of the relationship, Dvorak opted for a mediating position between independence and dependence. The present article examines trends in scholarship over the last twenty-five years, evaluating whether a relationship closer to dependence (especially on Mark) has more explanatory power than independence or a mediating position.

"ASPECTS OF INTERFLUENTIALITY BETWEEN JOHN AND THE SYNOPTICS: JOHN 18–19 AS A CASE STUDY"

Other than John 6 (see my monograph on John's Christology) John 18-19 contains the most similarities between John and the Synoptics. This essay assesses the character and literary origins of those similarities and differences. Published in Gilbert Van Belle, editor, The Death of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel. Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense LIV, 2005 (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, 200; Leuven: University Press / Peeters, 2007), 711-28.

Giving John a Fair Go: Christology in John and the Synoptics

Reformed Theological Review

In agreement with recent argument that the earliest Christians affirmed the divine identity of Jesus, this essay argues that differences between Christology in the Synoptics and John are too seldom assessed with sufficient care. First, the implications of the differing narrative styles of the Gospels are analysed and considered, showing how failures in this area lead to such problems as treating differences that are complementary as divisions, or differences of degree as differences of kind—thus confusing a greater presentation of Christology with a presentation of a greater Christology. Secondly, it is argued that the major Christological difference between the Gospels lies not in their content but in the way they present it. It does so by showing how the same divine Christology that is explicit in John’s prologue is implicit in Mark’s introduction and Matthew’s conclusion.

Intertextuality and the Relationship Between John and the Synoptics

2001

The literature on the relationship of John and Synoptics is extensive, and certainly I cannot even attempt a sketch of all the issues involved. I refer, instead, to the comprehensive study of the problem in D. Moody Smith's John Among the Gospels (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992), of which a second edition, updated, is soon to be published. 2 C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to John, second edition (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1978), p. 42 ff.; Frans Neirynck has expressed his view in many articles, for a quick summary see "John and the Synoptics" in L'Evangile de Jean, ed. M. De Jonge (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1987), pp. 73-106. 1 Intertextuality and the Relationship Between John and the Synoptics Mark A. Matson Milligan College I. JOHN AND THE SYNOPTICS AND THE "SOURCE MODEL" The study of gospel relationships, whether the study of the Synoptic Problem or the relationship between John and the Synoptics, has often focused on explicit examples of quotation (citation) or clear instances of verbal agreement between the gospels. Evidence of agreement in wording between two gospels would suggest some kind of literary relationship, while the absence of clear agreement points away from a literary relationship. This is a well-worn track for those who are interested in the sources of our gospels. 1 In the case of the relationship between John and Synoptics, for instance, we can see how this key issue influenced Johannine scholars in the last century. On the one hand we find scholars such as C. K. Barrett and Frans Neirynck who are convinced that the similarities in arrangement and occasional wording between John and the Synoptics point to John's knowledge and use of these other gospels, especially Mark and Luke. 2 On the other hand, however, we find a much larger array of scholars, perhaps best represented by