Paul's Attestation of the Virgin Birth

 Paul attests to the virgin birth indirectly, in the following ways:

1. Adam Christology of Romans 5 and 1 Cor 15.

2. Use of Greek terminology of Galatians 4. 

Adam Christology of Romans 5 and 1 Cor 15

Paul's comparison of Adam and Jesus suggests the idea of a unique or miraculous origin. Paul refers to Adam as a type of Christ in Romans 5:14, where he writes, “Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.” (NIV) In the ESV translation of Romans 5:14, Paul refers to Adam  as “a type of the one who was to come”. Jesus being a type of Adam is an indication that like Adam, Jesus is a direct creation by God, brought into existence without sin. It was necessary that a type of Adam be the remedy for the sin that entered the world. In 1Cor 15:45, Paul refers to Jesus as the “last Adam.”

Romans 5:14-19 (RSV) 

 ¹⁴ Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. ¹⁵ But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift in the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. ¹⁶ And the free gift is not like the effect of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brings justification. ¹⁷ If, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

¹⁸ Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men. ¹⁹ For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous.

 1 Corinthians 15:20-22 (RSV) 

²⁰ But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. ²¹ For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. ²² For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (RSV) 

⁴⁵ Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. ⁴⁶ But it is not the spiritual which is first but the physical, and then the spiritual. ⁴⁷ The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. ⁴⁸ As was the man of dust, so are those who are of the dust; and as is the man of heaven, so are those who are of heaven. ⁴⁹ Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. ⁵⁰ I tell you this, brethren: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 

 

Use of Greek terminology in Galatians 4 

There are two Greek for 'born' used in Galatians 4, γίνομαι (ginomai) vs γεννάω (gennaō)

The use of these two words for born differentiates Jesus being born vs. other humans being born. Gal 4:4 uses the word ginomai in reference to Christ, while Gal 4:23, 24, and 28 uses the form of the word gennaō in reference to humanity in general.  This differentiation is to indicate that Jesus’s was not born in the typical sense of natural reproduction.  

 

The BDAG lexicon gives a wide range of potential meanings for the word γίνομαι (ginomai):

 

1 to come into being through process of birth or natural production, be born, be produced 

2 to come into existence, be made, be created, be manufactured, be performed

3 come into being as an event or phenomenon from a point of origin, arise, come about, develop

4 to occur as process or result, happen, turn out, take place

5 to experience a change in nature and so indicate entry into a new condition, become someth.

6 to make a change of location in space, move

7 to come into a certain state or possess certain characteristics, to be, prove to be, turn out to be

8 to be present at a given time, be there

9 to be closely related to someone or someth., belong to

 

The BDAG lexicon gives a narrower range of potential meaning for the word γεννάω (gennaō) with a stronger connotation of being begotten by parents:

1 become the parent of, beget

2 to give birth to, bear

3 to cause someth. to happen, bring forth, produce, cause

 

The word applied to Jesus, a form of the word “ginomai” implies being brought into existence in a more generic and broad sense, whereas the implication of “gennao” gives a more narrow implication of being begotten through parents. Thus, the distinction Paul is making in using two different words for “born” is that Jesus was brought into existence in apart from having the connotation of natural reproduction.  When it comes to others being “born,” Paul wanted to give the connotation of natural reproduction using the word gennaō.

 

Although Gal 4 is a great proof text for the virgin birth, it is not at all a proof text for preexistence and incarnation.

Galatians 4:4-5 (RSV) 

⁴ But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born (ginomai) of woman, born (ginomai) under the law, ⁵ to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.

Galatians 4:23 (RSV)

²³ But the son of the slave was born (gennaō) according to the flesh, the son of the free woman through promise.

Galatians 4:28-29 (RSV) 

²⁸ Now we, brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. ²⁹ But as at that time he who was born (gennaō) according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now.

Also in Gal 4:4, Paul mentions that Jesus was “born of a woman” without specifying a human father. Some theologians suggest that this could be an indirect reference to the virgin birth.

The Raising of Lazarus, a Literary Creation?

Many scholars who specialize in the historical study of the New Testament approach the story of the Raising of Lazarus with a critical eye, and may view certain aspects of the story as non-historical or exaggerated.

Keith Yoder

Keith Yoder demonstrates in his paper, One and the Same? Lazarus in Luke and John, that the Lazarus of Luke 16 and the Lazarus of John 11-12 are largely one and the same. Yoder addresses such questions as (1) When was the story composed relative to the contiguous text? (2) How is it interwoven with the rest of John? (3) Whence came this otherwise unknown brother of Mary and Martha? (4) Why is his story here at this turn in the Fourth Gospel? The interpretation of John’s Lazarus narrative has languished in virtual stalemate for some time. Yoder brings new evidence to the table, to gain a fresh perspective on the composition of that story and its relationship to Luke 16, in the context of a carefully constructed array of network connections with earlier and later texts in John. Yoder identifies connections between Lazarus and the Temple Cleansing and how they illuminate why John moved his Cleansing from Crucifixion week all the way back to join with Jesus’ first miraculous sign at the wedding.

 

Keith L. Yoder. “One and the Same? Lazarus in Luke and John” Novum Testamentum Vol. 64 Iss. 2 (2022) p. 184 – 209 ISSN: 1568-5365

PDF Download Available at: https://works.bepress.com/klyoder/60/download/

Warren Carter

Warren Carter is a New Testament scholar who has written extensively on the Gospel of John and the historical Jesus. In his book "John and Empire: Initial Explorations," Carter argues that the Gospel of John was written in the context of the Roman Empire, and that it reflects the social, political, and religious tensions of its time.

Regarding the story of the Raising of Lazarus, Carter suggests that it should be read as a "sign" or "miracle" story that conveys a theological message, rather than as a straightforward historical account. He notes that the story contains several elements that are characteristic of miracle stories in the ancient world, such as the emphasis on eyewitness testimony and the portrayal of Jesus as a powerful wonder-worker.

Carter also points out that the story of Lazarus appears only in the Gospel of John, which was written later than the other three canonical gospels. He suggests that this may indicate that the story was a later addition to the Christian tradition, rather than a historical account of a specific event.

Overall, while Carter does not explicitly argue that the story of Lazarus is entirely fictional, he approaches it with a critical eye and suggests that its historicity may be called into question.

James Dunn

James Dunn was a New Testament scholar who passed away in 2020. He was known for his work on the historical Jesus, the New Testament, and early Christianity. Regarding the historicity of the Raising of Lazarus, Dunn's views are somewhat nuanced.

In his book "The Evidence for Jesus," Dunn suggests that while the story of the Raising of Lazarus may have some historical basis, it has been embellished and mythologized over time. He notes that the story contains several elements that are characteristic of miracle stories in the ancient world, such as the emphasis on eyewitness testimony and the portrayal of Jesus as a powerful wonder-worker.

However, Dunn also argues that the story has theological significance, and that it serves as a powerful symbol of Jesus' power over death and his ability to bring new life. He suggests that the story should be read primarily as a theological narrative, rather than as a straightforward historical account.

C.K. Barrett

C.K. Barrett was a British New Testament scholar and theologian who wrote extensively on the Gospel of John.

Regarding the historicity of the Raising of Lazarus, Barrett suggested that the story should be read as a theological narrative rather than as a historical account. In his commentary on the Gospel of John, he noted that the story contains several elements that are typical of miracle stories in the ancient world, such as the emphasis on eyewitness testimony and the portrayal of Jesus as a powerful wonder-worker.

Barrett also noted that the story is unique among the miracle stories in the Gospel of John, in that it is portrayed as a "sign" rather than a straightforward miracle. He suggested that the story should be understood as a symbolic representation of Jesus' power over death and his ability to bring new life.

Rudolf Bultmann

Rudolf Bultmann was a German Lutheran theologian and New Testament scholar who was one of the most influential theologians of the 20th century.

In his study of the Gospel of John, Bultmann argued that the Gospel was not intended to be read as a historical account of Jesus' life and teachings, but rather as a highly symbolic and theological work. He suggested that the story of Lazarus was not a historical account of an actual event, but rather a symbolic narrative designed to convey theological meaning.

Bultmann suggested that the story of Lazarus was meant to emphasize Jesus' power over death and to prepare readers for the coming resurrection of Jesus. He noted that the story contained many symbolic elements, such as the use of the number four (which he suggested represented the four directions of the world), the emphasis on the timing of Lazarus' death and resurrection (which he suggested was meant to parallel Jesus' own death and resurrection), and the portrayal of Lazarus as a representative of humanity (who is raised from death by Jesus).

Harold Attridge

Harold Attridge was an American biblical scholar and theologian who was known for his work on the New Testament and early Christianity. He was a leading figure in the study of the Gospel of John, and his approach to the text emphasized its literary and theological dimensions.

In his study of the Gospel of John, Attridge argued that the story of Lazarus was not intended to be a historical account of an actual event, but rather a highly symbolic and theological narrative. He suggested that the story was designed to convey the author's theological concerns, including the themes of life, death, and resurrection.

Attridge noted that the story of Lazarus contains many elements that are typical of ancient literary fiction, including the detailed descriptions of characters and settings, the use of dialogue, and the inclusion of dramatic events. He suggested that these literary features are evidence that the story was not intended as a straightforward historical account, but rather as a literary creation designed to convey theological meaning.

Despite his view that the story of Lazarus is a literary creation, Attridge did not dismiss its significance for the Gospel of John or for the broader Christian tradition. Rather, he argued that the story is a powerful and evocative narrative that speaks to fundamental aspects of Christian faith and belief.

Gerd Theissen

Gerd Theissen is a German Protestant theologian and New Testament scholar who is known for his contributions to the study of early Christianity and the historical Jesus. He has written extensively on the Gospel of John and the story of Lazarus.

In his book "The Miracle Stories of the Early Christian Tradition," Theissen argues that the story of Lazarus is a literary creation rather than a historical account of an actual event. He suggests that the story was intended to convey theological meaning and to establish Jesus as a powerful figure with the ability to perform miracles.

Theissen notes that the story of Lazarus contains several features that are typical of ancient literary fiction, including the emphasis on dialogue, the use of vivid imagery, and the inclusion of dramatic events. He argues that these features suggest that the story was not intended as a straightforward historical account, but rather as a symbolic narrative designed to convey theological ideas.

Despite his view that the story of Lazarus is a literary creation, Theissen emphasizes the importance of understanding the social and historical context in which it was written. He notes that the story reflects the concerns and beliefs of the early Christian community and sheds light on the ways in which they understood Jesus and his role in the world.

Nicodemus a Literary Creation?

Several scholars have suggested that Nicodemus, a character in the Gospel of John, is a literary creation rather than a historical figure. Some of these scholars include:

Rudolf Bultmann

Rudolf Bultmann, a prominent German theologian and New Testament scholar, argued that Nicodemus is a literary creation in his influential commentary on the Gospel of John, “The Gospel of John: A Commentary” (1971). Bultmann maintained that the character of Nicodemus is a representative figure rather than a historical person, intended to represent those Jews who were drawn to Jesus but could not fully comprehend his teachings. He argued that the Gospel of John is a theological rather than a historical work, and that the character of Nicodemus serves as a symbol of the struggle to understand and believe in Jesus as the Son of God.

Raymond Brown

Raymond Brown, an American Catholic priest and respected biblical scholar, did not argue explicitly that Nicodemus is a literary creation, but he did note the lack of historical evidence for the character's existence in his influential commentary on the Gospel of John, “The Gospel According to John I-XII" (1966). Brown acknowledged that the character of Nicodemus appears only in the Gospel of John and is not mentioned in any other historical sources, and he suggested that it is possible that the character was invented by the author of the Gospel as a literary device to illustrate the themes of belief and unbelief. However, Brown also noted that it is difficult to definitively conclude that Nicodemus is a purely fictional character, as there may be historical reasons why he is not mentioned in other sources, and there is no way to prove or disprove his existence.

D. Moody Smith

D. Moody Smith was a notable American scholar of the New Testament and early Christianity. In his book “John Among the Gospels: The Relationship and Contribution of the Fourth Gospel to the Synoptic Tradition,” he argues that Nicodemus is a literary creation by the author of the Gospel of John. Smith notes that Nicodemus only appears in the Gospel of John and is not mentioned in any of the other gospels or in any other ancient texts, and that the character is used primarily as a foil for Jesus to expound his teachings on being born again.

Smith also points out that Nicodemus is presented as a member of the Jewish ruling council, which is at odds with the portrayal of the Jewish authorities in the rest of the Gospel of John. Smith suggests that the character of Nicodemus was created as a way for the author of John to distance himself from Judaism and to portray the Jewish leaders as ignorant and hostile to Jesus' message.

Overall, Smith argues that Nicodemus is a literary device rather than a historical figure, created by the author of the Gospel of John to serve a specific theological purpose within the text.

C.K. Barrett

C.K. Barrett, a British biblical scholar and theologian, did not argue explicitly that Nicodemus is a literary creation, but he did suggest that the character may have been invented by the author of the Gospel of John as a literary device to explore the themes of faith and unbelief. In his commentary on the Gospel of John, Barrett noted that Nicodemus is a complex and ambiguous character who appears only in the Gospel of John and is not mentioned in any other historical sources. Barrett suggested that it is possible that the character was invented by the author of the Gospel as a way of exploring the contrast between those who believe in Jesus and those who do not, and that Nicodemus serves as an example of someone who is initially skeptical but eventually comes to faith. However, Barrett also acknowledged that it is difficult to definitively conclude that Nicodemus is a purely fictional character, as there may be historical reasons why he is not mentioned in other sources, and there is no way to prove or disprove his existence.

Urban C. von Wahlde

Urban C. von Wahlde, in his book “The Gospel and Letters of John: Interpreting Biblical Texts Series” argues that Nicodemus is a literary creation. He suggests that the Nicodemus story serves to present Jesus as the revealer of God to those who are searching for the truth, as Nicodemus himself is depicted as doing. Von Wahlde also notes the symbolic significance of Nicodemus' nocturnal visit to Jesus, which suggests a spiritual blindness or lack of understanding on the part of Nicodemus.

Craig Keener

Craig Keener discusses the possibility that Nicodemus is a literary creation in his commentary on the Gospel of John, “The Gospel of John: A Commentary” (2 volumes, 2003). Keener notes that the character of Nicodemus appears only in the Gospel of John, and that there is no independent historical evidence for his existence. Keener suggests that the character of Nicodemus may have been created by the author of the Gospel as a literary device to illustrate the themes of light and darkness, and to contrast Nicodemus's lack of understanding with the understanding of Jesus and other characters in the Gospel.

R. Alan Culpepper

R. Alan Culpepper has suggested that Nicodemus is a literary creation in his book “Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design” (1983). In the book, he argues that Nicodemus serves as a representative of those who are initially attracted to Jesus but have difficulty accepting his teachings. Culpepper notes that Nicodemus's nighttime visit to Jesus in John 3, his silence during the trial of Jesus in John 7, and his assistance in the burial of Jesus in John 19 all contribute to his role as a representative figure rather than a historical person.

Warren Carter

Warren Carter is another scholar who has argued that Nicodemus is a literary creation. In his book “The Gospel According to John and Its Literary Genius,” Carter suggests that Nicodemus is a composite character created by the author of the Gospel of John to represent the conflicted Jewish leadership. He notes that Nicodemus appears in only two episodes in the Gospel of John and serves to highlight the theme of belief and disbelief that runs throughout the Gospel. Carter argues that the author of John created Nicodemus to represent those who are open to Jesus but struggle to believe, and those who are closed-minded and resistant to Jesus' message.

James Dunn

James Dunn is a British New Testament scholar who has written extensively on the historical Jesus, the Apostle Paul, and the early Christian movement. In his commentary on the Gospel of John, Dunn suggests that Nicodemus may be a literary creation representing a particular type of Jewish believer in Jesus, rather than a historical figure. He notes that the name “Nicodemus” means “victory of the people,” which could be a symbolic name for a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin who comes to faith in Jesus. Dunn also highlights the fact that Nicodemus is referred to as a “ruler of the Jews” in John's Gospel, which may suggest that he is meant to represent the Jewish elite who were skeptical of Jesus. However, Dunn does not explicitly argue that the story of Nicodemus is a parable or fictional account.

"The Disciple that Jesus Loved" a Literary Creation?

 

Numerous scholars attest that “the disciple that Jesus loved” of the Gospel of John is a literary creation.

James Dunn

James Dunn, a British New Testament scholar, has written extensively on the Gospel of John and the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved”. In his book “The Evidence for Jesus”, Dunn suggests that the “beloved disciple” is not a historical figure, but rather a literary creation intended to represent the ideal disciple.

Dunn argues that the “beloved disciple” was created by the author of the Gospel of John as a way of emphasizing the importance of the disciple's relationship with Jesus, rather than his identity as a specific historical figure. According to Dunn, the character of the “beloved disciple” serves as a model for all Christians to follow, rather than as a specific individual who actually existed.

Dunn also suggests that the character of the “beloved disciple” was intended to counteract the influence of other Christian groups that were competing with the Johannine community, and to emphasize the unique message of the Gospel of John.

Overall, while James Dunn does not argue that the “beloved disciple” is a purely fictional creation, he does suggest that the character was created for specific theological and literary purposes, rather than being based on a specific historical individual.

Raymond Brown

Raymond Brown was an American Catholic priest and New Testament scholar who was widely regarded as one of the foremost experts on the Gospel of John. In his seminal two-volume commentary on the Gospel of John, “The Gospel According to John (I-XII)” and “The Gospel According to John (XIII-XXI),” Brown provides a detailed analysis of the text and its historical context.

With respect to the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” Brown acknowledges that there is no clear evidence to identify him with any particular historical figure, and suggests that the character may be a literary creation or composite of several historical individuals. He notes that the character is largely defined by his relationship to Jesus, and serves as a model of discipleship.

However, Brown also notes that the character's presence in the Gospel reflects the importance of personal relationships in early Christian communities, and suggests that the character may represent a particular group or faction within the Johannine community that produced the Gospel. Brown ultimately concludes that the question of the historicity of the character is less important than the Gospel's message about the relationship between Jesus and his disciples.

Overall, Brown's work on the Gospel of John recognizes the complexity and ambiguity of the text and its characters, and emphasizes the importance of historical and literary context in interpreting it. While he suggests that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” may be a literary creation, he also acknowledges the character's symbolic significance and importance in the Gospel's message.

Warren Carter

Warren Carter, an American New Testament scholar, has also written extensively on the Gospel of John and the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved”. In his book “John and Empire: Initial Explorations”, Carter argues that the “beloved disciple” is a literary creation intended to represent the ideal disciple, rather than a specific historical figure.

According to Carter, the character of the “beloved disciple” serves as a model for the Johannine community to follow, and represents the ideal way of following Jesus in a context of Roman imperial power. Carter suggests that the character of the “beloved disciple” was created to provide a counter-narrative to the Roman imperial ideology of power and domination, and to offer a vision of a different kind of community based on love, service, and mutual support.

Carter also suggests that the character of the “beloved disciple” was created as a way of highlighting the importance of the Johannine community's unique message and identity, and to distinguish it from other Christian groups of the time. According to Carter, the “beloved disciple” serves as a symbol of the Johannine community's distinctive beliefs and practices, rather than as a specific historical figure.

Overall, while Warren Carter does not argue that the “beloved disciple” is a purely fictional creation, he does suggest that the character was created for specific theological and literary purposes, and that its primary function is symbolic rather than historical.

R. Alan Culpepper

R. Alan Culpepper, an American New Testament scholar, has also written extensively on the Gospel of John and the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved”. In his book “Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design”, Culpepper argues that the “beloved disciple” is a literary creation, rather than a specific historical figure.

According to Culpepper, the character of the “beloved disciple” serves as a narrative device used by the author of the Gospel of John to provide an eyewitness perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus. Culpepper suggests that the character was created to lend credibility and authority to the Gospel's account of Jesus, and to provide readers with a sense of immediacy and intimacy with Jesus' teachings and actions.

Culpepper also suggests that the character of the “beloved disciple” was created as a way of highlighting the theme of love that is central to the Gospel of John. According to Culpepper, the “beloved disciple” serves as a symbol of the kind of relationship that all believers are called to have with Jesus, and represents the ideal of love and devotion to which all Christians should aspire.

Overall, while R. Alan Culpepper does not argue that the “beloved disciple” is a purely fictional creation, he does suggest that the character was created for specific literary and theological purposes, rather than being based on a specific historical individual.

Rudolf Bultmann

Rudolf Bultmann was a German Lutheran theologian and New Testament scholar who made significant contributions to the study of the Gospel of John. Bultmann is perhaps best known for his emphasis on the existential interpretation of the New Testament, which stressed the importance of understanding the text in terms of its relevance to contemporary human experience.

With respect to the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” Bultmann argued that the character is a literary creation rather than a historical figure. He noted that the character is not mentioned in any of the synoptic Gospels, and that his presence in the Gospel of John is largely defined by his relationship to Jesus.

Bultmann suggested that the character may have been invented by the author of the Gospel as a way of expressing his own views about the nature of discipleship and the relationship between Jesus and his followers. He also noted that the character's anonymity and lack of a clear identity make him a convenient literary device for the author.

Overall, Bultmann's work on the Gospel of John emphasized the importance of understanding the text in terms of its symbolic and existential significance, rather than as a straightforward historical or biographical account. He viewed the “disciple whom Jesus loved” as a literary creation that reflects the author's own theological and philosophical concerns.

Tim Mackie

Tim Mackie is an American biblical scholar and co-founder of The Bible Project, which is a non-profit animation studio that produces animated videos on various biblical topics, including the Gospel of John. While he is not a traditional academic scholar with a PhD in New Testament studies, he has been trained in biblical languages and has a deep knowledge of the Bible.

In his videos on the Gospel of John, Mackie suggests that the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is likely a literary creation. He argues that the character was created to represent the ideal disciple, and that his anonymity and vague description allow readers to project themselves onto the character and see themselves as the beloved disciple.

Mackie also suggests that the Gospel of John as a whole is a highly literary work, filled with symbolism, metaphor, and narrative devices. He argues that the story of the raising of Lazarus, for example, may be a literary creation intended to represent the theme of resurrection and new life, rather than a historical event.

Overall, while Tim Mackie's approach to the Gospel of John is not traditional, he offers a unique perspective on the text that emphasizes its literary and theological richness.

Harold Attridge

Harold Attridge is an American New Testament scholar who has written extensively on the Gospel of John and other New Testament texts. In his commentary on the Gospel of John in the “The HarperCollins Bible Commentary,” Attridge suggests that the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is likely a literary creation.

Attridge argues that the character serves a theological purpose in the Gospel, representing the ideal disciple who is able to understand and embody Jesus' message of love and compassion. He notes that the character's anonymity and vague description allow readers to identify with him and see themselves as beloved disciples.

At the same time, Attridge emphasizes the historical and literary complexity of the Gospel of John, suggesting that it cannot be reduced to a simple binary of historical fact or fiction. He argues that the Gospel reflects the historical context of its composition, while also employing literary devices and symbolism to convey theological and spiritual meaning.

Overall, while Attridge's approach to the Gospel of John is nuanced and complex, he is among the scholars who view the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” as a literary creation.

D. Moody Smith

D. Moody Smith was an American New Testament scholar who specialized in the Gospel of John and the letters of Paul. In his commentary on the Gospel of John in the “The Anchor Yale Bible,” Smith suggests that the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is likely a literary creation.

Smith argues that the character serves as a literary device in the Gospel, representing the ideal disciple who is able to understand and embody Jesus' message of love and compassion. He notes that the character's anonymity and vague description allow readers to identify with him and see themselves as beloved disciples.

At the same time, Smith emphasizes the historical and cultural context of the Gospel, suggesting that it reflects the concerns and interests of the Johannine community that produced it. He also notes the complex interplay of history and theology in the Gospel, suggesting that it cannot be reduced to a simple binary of historical fact or fiction.

Overall, while Smith acknowledges the historical complexity of the Gospel of John, he is among the scholars who view the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” as a literary creation.

Wayne Meeks 

Wayne Meeks was an American New Testament scholar who specialized in early Christianity, and in particular the social and cultural context of the New Testament texts. In his influential book, “The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul,” Meeks does not specifically address the question of the “disciple whom Jesus loved.”

However, in his essay “The Man from Heaven in Johannine Sectarianism,” Meeks suggests that the Gospel of John was written for a specific religious community with a particular theological agenda. He argues that the Gospel was not meant to be a straightforward historical or biographical account of the life of Jesus, but rather a theological interpretation of his teachings and significance.

Meeks notes that the Gospel of John employs a number of literary devices and symbolic elements, including the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” to convey its theological message. While Meeks does not directly address the question of whether the character is historical or fictional, his work on the Gospel of John suggests that he views it as a complex and highly symbolic text that cannot be reduced to a simple binary of fact or fiction.

Overall, while Meeks does not offer a definitive position on the historicity of the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” his work on the Gospel of John suggests that he views the text as a product of a particular religious community with a theological agenda, rather than a straightforward historical or biographical account.

Vincent Henry Stanton

Vincent Henry Stanton was a British theologian and biblical scholar who made important contributions to the study of the New Testament, including the Gospel of John. Stanton's work on the Gospel of John focused on its literary and historical features, as well as its relationship to the wider context of early Christianity.

With respect to the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” Stanton argued that the character is likely a literary creation rather than a historical figure. He noted that the character's anonymity and lack of a clear identity suggest that he was not a prominent figure in the early Christian community, and that his presence in the Gospel may reflect the author's theological and literary concerns rather than historical reality.

Stanton also emphasized the symbolic and theological significance of the character, noting that his relationship with Jesus serves as a model of discipleship and that his presence in key moments of the Gospel underscores the importance of Jesus' love for his followers.

Overall, Stanton's work on the Gospel of John emphasized the importance of understanding the text in its historical and literary context, while also recognizing the symbolic and theological significance of its characters and themes. While he suggested that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is likely a literary creation, he also recognized the importance of the character's role in the Gospel's depiction of discipleship and Jesus' relationship with his followers.

G. H. C. MacGregor

G. H. C. MacGregor was a Scottish biblical scholar who contributed to the study of the New Testament, including the Gospel of John. MacGregor's work on the Gospel of John focused on its literary and theological features, as well as its historical and cultural context.

With respect to the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” MacGregor argued that the character is a literary creation and not a historical figure. He noted that the character's anonymity and lack of a clear identity may reflect the author's desire to emphasize the importance of discipleship and the relationship between Jesus and his followers.

MacGregor also suggested that the character may have been intended to represent the ideal disciple or the community of Jesus' followers as a whole. He noted that the character's close relationship with Jesus and his understanding of Jesus' teachings may reflect the author's vision for the ideal relationship between Jesus and his followers.

Overall, MacGregor's work on the Gospel of John emphasized the importance of understanding the text in its literary, theological, and historical context. While he believed that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” was a literary creation, he also recognized the significance of the character's role in the Gospel's depiction of Jesus' relationship with his followers.

C.K. Barret

C.K. Barrett, in his book “The Gospel According to St John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text” (2nd edition, 1978), argues that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is a literary creation. He notes that the character is never named, and that there is no evidence outside of the Gospel of John that such a disciple ever existed. Barrett suggests that the character is a symbolic representation of the ideal disciple, and that the author of the Gospel of John may have used this character to convey theological messages.