How is John's Gospel a correcting one?

Answer 1

John's Gospel differs so markedly from the three other New Testament gospels as to raise questions about the very reason for this. Some theologians have long felt that John, a disciple of Jesus, wrote his Gospel in order to correct misconceptions evident in the other, synoptic gospels.

However, this hypothesis depends on the author of John's Gospel actually being the disciple John. In fact, the Gospel, like all others, was actually written anonymously and only attributed to the apostle John later in the second century, when the Church Fathers were seeking to establish who probably wrote each of the gospels. Around 180 CE, Irenaeus identified the author of this gospel as John, son of Zebedee. This arose because it was believed that the 'disciple whom Jesus loved' was the apostle John. It seems then to have been decided, on the basis of amateur psychology, that the author must have been John, because the author was too modest.

Today, most scholars assume that John did not write this Gospel. In fact, they say that the author could not have been an eyewitness to the events that the gospel portrays. Just as scholars have identified Mark's Gospel as the major source of information for the authors of Matthew and Luke, so they say that John was inspired by Luke's Gospel, although some material was taken direct from Mark. John's Gospel is entirely derivative and is not an attempt to correct the gospel record.

Perhaps the last word could go to the early Church Father, Origen, who in defending John's Gospel said (Commentary on John) "although he does not always tell the truth literally, he always tells it spiritually." Origen did not believe John's Gospel to be literally true.