The Gospel writers reveal that in the days following his resurrection, Jesus appeared before his followers on several occasions. The Apostle John, for example, records that Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene (John 20:11-18), one of his most faithful followers, as well as to his disciples (John 20:19-29) on separate occasions before ascending to his Father (John 20:19-23; 20:24-29; 21:1-23). In the midst of his account of these resurrection appearances, John offers a unique reflection on the purpose of his Gospel. He observes that “Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:30-31 NRSV).
It is certainly not uncommon for authors to offer a disclaimer that their treatment of a subject is not exhaustive. Few authors portend to offer the final word on a subject or to offer a comprehensive account of a given event. In this case, it is certainly understandable that John found it necessary to offer only an abridged overview of the life and ministry of Christ. Surely, we would not expect him to include every detail relating to the life of Christ! What does stand out in John’s reflections is what he shares regarding the purpose of his work. Rather than stating that his gospel was designed to serve as a comprehensive historical account of the life of Jesus or as a systematic treatment of his teaching, John reveals that his gospel was designed to elicit faith in Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah and Son of God. In other words, his work was not intended to serve merely as a source of historical information about the life of Jesus, but to call for faith and to demonstrate that Jesus is the source of spiritual life.
As we consider the literary genre and common interpretative methods used for the study of the Gospels, how might John’s reflections inform our understanding of the nature of these writings? Does the fact that they are written with apologetic concerns diminish their historical value? How should our understanding of the purpose of the Gospel writers inform our understanding of the manner in which they are to be read?
Comments are closed