Assignment

On
“Critically evaluate the date, authorship, destination, and purpose of all four gospels.”

Submitted to
Dr. Saju Thomas

In partial fulfilment of the requirements of the course

A Critical Introduction to the New Testament
For the Degree of Master of Theology (NT)

By

P. Brightson Khumba
Regd. No.

20 September, 2024

NEW LIFE COLLEGE, BANGALORE

 Table of contents
Introduction
1. Authorship of Matthew’s Gospel
1.1. Internal Evidence
1.2. External Evidence
2. Date And Place Of Writing Matthew’s Gospel
2.1. Date of Writing
2.2. Place of Writing
3. Recipients And Occasion Oof Matthew’s Gospel
3.1. Intended Audience
3.2. Geographic Location
3.3. Occasion for Writing
4. Purpose Of Matthew’s Gospel
Conclusion
Bibliography

2
Introduction
The Gospel of Matthew holds a significant place in the New Testament as both the
first book and a key text for understanding the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. Although
the Gospel does not explicitly state its author, a rich tradition and various lines of internal and
external evidence have led scholars to attribute it to Matthew, one of Jesus’ twelve apostles.
Through a detailed examination of its authorship, date, place of writing, recipients, and
purpose, scholars have developed a clearer picture of its context and message. This paper will
analyze the authorship, date, and location of Matthew’s Gospel while also examining its
intended audience and purpose.

1. Authorship Of Matthew’s Gospel

There is no direct and internal evidence in the gospel to which the author himself
ascribes the authorship of the gospel. It is made possible to assume and consider the author of
Matthew’s gospel through the style of writing and external evidence from the ancient
tradition.
1.1. Internal Evidence
The oldest known evidence regarding the authorship of the Gospel is the phrase, ‘The
Gospel According to Matthew’, as stated by a scholar specializing in the New Testament.
During 125 A.D. it is included in all known manuscripts of this gospel which makes it the
“most powerful testimony to the uniformity of evidence about the authorship of Matthew.” 1
Some argue that Matthew was a Gentile and had used Jewish terminology. Still, most
scholars agree and conclude that the authorship of this gospel was a Jew, who knew both
Hebrew and Judaism through the writing style, grammar, syntax, literary style, and the
distinctive themes depicted in Matthew’s gospel. 2 Matthew, a tax collector would probably
advocate for the authorship because; a Jew who is well known for the Jewish religions and
culture would better portray rather than a Greek. After all Matthew’s gospel used OT
passages heavily and the pattern and style of the gospels the 5 blocks 3 of teaching are
depicted in the form of the Torah.

1
Romulo L. Olalia, “Author of the Book of Matthew: Argument and Debate,” accessed on 16 August,
2024. https://www.academia.edu/7738059/Author_of_the_Book_of_Matthew_Argument_and_Debate
2
David L. Turner, Matthew: Baker exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Michigan: Baker
Academic, 2008), 11-12.
3
In Matthew, the five blocks of teaching include: the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), which
covers ethics and spirituality; the Missionary Discourse (Matthew 10), which provides instructions for spreading
the gospel; the Parables of the Kingdom (Matthew 13), which explains the nature of Heaven; the Teaching on
the Church (Matthew 18), which addresses church life and relationships; and the Eschatological Discourse
(Matthew 24-25), which discusses the end times and final judgment.

3
1.2. External Evidence
Some of the early church Fathers who advocated for Matthew’s authorship were
Papias, who marked Matthew’ s composed Logia in Hebrew. Irenaeus also wrote, “Matthew
published a book of gospel among the Hebrews their dialect.” Panaenus says that Matthew’s
gospel had preceded to India and was preserved there in Hebrew letters. Origen bears
testimony to the fact that Matthew wrote a gospel in Hebrew letters. 4 Traditionally, the
Church Fathers considered the author of the gospel as a tax collector and as one among the
twelve (Mt. 9:9-10; 10:3), apparently, a person who knew Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew, lived
around Greek-speaking areas who was well accustomed to both Greek and Jewish Culture. 5
Gerd Theissen also advocates Matthew’s authorship as “he calls Jesus a ‘Nazorean’ (2.23),
the name given to the Christians there.”6

2. Date And Place Of Writing Matthew’s Gospel

2.1. Date of Writing
The exact date of the writing of Matthew’s Gospel cannot be determined with
certainty. However, several factors provide a probable timeframe:
Gospel of Matthew contains hints, such as the parable of the Marriage Feast (Mt.
22:7) where “the king was angry and sent his troops and destroyed those murderers and
burned their city,” which suggests an event after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. 7
Additionally, Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24:158 (similar to Mk. 13:14) seems to allude to the
fall of the city, further indicating a post-70 AD date. Matthew’s reference to the Gospel of
Mark, which is believed to have been written shortly before the fall of Jerusalem, points to a
date of composition after 70 AD.9
Some of the Conservative scholars like Robert Gundry propose a pre-70 AD date for
Matthew’s Gospel, others place its writing between 80-100 AD or even into the early second

4
Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction (Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1990), 44-47.
5
Jae Hyung Cho, “The Gospel of Matthew,” in An Asian Introduction to the New Testament, ed.
Johnson Thomaskutty (Minneapolis: sFortress Press, 2022), 48.
6
Gerd Theissen, The New Testament: History, Literature and Religion (London: T&T Clark, 2003),
102.
7
Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, 54.
8
In Matthew 24:15, Jesus refers to the “abomination that causes desolation,” a term from the prophet
Daniel, to warn of a future event of great significance and distress. He signals that when this ominous event
appears in the holy place of the temple, it will mark a critical and troubling period. This prophecy is interpreted
as a reference to the desecration of the temple, which is seen as a precursor to significant upheaval and
tribulation.
9
David Hill, The New Century Bible Commentary: The Gospel of Matthew (Michigan: Wm. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1972.), 48.

4
century due to the theological reflections it contains. 10 However, evidence framed by Craig S.
Keener seems to favor widely after AD 70 as Matthew particularly engages Pharisaism which
resulted in Syro-Palestine Christians’ primary opposition after AD 70. Secondly, Matthew
seems to reflect the Jewish worldview closer to that of the rabbis than the other writers of the
New Testament, though the rabbinic movement began achieving only after AD 70. Thirdly,
Matthew and Luke mostly depended on Mark which probably developed during the mid-60s,
Matthew used Mark as a source and support of his gospel and all these points to the date after
70 AD.11
2.2. Place of Writing
The Gospel of Matthew is generally believed to have been written in Antioch, Syria.
Jae Hyung Cho notes that Ignatius of Antioch was familiar with this Gospel, which supports
the view that it originated in this region. Furthermore, Matthew’s depiction of Peter as an
ideal disciple, including Jesus’ pronouncement in Matthew 16:18-19 that Peter would build
the church and hold the keys to the kingdom of heaven, is significant.
Peter’s geographical association with Syria, as suggested in Acts 12:7, where he may
have left Jerusalem for Antioch, further points to this city as the likely place of writing for
Matthew’s Gospel.12
3. Recipients And Occasion Oof Matthew’s Gospel
3.1. Intended Audience
Matthew’s Gospel utilizes quotations from the Hebrew Bible to present Jesus as the
fulfillment of the law and the prophets, indicating that Judaism was a significant recipient of
the text. Yet, Some scholars argue that “Matthew’s community contains many Gentiles and
has already separated from the synagogue, others holding the opposite view that Matthew’s
community is largely Jewish and is still connected with the synagogue.” 13 This debate reflects
differing views on the Gospel’s primary audience and their relationship to Jewish traditions.
3.2. Geographic Location
The geographic location of Matthew’s audience has been the subject of scholarly
discussion. The city of Antioch is frequently proposed as the most likely location for
Matthew’s community. This suggestion is based on historical evidence and early Christian

10
Hill, The New Century Bible Commentary, 49.
11
Craig S. Keener, Matthew: The IVP New Testament Commentary Series, ed. Grant R. Osborne
(Illinois: IVP Academic), 33.
12
Cho, “The Gospel of Matthew,” 49.
13
Turner, Matthew: Baker exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, 14.

5
writings,14 including references by church fathers who were familiar with the Gospel of
Matthew and its context.15
3.3. Occasion for Writing
The occasion for writing Matthew’s Gospel appears to be related to the need of the
Christian Jewish community to understand how Jesus’ life and teachings fulfilled the Hebrew
Bible and interpreted the Torah of Moses (Mt. 5:17-48). 16 The text also shows an intent to
broaden its appeal to Gentiles, as evidenced by the inclusion of Gentile women in Jesus’
genealogy (Mt. 1:3, 5, 6) and positive references to Gentile faith (e.g., Mt. 8:10; 15:28). 17
This dual focus suggests that the Gospel was crafted to address both Jewish and Gentile
audiences, reflecting the expanding scope of early Christianity.

4. Purpose Of Matthew’s Gospel

The Gospel of Matthew serves multiple purposes, each of which reflects a distinct
aspect of its mission and audience.
Firstly, Matthew seeks to demonstrate that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of Old
Testament prophecies. This apologetic purpose is aimed particularly at Jewish readers who
might have been skeptical about Jesus being the Messiah. By meticulously linking Jesus’ life
and ministry to the prophecies found in Hebrew Scripture, Matthew underscores the
argument that Jesus’ arrival and work were anticipated and validated by the Old Testament.
For instance, Matthew frequently uses phrases such as “that it might be fulfilled” to show
how various events in Jesus’ life align with prophetic writings (e.g., Matt. 1:22-23; 2:15;
4:14).18
Secondly, the Gospel serves an instructional purpose within the Church. Matthew’s
comprehensive teachings of Jesus, including the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5-7) and other
discourses, were meant to provide foundational content for Christian doctrine and ethics.
These teachings not only lay out the moral and spiritual framework for living out the
Christian faith but also establish Jesus’ authority as a teacher. By preserving these teachings,

14
The suggestion that the Gospel of Matthew was written in Antioch is supported by early church
fathers such as Ignatius of Antioch, who references the Gospel in his letters, Eusebius of Caesarea, who
highlights Antioch as a significant center for early Christianity, and Jerome, who, while discussing the Gospel’s
translation, contributes to the broader context that includes Antioch as a key location.
15
David A. deSilva, An Introduction to the New Testament: Context, Methods, and Ministry Formation,
2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2018), 215.
16
Turner, Matthew: Baker exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, 15
17
Turner, Matthew: Baker exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, 15
18
. deSilva, An Introduction to the New Testament, 225.

6
Matthew ensures that the Church has a rich resource for guiding its members in the principles
and practices of the Christian life.19
Thirdly, Matthew addresses the issue of hope amidst impending judgment and
challenges. The Gospel conveys the message that, despite present hardships and the
anticipation of judgment, Jesus, as the King, will return to establish His kingdom. This
eschatological outlook offers comfort and reassurance to believers facing persecution or
uncertainty, reinforcing the belief in the ultimate triumph of God’s kingdom.20
Donald Guthrie highlights that Matthew’s Gospel aims to show that the major events
of Jesus’ life occurred in fulfillment of prophecy, emphasizing that Christianity is both a
continuation and a more comprehensive revelation than Judaism. This perspective helps to
position Christianity as the culmination of the Jewish faith while also presenting it as a
transformative expansion that includes Gentiles and redefines the relationship between God
and humanity.21
these major purposes are missional, ecclesiastical, and pastoral objectives. Missional,
because Matthew’s Gospel encourages the spread of the message about Jesus to both Jews
and Gentiles, aligning with the broader mission of the early Church. Ecclesiastical, as it
provides practical guidance and structure for church life and worship, helping to form and
sustain the early Christian communities. Pastoral, because it addresses the spiritual and
practical needs of believers, offering comfort, encouragement, and direction as they navigate
their faith in a complex and often hostile environment. Matthew’s Gospel is a multifaceted
text designed to affirm Jesus as the Messiah, educate the early Christian community, provide
hope in the face of judgment, and support the Church’s mission and pastoral care.

Conclusion
The Gospel of Matthew stands as a crucial text in the New Testament, bridging the
Old Testament with the New by presenting Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy.
Although the Gospel itself does not directly state its authorship, both internal evidence and
early church traditions strongly support that Matthew, one of Jesus’ apostles, wrote it. Likely
composed after the destruction of Jerusalem and probably in Antioch, the Gospel addresses
both Jewish and Gentile audiences. Its main goals are to demonstrate Jesus as the anticipated
Messiah, provide essential teachings for Christian life, and offer hope in the face of trials.

19
Norman L. Geisler, A Popular Survey of the New Testament (Hyderabad: GS Books, 2007), 46.
20
Geisler, A Popular Survey of the New Testament, 46.
21
Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, 32-33.

7
Through its focus on Jesus’s fulfillment of prophecy, instructional content, and pastoral care,
Matthew’s Gospel plays a vital role in affirming Christian beliefs and guiding the early
Church.

Bibliography
Books:
Cho, Jae Hyung. The Gospel of Matthew. In An Asian Introduction to the New Testament,
edited by Johnson Thomaskutty. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2022.
deSilva, David A. An Introduction to the New Testament: Context, Methods, and Ministry
Formation. 2nd ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2018.
Geisler, Norman L. A Popular Survey of the New Testament. Hyderabad: GS Books, 2007.
Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1990.
Theissen, Gerd. The New Testament: History, Literature and Religion. London: T&T Clark,
2003.
Turner, David L. Matthew: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Michigan:
Baker Academic, 2008.

Commentaries:
Hill, David. The New Century Bible Commentary: The Gospel of Matthew. Michigan: Wm.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1972.
Keener, Craig S. Matthew: The IVP New Testament Commentary Series. Edited by Grant R.
Osborne. Illinois: IVP Academic.

Websites:
Olalia, Romulo L. “Author of the Book of Matthew: Argument and Debate.” Accessed on
August 16, 2024.
https://www.academia.edu/7738059/
Author_of_the_Book_of_Matthew_Argument_and_Debate

8
 Table of contents
Introduction
1. Authorship of Mark’s Gospel
1.1. Internal evidence
1.2. External evidence
2. Date of Writing
3.3. Place of writing
4.4. Audience (Community)
5.5. Occasion of writing
6.6. Purpose of Mark
6.1. Preserving the tradition
6.2. Giving a pastoral ministry
6.3. Combating with Christological heresy
Conclusion
Bibliography

9
Introduction
This paper examines the Gospel of Mark, focusing on its authorship, dating, place of
writing, audience, and purpose. It investigates traditional beliefs and scholarly debates,
analyzing evidence to understand the text’s context and significance.
1. Authorship of Mark’s Gospel
Although, traditionally, “John Mark,” also known as Mark, is believed to be the
author of the Gospel, it is argued that the author of the Gospel according to Mark is
anonymous because text says nothing about the author.22 However, scholars have set forth
different arguments to find out the author of the gospel of Mark.
1.1. Internal evidence
The title suggests ‘Mark’ to be the author. According to Martin Hengel, gospels were
not written with its author’s name mentioned in them. They were circulated with titles
naming their authors when they were copied and sent out to the churches.23 But it is argued
that the title to this gospel was given only in the middle of the second century when the
canonical gospels were collected and there was need to distinguish this version of the gospel
from others.24 Therefore, although the title suggests Mark to be its author, there may still a
doubt whether Mark wrote the gospel since the name was given later on. There may also be a
confusion as who is this, Mark. Some Scholars have tried to identify the “young Man,”
mentioned in Mark 14:51-52 as Mark, the author, who wrote about himself. But this view has
been objected with the fact that it is uncertain, and it does not even prove anything in his
authorship.25
However, the name “Mark” is mentioned in various other books of the New
Testament. A person called ‘John Mark’ is seen with Paul and Barnabas in the mission (Acts
12:12; 13:13; 15:37-40). Philemon 24 also mentions the name Mark. This name is also
mentioned in Colossians 4:10, 2nd Timothy 4:11, and 1st Peter 5:13.But again it is argued that
“Mark” was a common name in the Roman Empire; Therefore, it is confusing to know,

22
R.A. Guelich, “Mark, Gospel of” Dictionary of the New Testament Jesus and the Gospels, eds. Joel
B. Green, Scot McKnight and I. Howard Marshall (Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 514.
23
Martin Hengel, Studies in the Gospel of Mark, trans. John Bowden (London: SCM Press LTD.,1985),
64.
24
D.A. Carson and Douglas Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand rapids, Michigan:
Zondervan, 2005), 172.
25
R. Alan Cole, Mark: An Introduction and Commentary (England: InterVarsity Press, 2008), 24.

10
whether all these books refer to the same Mark as the author of the Gospel.26 However, John
F. O’Grady argues, that on the assumption, that there was only one Mark prominent in the
early church, all of these references can be assumed to be related to John Mark, the author of
the second gospel.27
1.2. External evidence
There are testimonies of some early Church fathers which claim Mark to be the author
of this Gospel. The earliest among them, as recorded by Eusebius, is Papias (110 AD) who
attributed this Gospel to Mark, as the companion and interpreter of Peter.28 Other early
Fathers unanimously agreed that Mark was the author. Some of them were, Irenaeus, Clement
of Alexandria, Justin Martyr, Tatian, Tertullian, Origen, Jerome, and Eusebius.29
Although Gospel lacks its clear evidence to present “John Mark” as the author of the
gospel, the frequent appearance John Mark with Apostles, his involvement in the ministry, his
name being mentioned in different books, and strong suggestions of early church fathers
seem convincing to accept John Mark, along with the tradition, to be the author of the gospel
of Mark.
2. Date of Writing
The date of the Gospel according to Mark has been a topic of debate for the scholars.
Scholars have argued for three different dates for Mark. They are as follows:
2.1. Early 40s
Basing on the three Papyrus fragments of Qumran, that dated between 50 B.C and 50
A.D containing Mark 6:52-53, 4:28, and 12:17 respectively, Jose O’Callaghan proposed the
date of Mark early in the 40s. But this view is contested by D.A. Carson and Douglas Moo
with the argument, that it would prove only the existence of tradition of this date, that was
later incorporated into Mark, but not that Mark, as a gospel was already written by that time. 30
2.2. Mid 60s
Those who gave credence to the Papias and other tradition, proposed the date of Mark
during the time of Peter’s death, assumed to be in the mid- or late 60s. This view is observed
to be supported even by some internal evidence. For example, Mark writes about the
importance of disciple’s following the “way of the cross” (Mark 8: 34-38), and the
persecutions and martyrdom (Mark 13). This emphasis fits a situation, when Christians were
26
John F. O’Grady, The Four Gospels and the Jesus tradition (New York: Paulist Press, 1989), 69.
27
John F. O’Grady, The Four Gospels and the Jesus tradition, 69.
28
John F. O’Grady, The Four Gospels and the Jesus tradition, 68-69.
29
Norman L. Geisler, A Popular Survey of the New Testament (Grand rapids, Michigan: Baker Books,
2007), 67.
30
D.A. Carson and Douglas Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 179.

11
facing persecutions, and the persecution happened during the time of Nero in mid- 60s.31 R.
E. Brown also expresses his support on the dating of Mark in the mid- 60s with the
observation, that Mark does not show any knowledge of the details of the events that took
place after late 60s, such as, “first Jewish revolt” (66-70 AD), and the fall of Jerusalem (70
Ad).32
2.3. After 70 A.D.
S.G.F. Brandon dates the Gospel according to Mark as late as 70s on the assumption,
that Mark 13 reflects the actual experience of persecution of Roman Christians by the
Romans.33 However, scholars also have noticed that Mark does not record the details of the
events of A.D. 70. Thus, this argument is claimed as flawed.34 R.E. Brown rejects this view
arguing that, in a synoptic relationship, if Mark is believed to be used by Matthew and Luke,
which were written in 80s and 90s, then dating Mark as late as 70s seems unlikely.35
The exact date of the gospel according to Mark seems to be uncertain. But, analyzing
the above arguments, the date of the gospel of Mark as mid 60s seems stronger. Because this
date is supported by both internal evidence and external testimonies
3.3. Place of writing
Traditionally, Rome is considered as the place of writing of the Gospel, affirmed by
Papias, Anti-Marcionite Prologue, Irenaeus and others.36 According to William Lane, the
evidence of the Gospel’s relation to Peter (1st Peter 5:13), and the presence of Latinisms,
suggests Rome as the location.37 James A. Brooks also argues, if in fact the prison epistles
were written by Paul from Rome, Colossian 4:10, and Philemon 24 connects Mark with
Rome in the early 60s.38 However, J.V. Bartlet, cited by Thomaskutty, claimed Syria as the
place of the Gospel, with the argument that, Peter’s connection to the Antiochian church, the
reference to Simon of Cyrene (15:21), Mark’s use of Aramaic words, Antioch being the great

31
D.A. Carson and Douglas Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 181.
32
Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, 163.
33
S.G.F. Brandon, Jesus and the Zealots: A Study of the Political Factor in Jewish Christianity
(Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1967), 245-46.
34
D.A. Carson and Douglas Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 182.
35
Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 164.
36
Edwin Jebaraj and Johnson Thomaskutty, “The Gospel of Mark” An Asian Introduction to the New
Testament ed. Johnson Thomaskutty (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2022), 79.
37
William Lane, The Gospel of Mark: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes, The
New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1974), 24-25.
38
James A. Brooks, “Mark: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of the Holy Scripture,” The
New American Commentary (Tennessee: Broadman Press, 1991), 27.

12
center of Roman culture, and Mark’s unexplained use of geography of Palestine points to a
place other than Rome, and Antioch fits into the space.39
Thomaskutty citing John Chrysostom, suggests that Gospel was composed in Egypt.
However, Chrysostom’s view was not accepted by the scholars, and it was viewed as mistake
of Chrysostom in understanding Eusebius’ statement.40 Despite of the various suggestions of
the places for the Gospel of Mark, the evidence in favor of Rome is stronger. Therefore, most
of the scholars agree that whether in the early tradition, or today’s world, Rome is commonly
considered to be the Place of writing for Mark’s Gospel.
4.4. Audience (Community)
Determining the exact audience of the Gospel of Mark is challenging, but several
clues suggest it was written for a predominantly Gentile Christian audience in Rome. Mark
explains Jewish customs (7:2-4; 15:42), translates Aramaic terms (3:17; 5:41; 7:11), and uses
Latin terms, indicating that his readers were familiar with Roman culture but not necessarily
with Jewish practices.41
S.H. Smith argues that the Rabbinic-style debate stories could suggest a mixed
audience of Jews and Gentiles.42 However, most modern scholars, supported by early sources
like Papias, the Anti-Marcion Prologue, and Clement of Alexandria, agree that Mark’s
primary audience was Roman Gentile Christians.43
The Historical-critical approach using form criticism highlights that Mark’s Gospel
addresses various issues, including political, legal, social, and religious matters, suggesting it
was written for a community facing persecution and tension with Jewish heritage. W.R.
Telford notes that the Gospel’s focus on suffering and moral guidance indicates a community
under threat and in need of support.44
R.A. Guelich contends that Mark’s Gospel has a universal character that speaks
beyond its immediate context. It addresses the call to repentance and belief in Jesus as the
Son of God, relevant to both the original readers and modern disciples.45
5.5. Occasion of writing
39
Edwin Jebaraj and Johnson Thomaskutty, “The Gospel of Mark,” 79.
40
Edwin Jebaraj and Johnson Thomaskutty, “The Gospel of Mark,” 80. A statement in Eusebius’
Ecclesiastical History said, “They say that mark set out for Egypt and was first to preach there the gospel which
he composed.”
41
Walter W. Wessel, “Mark,” The Expositors Bible Commentary, eds. Frank E. Gaebelein, Vol. 8
(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), 609.
42
S.H. Smith. A Lion with wings: A Narrative Critical Approach to Mark’s Gospel (United Kingdom:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 38.
43
Robert H. Gundry, A Survey of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing
House, 2012), 153.
44
W.R. Telford, The Theology of the Gospel of Mark (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999),
17.

13
 The occasion for writing the Gospel of Mark relates to the challenging socio-political
conditions faced by early Christians in Rome during the mid-60s A.D.46 Under Emperor
Nero, who was notorious for his despotic rule, Christians faced severe persecution. Nero’s
regime was marked by heavy taxation, false accusations, and brutal punishments. After the
Great Fire of Rome in 64 A.D., Christians were wrongfully blamed and subjected to horrific
executions, such as crucifixion and being burned alive.47 The tradition says that the Apostle
Paul and Peter were martyred in the persecution of Nero.48 William L. Lane notes that during
this time, Christians were not only persecuted but also faced intense social isolation and
violence. Despite being allowed to worship, they were accused of crimes like hating
humanity for not participating in pagan rituals. This persecution introduced a new level of
martyrdom into the church.49
Christopher Bryan observes that Mark’s Gospel was written for Christians who felt
isolated and insecure due to these harsh conditions. The Gospel aimed to offer them hope and
a sense of identity and security through their faith in Jesus Christ.50
6.6. Purpose of Mark
The Markan Purpose of writing the gospel seems to have different aspects. However,
three major purposes of Mark are as follows:
6.1. Preserving the tradition
R. A. Guelich asserts, the more traditional answer for why Mark wrote gospel has to
do with the concern of preservation of the tradition. Since, first generation eyewitnesses and
the guarantors of the tradition were either dying or being killed, the evangelist would have
written the gospel to preserve it from being lost or distorted.51
6.2. Giving a pastoral ministry
Guelich also asserts that the purpose of Mark’s gospel was pastoral to address a
community under the threat and persecution. The threat had given rise to questions about who
Jesus was and the nature of the kingdom he had come to inaugurate. Therefore, Mark presents

45
R.A. Guelich, “Mark, Gospel of,” Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, eds. Joel B. Green, Scot
McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall (England: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 513.
46
Howard Clark Kee and Franklin W. Young, the living world of the New Testament (London: Bath
Press, 1971), 39-45.
47
William Lane, The Gospel of Mark, 13.
48
Dave Hagelberg, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Delhi: Allianz Enterprises, 2013), 8.
49
William Lane, The Gospel of Mark, 13.
50
Francois P. Viljoen, Mark, The Gospel of the Suffering Son of Man: An encouragement directed to a
despondent religious minority in the city of Rome (POTCHEFSTROOM: School of Biblical Studies and Biblical
Language), 465.
51
R.A. Guelich, “Mark 1-8:36,” Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 34 A, eds. David A. Hubbard and
Glenn W. Barker (USA: Word Books Publisher, 1989), 29.

14
the good news concerning Jesus Messiah, Son of God, to remind them who Jesus is and what
he had come to do as well as what he would do.52 In this way, he wrote the gospel to the
people under threat and persecution to encourage them, introduce Jesus and lead people
towards him.
6.3. Combating with Christological heresy
According to Wessel, Mark wrote the gospel in a situation where Christological
teachings were diluted in which only the divinity of Jesus as focused and Jesus was viewed as
a divine man, whereas the historical Jesus and his humanity was neglected.53 Therefore, Mark
balances the Christological teaching by showing Jesus’s true humanity with Jesus’ picture as
a suffering servant.54
Conclusion
The Gospel of Mark’s authorship, date, place of writing, audience, occasion, and
purpose reveal a complex picture of early Christian life and thought. While the traditional
attribution to John Mark is supported by external evidence and early church testimonies,
internal evidence and scholarly debate suggest uncertainties. The mid-60s A.D. date,
supported by both internal and external evidence, aligns with the socio-political climate of
Roman persecution. The Gospel is generally believed to be written in Rome for a Gentile
audience facing severe trials, aiming to preserve the tradition, offer pastoral support, and
address Christological concerns. Mark’s portrayal of Jesus as both divine and human reflects
a nuanced response to contemporary theological challenges, making the Gospel a vital
document for understanding early Christian identity and resilience.

Bibliography
Books:
Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Doubleday, 1997.
Carson, D.A., and Douglas Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Zondervan, 2005.
Dave Hagelberg. The Revelation of Jesus Christ. Delhi: Allianz Enterprises, 2013.

52
R.A. Guelich, “Mark 1-8:36,” Word Biblical Commentary, 31.
53
Walter W. Wessel, “Mark,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 8, edited by Frank E. Gaebelein
(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), 610
54
H.N. Roskam, “The Origin and Purpose of Mark in the New Testament Scholarship,” The Purpose of
the Gospel of Mark in its Historical and Social Context, edited by H.N. Roskam (Boston: BRILL, 2004), 7.

15
Geisler, Norman L. A Popular Survey of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Baker Books, 2007.
Hengel, Martin. Studies in the Gospel of Mark. Translated by John Bowden. London: SCM
Press Ltd., 1985.
Kee, Howard Clark, and Franklin W. Young. The Living World of the New Testament.
London: Bath Press, 1971.
Gundry, Robert H. A Survey of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan
Publishing House, 2012.
Roskam, H.N. The Purpose of the Gospel of Mark in its Historical and Social Context.
Edited by H.N. Roskam. Boston: BRILL, 2004.
Smith, S.H. A Lion with Wings: A Narrative Critical Approach to Mark’s Gospel. United
Kingdom: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996.
Telford, W.R. The Theology of the Gospel of Mark. New York: Cambridge University
Press, 1999.

Commentaries:
Cole, R. Alan. Mark: An Introduction and Commentary. England: InterVarsity Press, 2008.
Guelich, R.A. “Mark 1-8:36.” In Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 34 A, edited by David A.
Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker. USA: Word Books Publisher, 1989.
Guelich, R.A. “Mark, Gospel of.” In Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, edited by Joel B.
Green, Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall. Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1992.
Lane, William. The Gospel of Mark: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition and
Notes. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974.
Wessel, Walter W. “Mark.” In The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 8, edited by Frank E.
Gaebelein. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984.

Table of contents

Introduction
1. Authorship of Luke’s Gospel
2. Environment of Luke’s Gospel
3. Date of writing

16
4. Address of Luke’s Gospel
5. Destination of Luke’s Gospel
6. Purpose of Luke’s Gospel
Conclusion
Bibliography

Introduction
The traditional canonical order of the New Testament books divides Luke’s work into
two separate sections, the Gospel according to Luke and the Acts of the Apostles. But in this
research will study only on the gospel according to Luke. The gospel content with rich
description about Jesus and his ministry. Scholars had several critics regarding the gospel in

17
different areas. Therefore, in the following discussion will be dealing on authorship, date of
writing, audience, destination, occasion, purpose in the gospel.

1. Authorship Luke’s Gospel

The Gospel of Luke has been traditionally ascribed to Luke, a physician and a
missionary companion of apostle Paul. Acts 16:10-17; 20:5-21:18, reveal that the author was
with Paul on his second missionary journey.55 Most critics agree that Luke and Acts are from
the same author because of the same style and the vocabulary usage. Luke authorship was
affirmed by the heretic Marcion about middle of the second century. Ireneus and Tertullian
also says that there was no doubt about the Lukan authorship of the book.56
In patristic discussions apostolicity receives a good deal of emphasis as a criterion for
acceptance of books, so if the author was not known, it would have been much more likely
that an apostle or someone like Mark would have been credited with them. D. A. Carson,
Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris cited that Luke was not such an eminent member of the
early church as to have writings like these attributed to him without reason. The preface
shows that the author was not an eyewitness of Jesus’ ministry but that he had made careful
inquiries, and this agrees with what tradition says about Luke.57
Rendel Harris developed an argument from the original Western text of Acts 20:13
read, “But I Luke, and those who were with me, went on board,” and F. F. Bruce reasons that,
if this can be accepted, we have testimony to the Lukan authorship. D. A. Carson, Douglas J.
Moo and Leon Morris mentioned that the strongest objection to Luke as the author is the
contention that the author of Acts cannot be a companion of Paul (e.g., in references to Paul’s
visits to Jerusalem, cf. Acts 9:26; 11:30; 15:2 and Gal. 1:18; 2:1), because of the theology
Acts attributes to Paul.58
So, in the case of gospel according to Luke’s authorship, the traditional ascription to
Luke the physician author will be the correct assumption.
and the theology in the gospel.

2. Environment of Luke’s Gospel

55
Mark L. Strauss, “Luke,” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary, Clinton E. Arnold
ed. (Michigan: Zondervan publication, 2002), 05.
56
D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris, An Introduction to The New Testament (Michigan:
A Division of Harper Collins Publishers, 1992), 101.
57
Carson, Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris, An Introduction to The New Testament, 101.
58
Carson, Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris, An Introduction to The New Testament, 102.

18
 The place of writing and the city where Luke lived is uncertain. It would been easier
to study from the time he lived in order to find out the social setting. It is obvious that he
lived during the Greco-Roman world.59 Therefore, will be looking at the Greco-Roman world
of Luke’s time without reference to any particular place or city.

In the Greco-Roman world, the Greek element predominated in political influence

from 330-30 B.C., from Alexander to Augustus which is known as Hellenistic Age. The
Greek culture was creative and expansive, penetrating the eastern Mediterranean world, from
about 30 B.C. onward Augustus to Constantine. With the Roman occupation of the entire
Mediterranean world, a process of assimilation and syncretism developed. The Roman
influence was expansive for the first two centuries of the Roman empire, preserving much of
the Hellenistic culture in the near west.60

Religious groups were well represented, temples dedicated to the cult of the emperor,
to the various Greek deities, and to Egyptian gods highlight both the religious diversity and
the ethnic complexity. The society of the Hellenistic cities presents a picture of a society in
which there were clearly distinguishable social classes. In fact, the whole population could be
divided into two main categories. In the words of Stambaugh and Balch they were, “those
with influence and those without it, the ‘honorable’ and the ‘humble,’ those who governed
and those who were governed, those who had property and those who did not.” The upper
classes came to refer to themselves as honestiores, possessors of honour or esteem, while the
rest were simply humiliores, those of lowly birth and status.61

3. Date of writing
The second half of the second century the gospel of Luke was already generally
known and regarded as authoritative. Justin the early Christian apologist and philosopher
(150 AD) made abundant use of this gospel in his writings. Marcion (140 AD) composed his
heretical ‘Gospel,’ where he mainly used the gospel of Luke. The Gnostics Basilides and
Valentinus who flourished between about A.D. 120-140 also knew the gospel. Probably
during the same period, the writer of the apocryphal “Gospel according to Peter” also made
used of Luke (130 AD). Finally, there is the high probability that when the Gospel of John

59
Takatemjen, The Banquet is Ready: Rich and Poor in the Parables of Luke (Delhi: ISPCK, 2003),
37.
60
Takatemjen, The Banquet is Ready: Rich and Poor in the Parables of Luke, 37.
61
Takatemjen, The Banquet is Ready: Rich and Poor in the Parables of Luke, 38.

19
was written (about AD 90), Luke was already regarded at Ephesus as recognized standard
work on the life of Jesu. From this it is clear that Luke was written at least before A.D. 90.62

Against such an early dating of Luke the objection is raised that Luke shows a certain
degree of dependence on Josephus’ Antiquities (published about AD 94). This objection,
however, is based on extremely weak grounds and most critics reject the view that Luke
made use of the Antiquities.63According to Walter L. Liefeld, the dating of Luke depends
largely on four factors: i) the date of Mark and Luke’s relationship to it64, ii) the date of
Acts,65 iii) the reference to the destruction of Jerusalem in chapter 21, and iv) the theological
and ecclesiastical tone of Luke-Acts66.67
4. Address of Luke’s Gospel
Luke opens his gospel with a prologue in which he acknowledges his predecessors,
states his purpose, and recognizes his addressee to Theophilus. Since “Theophilus” is the
transliteration of a Greek word, means “lover of God,” some scholars have suggested that the
address is in common. Luke writes to any person who might fit into the category of a lover of
God. But the more natural interpretation is that Luke has a definite individual in view. This
person’s name might have been Theophilus, or Luke might be using an alias to guard the
person’s true identity. Luke may also imply that Theophilus was a person of rank, perhaps a
Roman aristocrat (Acts 24:3; 26:25). Theophilus may, in fact, have been Luke’s patron, the
person who incurred the costs of Luke’s writing. Since Luke writes to convince Theophilus of
the “certainty of the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:4), he was probably a recent
convert to the faith.68

62
Norval Geldenhuys, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke
(Michigan: WM.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988), 30.
63
Geldenhuys, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke, 31.
64
First, the date of Mark is, relevant only if Luke used Mark as one of his sources. This probability is
strong enough to assume. With rare exceptions, scholars today hold that Mark was written about A.D. 70,
probably just a few years before that date, which was marked by the destruction of Jerusalem.
65
Second, presumably Luke completed his Gospel before writing Acts, though this has been debated.
The main considerations in the dating of Acts relate to the time of Paul’s imprisonment and the date of the
Neronian persecution (Acts 28:30). This is generally agreed to have taken place around A. D. 60 to 62. The fact
that there is no record in Acts of the subsequent persecution under Nero in A.D. 65 and of Paul’s death at about
that time suggests that Luke wrote Acts before these events.
66
Fourth, another reason why many date Acts and also Luke later is that they believe Acts reflects a
theological climate and ecclesiastical situation nonexistent in the 60s or 70s. They base their view largely on the
assumption that the author of Acts shows little knowledge of the apostle Paul as the early epistles portray him
and also that the author reflects a view of the church more in common with the later Pastoral Epistles and “early
Catholicism.”
67
Walter L. Liefeld, “Luke,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 8, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein
(Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), 807-809.
68
D. A. Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament (Michigan: Zondervan
publication, 2009), 210.

20
 It is almost certain that Luke had a wider reading public in view. Theophilus, though
probably a real person, stands as representative of the people whom Luke addresses in his
two books. It has necessarily had the same social rank as Theophilus, the wider public Luke
addresses probably shared with him a Gentile background. Luke implies such an audience in
many ways: his concern to situate the gospel events in the context of secular history (e.g.,
Luke 2:1; 3:1–2), his emphasis on the universal implications of the gospel. This recognize the
possibility that Luke, like the other gospels, was not so much written to a specific location as
to a specific kind of reader.69

5. Destination of Luke’s Gospel

Early tradition (the Anti-Marcionite prologue) claims that Luke was from Antioch but
it possesses little evidence. The same tradition, in the Monarchian prologue asserts that Luke
wrote his gospel in the region of Achaia. Some scholars are inclined to agree with this
tradition, and it would fit in with if Luke remained in Rome until Paul was released from
prison, then went to Greece and wrote his gospel. Still another tradition, some late
manuscripts of Luke, gives Rome as the place of composition, but it is not known on what
basis. All these traditions are not sufficient evidence to link the gospel definitely with any
particular area.70
Though Luke dedicates the work to Theophilus, it seems certain that he like the other
gospel writers writes for a wider audience. That this audience is predominantly gentile is
suggested by Luke’s profound interest in the universality of the gospel message. It is good
news for all peoples and for all nations. There are few clues as to specify destination of the
letter. Rome, Greece, Caesarea, and Alexanderia have all be suggested in the wider scope of
the gospel.71

6. Purpose of Luke’s Gospel

Luke’s gospel is written to assure his readers of the certainty of the teachings they
have received (Luke 1:4). The message of Luke’s Gospel is that Jesus is the promised
Messiah who fulfills Old Testament prophecies. As the anointed king, Jesus defeats Satan and
his forces, freeing both Israel and the nations from the bondage of sin. Jesus is depicted not
only as the Savior and Lord of Israel but also as the one who invites all people, including the
69
Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 211.
70
Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 206-207.
71
Strauss, “Luke,” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary, 06.

21
marginalized and destitute, into the community of faith. Through faith in Jesus, everyone can
receive salvation and be equal before God.72 Luke defends the inclusion of Gentiles in the
church, arguing that their salvation was always part of God’s plan and that Israel’s rejection
of the Gospel was anticipated in Scripture and part of its historical resistance. 73 Luke’s
purpose is to affirm the Christian message and validate the church’s role in God’s plan by
presenting Jesus with titles such as Savior, Lord, and Son of God, which are also used for
Roman emperors, thereby contrasting Jesus’ true divine status with the claims of imperial
divinity.74
Luke’s Gospel aims to confirm the truth of Christian teachings by showing that Jesus
is the promised Savior who fulfills ancient prophecies and welcomes everyone into God’s
family. By emphasizing that Jesus is the true Lord, and comparing Him with Roman
emperors, Luke shows that Jesus is far above any earthly ruler and supports the idea that
God’s plan includes all people, not just a select few.

Conclusion
The Gospel according to Luke was regarded as authoritative by the second half of the
first century in the formation of the New Testament, and its literary quality was highly
esteemed. The author’s intended message is evident throughout the text, with Luke’s
background as a Gentile suggesting that the gospel was directed primarily at a Gentile
audience rather than a Jewish one. Rich in theological insights and offering a broad
perspective, Luke’s Gospel goes beyond depicting Jesus’ ministry and salvific acts; it also
introduces spiritual evidence within the community and emphasizes eschatological
expectations. Thus, the Gospel according to Luke represents a comprehensive view of God’s
plan and mission, highlighting its significance for both individual salvation and the broader
scope of divine purpose.

Bibliography
Books
Beale, Gregory K., and Benjamin L. Gladd. A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the New
Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2020.

72
Gregory K. Beale and Benjamin L. Gladd, A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the New Testament
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2020), 100.
73
Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 211.
74
Robert J. Dean, Layman’s Bible Book Commentary: Luke, Vol. 17 (Tennessee: Broadman Press,
1983), 13.

22
Carson, D. A., and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. Michigan:
Zondervan Publishing, 2009.
Carson, D. A., Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament.
Michigan: A Division of HarperCollins Publishers, 1992.
Takatemjen. The Banquet is Ready: Rich and Poor in the Parables of Luke. Delhi: ISPCK,
2003.

Commentaries
Dean, Robert J. Layman’s Bible Book Commentary: Luke, vol. 17. Tennessee: Broadman
Press, 1983.
Geldenhuys, Norval. The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel
of Luke. Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988.
Liefeld, Walter L. “Luke.” In The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 8, edited by Frank E.
Gaebelein. Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984.
Strauss, Mark L. “Luke.” In Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary, edited
by Clinton E. Arnold. Michigan: Zondervan Publishing, 2002.

Table of contents

Introduction
1. Authorship Of John’s Gospel
1.1. External Evidence
1.2. Internal Evidence
1.2.1. Knowledge of Palestine and Jewish Culture

23
 1.2.2. Linguistic Evidence and Eyewitness Testimony
2. Date of writing John Gospel
3. Destination of the Gospel of John
4. Purpose of John’s Gospel
4.1. Dependence on the Synoptics
4.2. Combatting Gnosticism
4.3. Evangelistic Purpose
Conclusion
Bibliography

Introduction
This paper examines the Gospel of John, focusing on its authorship, dating, place of
writing, audience, and purpose. It reviews traditional beliefs and scholarly debates to
understand the context and significance of the Gospel. By analyzing early Church testimonies
and internal evidence, the paper aims to clarify the Gospel’s origins and its intended impact
on early Christian communities.

24
1. Authorship of John’s Gospel
To determine the authorship of the Gospel of John, one must evaluate both external
and internal evidence. This involves considering the testimony of early Church figures and
traditions, as well as analyzing evidence found within the Gospel itself.
1.1. External Evidence
External evidence includes testimony from early Church figures and traditions.
Polycarp, who was martyred in Smyrna in A.D. 156, claimed a direct association with the
apostle John. Eusebius, quoting Irenaeus, provides support for this claim:
“I am able to describe the very place in which the blessed Polycarp sat as he
discoursed, and his goings out and his comings in, and the manner of his life, and his physical
appearance, and his discourses to the people, and the accounts which he gave of his
intercourse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord.”75 Polycarp’s connection to
John lends credence to the claim of Johannine authorship. Additionally, second-century
witnesses such as Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian also support Johannine authorship.
Eusebius records Clement’s assertion:
“But that John, last of all, conscious that the outward facts had been set forth in the
Gospels, was urged on by his disciples, and, divinely moved by the Spirit, composed a
spiritual Gospel.”76 Despite some dissenting views, from the end of the second century, there
is general agreement within the Church regarding the authority, canonicity, and authorship of
the Gospel of John.77
1.2. Internal Evidence
Internal evidence supporting Johannine authorship can be summarized into two main
points:
1.2.1. Knowledge of Palestine and Jewish Culture
The detailed knowledge of Palestinian geography and Jewish customs suggests direct
interaction with the culture rather than reliance on later Jewish sources. The Dead Sea Scrolls
have made it less necessary to invoke Hellenistic influences to explain the Gospel’s
characteristics.78

75
Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black, The New Testament: Its Background and Message,
(Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2003), 156.
76
Eusebius Pamphilus, Ecclesiastical History, 8th ed. (New York, NY: Dayton & Saxon, 1842), 5.20.5-
6.
77
D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 2005), 232.
78
D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 2005), 234.

25
1.2.2. Linguistic Evidence and Eyewitness Testimony
John’s quotations from Hebrew and Aramaic are closer to their original forms than to
Greek. The Gospel itself claims to be an eyewitness account of Jesus’ ministry and concludes
in 20:21 that the narrative is provided by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” and is a true
account of events.79
When looking at the list of apostles in the Synoptic Gospels, possible authors include
Matthew, Simon the Zealot, James the son of Alphaeus, and John the son of Zebedee. Since
Matthew already wrote a Gospel, it’s unlikely he wrote another one. Simon the Zealot and
James the son of Alphaeus seldom get considered as authors. Therefore, John the son of
Zebedee stands out as the most likely author.
2. Date of writing John Gospel
The Gospel of John is commonly dated to the 80s or later based on several
considerations. John 21:18-19, which references Peter’s death, suggests that the Gospel was
written after AD 64-65, the approximate time of Peter’s martyrdom.80 Additionally, the
absence of any mention of the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in AD 70 could indicate
that the Gospel was written either before this event or a significant time after it. This lack of
reference might reflect a period of relative calm or transition in the narrative.
A strong reason for dating the Gospel of John to the end of the first century is its
mentions of organized expulsions from the synagogue (e.g., John 9:22, 34; 12:42-43). While
there was early tension between Jewish Christians and non-Christian Jews, formal expulsions
from the synagogue likely became more common only after the Temple’s destruction in AD
70. This separation from the Jewish community was a gradual process that took place over
the years following the Temple’s fall.81 Therefore, the Gospel’s references to these expulsions
suggest it was written during a time when such conflicts were more intense and officially
recognized.
3. Destination of the Gospel of John
The Gospel of John was likely written for a community known to the author, perhaps
in a major city like Ephesus. Its themes and references, including those to the Paraclete, 82

79
Andreas J. Köstenberger, Encountering John: The Gospel in Historical, Literary, and Theological
Perspective, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013), 4.
80
Gregory K. Beale and Benjamin L. Gladd, A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the New Testament
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2020), 127.
81
David A. deSilva, An Introduction to the New Testament: Context, Methods, and Ministry Formation,
2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2018), 344.
82
The Paraclete, meaning “helper” or “comforter,” refers to the Holy Spirit in the Gospel of John, who
is promised by Jesus to guide, support, and encourage believers after his departure.

26
indicate it was intended for both Jesus’ immediate disciples and the later audience familiar to
the author.
Raymond E. Brown suggests that the Gospel of John was written to support early
Christians who were facing opposition from Jewish authorities and internal conflicts within
their own communities. He believes that John’s emphasis on the Paraclete, or Holy Spirit,
was intended to provide comfort and guidance to believers during times of uncertainty. While
the Gospel may have addressed a wider audience, its primary focus was on the immediate
community closely associated with the author.83
Richard Bauckham, on the other hand, argues that the Gospel was intended for a
wider Christian audience rather than just a narrow group. He points to universal references in
the text, like the term “world,” to support the idea of a broader Christian perspective.
However, Bauckham acknowledges that the exact relationship between the Johannine
community and other Christian groups is still debated.84
Both scholars agree that the Gospel is closely linked to its time and had a big effect on
early Christianity. The different ways people understand the Gospel show how valuable and
adaptable it was for various needs in early Christian communities. So, it is believed that the
Gospel’s many meanings helped it tackle different issues and was important in shaping early
Christian beliefs and practices.
4. Purpose of John’s Gospel
The purpose of the Gospel of John has been widely debated, with scholars offering
diverse theories. Here are some key points regarding this discussion:
4.1. Dependence on the Synoptics
Earlier scholars believed John wrote to supplement or supersede the Synoptic Gospels
(Matthew, Mark, and Luke).85 This assumption was based on contrasting John’s Gospel with
the Synoptics, but many now reject this view, emphasizing that John should be understood
independently.86
4.2. Combatting Gnosticism

83
Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John (Chapters 1-12), The Anchor Yale Bible (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), 88.
84
Richard Bauckham, “For Whom Were the Gospels Written?” in The Gospels for All Christians:
Rethinking the Gospel Audiences, ed. Richard Bauckham (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 48.
85
D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Leicester,
England: Apollos; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1991), 73
86
The excerpt argues that earlier interpretations were often limited by these assumptions and
methodologies, and that a better understanding of John’s purpose can be achieved by examining the Gospel on
its own terms, rather than just in relation to the Synoptics.

27
 Some suggest John’s Gospel was aimed at countering early Gnostic beliefs, as its
Christology could be useful for this purpose. Strachan suggests that John’s primary purpose
was to combat Gnosticism, proposing that the Gospel addresses and counters early Gnostic
beliefs.87 However, Brian J. Smalley argues that the primary purpose of the John’s Gospel
was to present a theological understanding of Jesus to inspire faith and strengthen the early
Christian community, rather than to combat Gnosticism.88 So, John’s content is more Jewish
in nature, making it unlikely that anti-Gnosticism was the primary motivation.

4.3. Evangelistic Purpose

Some scholars, like David Rensberger, think John wrote his Gospel to reach both
Jews and Gentiles, teaching and strengthening Christians by showing Jesus as the Messiah
and Son of God (Jn. 20:31). They believe John’s main goal was to help people believe in
Jesus.89 On the other hand, Freed suggests that John 4 might show an effort to win over
Samaritan converts.90 Malina uses sociolinguistic models to understand the Johannine
community, but these models are criticized for possibly missing the main message about
Jesus. Also, Käsemann argued that the Gospel presents a view where Jesus’ humanity seems
only a disguise for his divine nature, but others believe the Gospel actually shows Jesus’
divine nature through his human experiences.91
The purpose of the Gospel of John is widely debated, but in John 20:30-31, He says
that the accounts of Jesus’ miracles are meant to help people believe that Jesus is the Messiah
and the Son of God. By believing in Jesus, people can have life through his name.92 The
Gospel is intended to strengthen the faith of Jewish Christians. It also aims to reach
unbelievers by presenting Jesus as the Savior who redeems humanity and creation.
Conclusion
The Gospel of John is traditionally attributed to John the son of Zebedee, supported
by early Church testimony and internal evidence of Jewish and Palestinian knowledge. It is
generally dated to the late first century, reflecting post-AD 70 events and tensions. The
Gospel was likely intended for a community familiar to the author, possibly in Ephesus, and
aimed to strengthen faith in Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God. It is believed to have been

87
Carson, The Gospel According to John, 73.
88
Carson, The Gospel According to John, 73.
89
George R. Beasley-Murray, Overcoming the World: Politics and Community in the Gospel of John
(London: SPCK, 1988), 87–90.
90
George R. Beasley-Murray, Overcoming the World, 90.
91
Carson, The Gospel According to John, 74.
92
Beale and Benjamin L. Gladd, A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the New Testament, 127.

28
written for a broad audience, addressing both Jewish Christians and Gentiles, with the
primary purpose of inspiring belief and providing guidance in the early Christian context.
Bibliography
Books:
Beale, Gregory K., and Benjamin L. Gladd. A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the
NewTestament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2020.
Bauckham, Richard. “For Whom Were the Gospels Written?” In The Gospels for All
Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences, edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.
Beasley-Murray, George R. Overcoming the World: Politics and Community in the Gospel of
John. London: SPCK, 1988.
Carson, D. A., and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. 2nd ed. Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005.
deSilva, David A. An Introduction to the New Testament: Context, Methods, and Ministry
Formation. 2nd ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2018.
Eusebius Pamphilus. Ecclesiastical History. 8th ed. New York, NY: Dayton & Saxon, 1842.
Köstenberger, Andreas J. Encountering John: The Gospel in Historical, Literary, and
Theological Perspective. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013.
Lea, Thomas D., and David Alan Black. The New Testament: Its Background and Message.
Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2003.

Commentaries
Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary.
Leicester, England: Apollos; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1991.
Brown, Raymond E. The Gospel According to John (Chapters 1–12). The Anchor Yale Bible.
New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008.

29