"Come and See": A Web Commentary on the Gospel of John

Appendix 3: The "Interleaving" of John with Mark

For several generations scholars have concluded (correctly I think) that there is no literary dependence between John's Gospel and the other three gospels, the Synoptics. Many have gone on to assume that this shows that John did not know any of the other three. This seems a difficult claim to defend, given the late date at which John likely wrote, the popularity of the Synoptics, and the circulation of Christian writings and Christian preachers and teachers in the Mediterranean area. Instead, I think that we should look for signs that John not only knew one or more of the Synoptics but was also writing in dialogue with them, reacting by contradicting or supplementing what had already been written.

It is possible to demonstrate associations between John and Mark in particular by using John to provide a chronological framework for Mark. I have worked from Richard Bauckham's suggestions in “John for Readers of Mark” (pp 154-58; found in Bauckham 1998) to do so, while also adopting the arguments of Barry D. Smith, (discussed both in the commentary on Jesus' washing of the disciples' feet and part 3 of my essay on Gospel Chronology). Following the rough dating given in that essay, and Smith's and Bauckham's arguments, we can read John as supplementing, and occasionally attempting to correct, the earlier gospel, especially with respect to its chronology. This is in keeping with a long-standing ancient and mediaeval Christian tradition that John the Evangelist wrote his gospel at least in part to correct omissions and fill up gaps left by the Synoptics. (Bauckham not only argues that Mark and John can be effectively combined in this way, but that the Fourth Evangelist intended that readers familiar with Mark would readily fit the two gospels together and that two passages in John in particular were intended as clues for the Markan reader (Jn 3.24 and Jn 11.2). The latter argument has proven the more controversial of the two.)

Following these chronological arguments and indications, I have produced the table shown below. I have assumed for the purpose of the table that the Johannine dating of the Cleansing of the Temple is correct, and it was misplaced by Mark, and that the annointing of Jesus shortly before his death is correctly dated by John to six days before Passover and that the annointer was Mary of Bethany. It seems possible, however, that Mark is right that the location was the house of Simon the Leper (see the discussion of John 12.1-11). Passages whose interpretation seems particularly relevant to this "interleaving" of the Gospels of John and of Mark are discussed in the comments sections of the commentary.

Return to the Outline

Return to the opening menu.