The Eye of the Beholder: The Gospel of John as Historical Reportage

by Lydia McGrew

Why is the Gospel of John different from Matthew, Mark, and Luke? Many scholars have suggested that John felt more free than the other evangelists to massage the facts in the service of his theological goals and to put embellishments into the mouth of Jesus. Such freedom supposedly accounts for the discourses in John, for Jesus' way of speaking in John, and for (at least) the time, place, and manner of various incidents. Analytic philosopher Lydia McGrew refutes these claims, arguing in detail that John never invents material and that he is robustly reliable and honestly historical.

The Eye of the The Gospel of John as Historical Reportage is unique in several respects. 1) It delves in more detail than previous works do into the meaning of common scholarly phrases like "Johannine idiom" and applies careful distinctions to defend the recognizable historicity of Jesus' spoken words in John. 2) It focuses especially on arguments that have impressed some prominent evangelical scholars, thus refuting the unspoken assumption that if a scholar dubbed "conservative" is moved by an argument against full Gospel historicity, it must be strong. 3) It argues positively for the historicity of John's Gospel using evidences that are not commonly discussed in the 21st century, including undesigned coincidences, unexplained allusions, and the unified personality of Jesus. 4) While the body of the book will be congenial to many who accept Richard Bauckham's "elder John" theory of authorship, The Eye of the Beholder features a lengthy appendix on that question, including original arguments for authorship by the son of Zebedee.

Meticulously argued and engagingly written, The Eye of the Beholder contains a wealth of material that will be helpful to seminarians, pastors, and laymen interested in the reliability of the Gospel of John.

Genres: Christianity

Kindle Edition

Published October 5, 2021

Reviews

[Will Brooks · Rating 5 out of 5]

Is the Jesus of the Gospel of John a true historical figure or merely a true theological figure? Many scholars today, conservative or otherwise, would at best only affirm the latter, arguing that John felt free to embellish and create events to teach theological truths about Jesus. Lydia McGrew counters such a view, instead demonstrating that the Gospel of John is a historical reportage of the life of Jesus of Nazareth by a close eyewitness, if not the disciple John himself.

The strengths of this book are manifold, but lay in McGrew’s combination of exegesis, reason, and historical methodology. She evaluates critical scholarship’s claims about the Gospel of John and shows their vacancy, based largely on self-fulfilling assumptions rather than literary evidence. She also provides an excellent positive case for the historical nature of John’s Gospel.

The only area that could have been bolstered, although it is quite a large work already, is to identify more archaeological evidence showing John must have been an eyewitness (especially when the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is combined with a late 1st century date for its authorship), such as Shimon Gibson’s work on the location for the trial of Jesus and it’s match with the Gospel of John. This is really a nitpick however, as she does allude to the archaeological record, as well as the geography and topography of the Holy Land to demonstrate John’s firsthand knowledge.

I really could not recommend this book enough, especially for those interested in Gospel studies. In a field inundated with critical theories many of which are not based in evidence, it is essential to recover the historical nature of all four Gospels. Lydia McGrew shows us we can do just that.

[Matthew McConnell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic! Lydia McGrew forcefully and persuasively argues that the Gospel of John is historical reportage from the eye of the one who beheld the events himself—John, the son of Zebedee. She argues against those who claim that John felt free to alter the facts in order to present a more spiritualized version of Jesus that gets the “gist” of who he is rather than reporting with historical accuracy that which Jesus did and said. I am grateful for McGrew’s work and am more than willing to stand alongside her and be considered “ultra-conservative” in this regard if it means remaining faithful to the witness of Scripture to historical truth in this particular Gospel.

[Jason Engwer · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a valuable resource on the many evidences for the historicity of the fourth gospel. It's nearly 500 pages of well-argued, well-written, well-organized material. Much of what the book covers has been highly neglected and deserves a far wider audience. The number and variety of topics is large: the authorship of the gospel, the relationship between it and the Synoptics, allegations of historical inaccuracy in certain passages, whether the author puts his own words in Jesus' mouth, undesigned coincidences, the significance of the names the gospel applies to people and its use of disambiguation, etc. Few people will come away from reading this book without having learned something significant about one of the most important documents in history and the supremely important issues that document addresses.

[E · Rating 4 out of 5]

Last year I read McGrew's The Mirror or the Mask: Liberating the Gospels from Literary Devices, which dealt with attacks on the historical reliability of the Synoptic Gospels. Now this work addresses the Fourth Gospel. You don't necessarily need to read the first one first, but it helps. Many of the arguments are the same.

And yet, John deserves a separate book because the attacks are so pervasive. Critics claim Jesus doesn' "sound the same" as he does in Matthew–Luke. They complain that John contains many unique accounts--and so he must have made them up. These and other absurdities are handled well by McGrew. Her goal is not to show that John is inerrant but to demonstrate that it's good and reliable historiography. Anyone interested in the inner workings of the Gospel of John, and in defending it to others, would be well served by this book.

In a previous review I complained about McGrew's tone. It's better here. I also complained that she seemed limited to a small circle of interlocutors. That remains the case, even though she herself has clearly read widely. To write such two lengthy books seems to suppose she's dealing with a major issue. She'd help buttress her case by showing the extent of the rot in modern scholarship.

[John Eldreth · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Intermediate State of Some Evangelical Scholars

In this book Dr Lydia McGrew thoroughly refutes evangelical scholars who propose the Gospel of John is filled with fabrications intended to score theological points rather than be a serious historical source. She leaves no pebble unturned. In reading this book, I developed the idea that quite a few evangelical scholars live in some kind of intermediate state. On one hand, when in academic contexts, they appear “unbiased” and “intellectual” and aloof from those “ignorant sold out for Jesus nuts that actually believe the Bible is historical fact and inerrant”. On the other hand, when in evangelical contexts (i.e. hanging out with the sold out for Jesus nuts), they appear to believe the Bible is “historical” and “inerrant”… though in a way that skips past most people’s common sense understanding of those terms. This duality reminds me of a sentence at the end of Luke 12:1 where Jesus warned his disciples, regarding the “evangelical scholars” of his day, to… “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy“ … although this could be a polemic fabricated and put into the mouth of Jesus by one of the evangelists and shouldn’t be taken too seriously.

[SusanwithaGoodBook · Rating 5 out of 5]

The gospel of John seems to me to be the most disrespected of the gospels. So many times I've encountered books, commentaries, and even preachers, who make comments that indicate a disrespect for John's timeline of events and even sometimes his reporting of the words of Jesus. This is particularly bad in certain "scholarly circles," so Ms. McGrew has gone to great lengths to counter this view with a scathing rebuttal here and in her other works. This one, though, is focused on John and will definitely bolster your confidence in John's reporting of the events of the life of Jesus. I highly recommend all of Ms. McGrew's books to you if you are at all concerned in the supposed "errors" or "paraphrases" attributed to John.

[Caleb · Rating 5 out of 5]

A solid defense of John's Gospel!

[Ken Reese · Rating 5 out of 5]

You don't recognize your own presuppositions until someone illuminates them.

[Chris Risley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Meaty and very enjoyable - this book increases your confidence in the gospel of John