Witness is like Real Estate in that it has 3 important criteria to determine its value:
- Source, source and source.
- 1) That GMark is the original Gospel narrative
2) and therefore the primary source for GJohn
3) That GMark has a primary objective of discrediting the Disciples as witnesses
4) That GJohn has the opposite primary objective of crediting the Disciples as witnesses.
What this Thread will be concerned with than is not whether GJohn is a reaction and denial of GMark's presentation of the Disciples as witnesses because this reaction and denial is an assumption of this Thread, but rather how GJohn reacts and denies.
On to the evidence:
Comparison of The Calling of The First Disciples
|Description of||GMark 1:16-18||GJohn 1:35-40||Commentary|
|Preparation for the Call||None||Waiting For||GJohn has implication that they were actively seeking the Messiah|
|Discovery Context||No||Yes||GMark setting is job site while GJohn setting is Teacher/Disciples|
|External Identification||No||Yes||John the Baptist explicitly identifies|
|Internal Identification||No||Yes||Jesus immediately identified as Messiah|
|Simon was the first?||Yes||No||-|
|Contrived Ending||Yes||No||In a relatively short space "Mark" finishes with "fisher of men" pun|
To the extent GJohn provides opposite reaction to GMark is evidence of literary creation (fiction) rather than historical witness.
"He who denies that "John's" Jesus is denying "Mark's" Jesus is the liar." - JW