Uploaded February 2026 | Updated September 2026, 6 days ago
Could the son of a Galilean fisherman have been "known to the high priest"? Sure, why not?!
Here I argue against what is taken to be one of the strongest arguments against authorship of the Fourth Gospel by John the son of Zebedee. I argue that the argument is a combination of over-reading the meaning of the word "known" and a priori history about who couldn't possibly have been even acquainted with whom.
Small correction to my verbal notes in the vid: While recording I thought this was 7th in the series, but as you see, it's actually 8th. Which means the projection now is for 11 parts, not ten.
Could the son of a Galilean fisherman have been "known to the high priest"? Sure, why not?!
Here I argue against what is taken to be one of the strongest arguments against authorship of the Fourth Gospel by John the son of Zebedee. I argue that the argument is a combination of over-reading the meaning of the word "known" and a priori history about who couldn't possibly have been even acquainted with whom.
Small correction to my verbal notes in the vid: While recording I thought this was 7th in the series, but as you see, it's actually 8th. Which means the projection now is for 11 parts, not ten.
