And you care WHY? Would you go on a Shakespeare discussion board and harass lovers of "Hamlet" because YOU think the play was written by Christopher Marlowe?
Because Hamlet is a work of fiction, and so the authorship does not impact the truth.
If John was really the author of the gospel, that would be a great reason to think that it was all true. If John was not; if it was written by unknown Christians between AD 90 and AD 120, up to ninety years after the events it purports to record, that makes those events considerably less likely to be true.
And yet none were providentially canonized. I believe there is a divine reason for that.
Not sure I would call it divine. The author of John was more convincing and what he wrote better aligned with what the mainstream church was promoting.
Oooh, looky there. You know how to selectively google stuff that supports your bias. Hey, I can do that too. Check this out:
Fact is that most Biblical scholars reject John as the author.
God is beyond time, but every person is firmly planted in it. History impacts us endlessly, including the ways we understand the church and its teachings. This has been the case since the time of the earliest believers.In History and Heresy, Joseph F. Kelly considers heresies and the historical...
books.google.co.uk
How about you address the fact that the author thought Christians were banned from synagogues when Jesus was still alive.
John 9:22 His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jewish leaders, who already had decided that anyone who acknowledged that Jesus was the Messiah would be put out of the synagogue.
The reality is that Christians were not banned until about AD 90. How could an eye-witness get that wrong?
Mark indicates John was martyred before that gospel was written.
Mark 10:35 Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. ‘Teacher,’ they said, ‘we want you to do for us whatever we ask.’
36 ‘What do you want me to do for you?’ he asked.
37 They replied, ‘Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory.’
38 ‘You don’t know what you are asking,’ Jesus said. ‘Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptised with the baptism I am baptised with?’
39 ‘We can,’ they answered.
Jesus said to them, ‘You will drink the cup I drink and be baptised with the baptism I am baptised with, 40 but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared.’
If John is the "beloved disciple", why does John 21 not use that phrase about him?
John 21:1 Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Galilee. It happened this way: 2 Simon Peter, Thomas (also known as Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together.
How come the disciple Jesus loved, the supposed author, does not appear until chapter 13? The other gospels tell us John joined Jesus ministry right at the start.
And while you're desperately searching the internet for support, try to find someone who can explain why the early church supposedly lied about the authorship, since you are apparently not up for the task.
And yet I addressed just that in my last post. If your faith makes you pretend something is not so, the problem is with your religion, stiggy.