The Bible and Wisdom II

Why did the first three evangelists become more and more esteemed, while the writer of the Gospel of John became merely a lyricist and confessor? Because it could be said that the first three evangelists, the synoptics, describe an ideal human figure, but always something that, although lofty, does not transcend. It flatters the modern mind when a modern theologian says: If we remove everything supernatural and spiritual from Jesus of Nazareth, if we take the simple man of Nazareth, then we are closest to Jesus. — This does not work with the Gospel of John. It begins with the words: In the beginning was the Logos, the Word. And the Word that was with God in the beginning was before there was a material world. What was there in all spiritual origins became flesh, which changed at the beginning of our calendar in Palestine. The writer of the Gospel of John applies the highest wisdom to understand this event and bring it to understanding. In view of this, it is not possible to speak of the simple man from Nazareth. Therefore, he could never have had anything to do with a historical document. So it is not only scientific reasons, it is the development of ordinary thoughts, feelings, and sensations that have found expression in what is today known as New Testament biblical criticism, what is known as historical research, which claims to have unconditional or at least relative authority over these matters.