“Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” – John 2:19 (ESV)

The dating of the Gospel of John is one of the most debated topics in New Testament studies. While many scholars traditionally assign it to 90–95 AD, compelling evidence suggests a much earlier date—potentially before 70 AD. Dr. Daniel B. Wallace, an eminent scholar of textual criticism, contributes significant insights to this discussion. When internal, external, and archaeological evidence is combined with Jewish sources and rebuttals to skeptics, the case for an early date becomes overwhelming.

Internal Evidence for an Early Date

1. Present-Tense References to the Temple

In John 2:20, Jesus’ audience responds, *“It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?”*¹ The use of the Greek present tense when referencing the Temple strongly suggests it was still standing at the time of writing. Dr. Wallace argues that, had the Temple been destroyed in 70 AD, John—a reflective writer—would almost certainly have mentioned this cataclysmic event.² The absence of any reference to the destruction aligns with a composition date prior to 70 AD.

2. Detailed Knowledge of Jerusalem’s Geography

The Gospel provides vivid descriptions of Jerusalem, such as the Pool of Bethesda, described as having “five roofed colonnades” (John 5:2). The Greek text uses the present tense: “there is a certain pool…” (estin de tis kolumbethra).³ Archaeological excavations in 1888 confirmed the existence of this pool near the Church of St. Anne, close to the Sheep Gate mentioned in John. Later digs revealed a dual-pool system and the distinctive five roofed colonnades, precisely as described. This discovery strongly supports John’s credibility as an eyewitness. Similarly, John 10:23 describes Jesus walking in “Solomon’s colonnade,” a structure within the Temple Mount complex, destroyed in 70 AD.⁴ These details strongly support a pre-destruction composition.

3. Detailed Explanations of Jewish Customs

John explains Jewish practices such as purification (John 2:6) and festivals like the Feast of Booths (John 7:37–38). These explanations suggest John was writing to an audience unfamiliar with Jewish customs, likely a Gentile readership. Dr. Wallace notes that these vivid portrayals of pre-70 AD Jewish life align with the Gospel being composed while these practices were still relevant.⁵

External Evidence Supporting a Pre-70 AD Date

1. Early Church Testimony

While Irenaeus (ca. 130–202 AD) associates John’s Gospel with the apostle’s later years, his testimony does not preclude an earlier start.⁶ Dr. Wallace highlights that John could have written parts of his Gospel around 66 AD, with a finalized version emerging later.⁷ The early Church Fathers consistently affirm John’s authorship, lending credibility to its apostolic origins.

2. Manuscript Evidence

The discovery of the Rylands Papyrus (P52), dated to ca. 125 AD, provides tangible evidence of John’s Gospel being in circulation within a few decades of its composition.⁸ Its presence in Egypt implies rapid dissemination, necessitating an earlier date, potentially as early as 66 AD. Additional manuscripts, such as P66 and P75, further attest to the Gospel’s early textual stability.⁹

Jewish Sources and Archaeological Corroboration

1. Josephus on Jewish Practices

Josephus (The Jewish War and Antiquities) corroborates the cultural and geographical details found in John’s Gospel. For instance, his description of the Pool of Bethesda as a site associated with healing aligns with John’s account.¹⁰

2. Mishnah on Ritual Purity

The Mishnah provides insights into Jewish purification practices, supporting John’s mention of stone water jars for ceremonial washing (John 2:6). These details demonstrate the Gospel’s rootedness in a first-century Jewish context.¹¹

3. Archaeological Discoveries

• Pool of Bethesda: First identified in 1888, the Pool of Bethesda’s excavations uncovered a dual-pool system with five roofed colonnades, exactly as described in John 5:2. The pool was near the Church of St. Anne, close to the Sheep Gate, confirming the Gospel’s geographical accuracy.¹²

• Temple Mount: Archaeological studies of Solomon’s colonnade and other Temple features align with John’s descriptions, which would be unlikely from a post-70 AD perspective.

Theological and Linguistic Considerations

1. Simplicity and Depth of John’s Greek

John’s Gospel combines theological profundity with linguistic simplicity, making it accessible to both Jewish and Gentile audiences. Dr. Wallace observes that this stylistic choice reflects the Church’s early expansion in the 60s AD, before the destruction of Jerusalem disrupted Jewish-Gentile relations.¹³

2. Absence of Post-70 AD Church Structures

Unlike later New Testament writings, John’s Gospel lacks references to established Church hierarchies or theological debates, such as the inclusion of Gentiles. Dr. Wallace argues that this absence supports a pre-70 AD context when Christianity was still closely tied to its Jewish roots.¹⁴

Engaging Skeptics

1. Bart Ehrman’s Late-Date Argument

Ehrman claims that John’s theological maturity requires a late date. However, this assumes that deep reflection could not have developed within a few decades. As an eyewitness, John had decades to meditate on Jesus’ teachings, making theological depth entirely plausible by the 60s AD.¹⁵

2. Gnostic Influence?

Skeptics argue that John’s Gospel addresses developed Gnostic ideas, necessitating a late date. However, proto-Gnostic beliefs, such as dualism and denial of Jesus’ physical resurrection, were present in the 60s AD. John’s emphasis on the incarnation (John 1:14) directly counters these early heresies.

Why 66 AD?

The Jewish-Roman War began in 66 AD, marking a period of upheaval for Jewish Christians. John’s Gospel, emphasizing Jesus as the fulfillment of Jewish messianic hopes, would have been particularly poignant during this time. Dr. Wallace highlights that John’s prophetic tone, such as Jesus’ prediction of His resurrection (John 2:19–22), resonates with an audience on the brink of witnessing Jerusalem’s destruction.¹⁶

Conclusion

Dr. Daniel Wallace’s insights, combined with internal evidence, early manuscripts, archaeological discoveries, Jewish sources, and rebuttals to skeptics, make a compelling case for the Gospel of John’s pre-70 AD composition. The archaeological evidence of the Pool of Bethesda and its colonnades further affirms John’s reliability as an eyewitness. A composition date of around 66 AD enhances the Gospel’s historical reliability and underscores its relevance for understanding Jesus in His Jewish context.

Footnotes

¹ John 2:20.

² Daniel B. Wallace, The Gospel According to John: Evidence for Early Composition, accessed January 22, 2025.

³ John 5:2.

⁴ John 10:23.

⁵ Wallace, The Gospel According to John.

⁶ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.1.1.

⁷ Wallace, The Gospel According to John.

⁸ Rylands Papyrus (P52), University of Manchester.

⁹ Ibid.

¹⁰ Josephus, Jewish War, 5.5.4.

¹¹ Mishnah, Yadayim 4:6.

¹² E. M. Blaiklock, Cities of the New Testament.

¹³ Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics.

¹⁴ Wallace, The Gospel According to John.

¹⁵ Bart D. Ehrman, Jesus, Interrupted.

¹⁶ Wallace, The Gospel According to John.