Not sure where you got your "facts" from. The earliest writings we have of the Gospel of John was written within 50 - 75 years of John's lifetime and John was an eye witness of the crusifixion of Jesus Christ. Sure the person(s) who wrote "the copy" of the book may not have been John himself, as he would have been deceased, but of the many copies in existence, they all point to John being the original author (there are no copies that dispute it or attribute it to any other individual).
Even if John had a ghost writer, the book was not an autobiography and has been proven to be somewhat historically accurate. We don't question the truthfulness of Walter Isaacson's Steve Jobs, or the Quran, why would we treat this text any different? Double standards.
On the other hand, the gnostic texts have been demonstrably verified as not being attributed to their respectively claimed authors. There are serious flaws and contradictions between those and the accounts that exist in the bible.
In the end, modern scholars present their opinions and people take it as objective truth, when it's not. Most of those same scholars love to make money off the books they write to push thier agenda and spread their biased view of the texts.
Not sure where you got your "facts" from. The earliest writings we have of the Gospel of John was written within 50 - 75 years of John's lifetime and John was an eye witness of the crusifixion of Jesus Christ. Sure the person(s) who wrote "the copy" of the book may not have been John himself, as he would have been deceased, but of the many copies in existence, they all point to John being the original author (there are no copies that dispute it or attribute it to any other individual).
Even if John had a ghost writer, the book was not an autobiography and has been proven to be somewhat historically accurate. We don't question the truthfulness of Walter Isaacson's Steve Jobs, or the Quran, why would we treat this text any different? Double standards.
On the other hand, the gnostic texts have been demonstrably verified as not being attributed to their respectively claimed authors. There are serious flaws and contradictions between those and the accounts that exist in the bible.
In the end, modern scholars present their opinions and people take it as objective truth, when it's not. Most of those same scholars love to make money off the books they write to push thier agenda and spread their biased view of the texts.