Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

6

One possibility: the Beloved Disciple is Lazarus The primary source for laying out a case for the author's identity is John 21.24-25, the final two verses of the book. Here we are given a brief glimpse at the book's origin: it seems to have been written by or based on the testimony of an individual we identify as the Beloved Disciple ('This is the disciple ...


4

Several years ago, I was reading through the Fourth Gospel about every week. During this time, one of the things I noticed was the way in which the author refers to Peter. Matthew, Mark and Luke almost almost refer to him simply as "Peter", the major exception being in the retelling of accounts prior to Peter's meeting with Jesus. On the other hand, the ...


2

Since he is using the 'I' without further reference, he is the author. (No one else is being named explicitly who could be co-author.) The 'we' in the beginning therefore can only be understood as standing for the group of witnessing disciples (apostles). Regarding witness the commonness (plural) of the experience is important (as not being just an ...


2

Further argument for a late date Not only does Daniel seem able to prophesy events close to the time of 167 BCE accurately, although not the relevant events that occurred shortly after this time, but its narrative around the chronology of the Exile seems flawed. Chapter 8 is in the time of Babylonian rule, then Daniel 9:1 is the first year of Darius, son of ...


2

Yes and No Authorship of the gospel First, we must consider who authored the fourth gospel. Tradition attributes this gospel to John, a fisherman who became one of Jesus' first disciples. Because most working people of that era were illiterate, many modern scholars have questioned whether John could have written a gospel at all, let alone one filled with ...


2

P66, a manuscript from ca. 200 AD, contains the first nine verses of John 21, indicating that if it was an addition, it was a very early addition. Thus the addition of this chapter cannot have been motivated by Catholic theology of the pope, which was not developed until much later. In fact, Nestle Aland (the most used critical edition of the New ...


2

This is a "well known" great hermeneutics question, it can't be answered fully here. In fact there are many evidence that support an hypothesis of latter addition. The first is merely of writing style Jhon[20:30-31] is stylistically a conclusion "Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book. These are ...


2

Short Answer: It really depends on what presuppositions you embrace. But it is certainly not clear that the passage requires John to already be dead. Presuppositions play a huge role in such debates. There are two main groups in this debate, and the division between the two is based largely on their presuppositions. (See here for an excellent treatment of ...


2

I think it's a very strong possibility but it's not the only explanation. John 21 does appear to be a post script to John's gospel. John 20:30-31 is certainly a fitting conclusion to the gospel proper. 30 Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may ...


1

The 'we' here may be reference to the congregation who are being addressed by their absent Pastor. It could also be an address to disciples widely scattered. John feels that the things he declares demand the strongest evidence. He has not believed them lightly, and he does not expect others to believe them lightly.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible