Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
views of modern scholars
Line 66: Line 66:  
== Analogy to Mark ending ==
 
== Analogy to Mark ending ==
 
Virtually everyone agrees that the [[Mark ending]] was a later addition, so it is proper to ask if the rehashed, duplicative content comprising John chapter 21 after the clear ending above, was likewise a later addition to the [[Gospel of John]].
 
Virtually everyone agrees that the [[Mark ending]] was a later addition, so it is proper to ask if the rehashed, duplicative content comprising John chapter 21 after the clear ending above, was likewise a later addition to the [[Gospel of John]].
 +
 +
== Current scholarly debate ==
 +
Prof. Bruce Metzger, who wrote ''A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament'', found no manuscript that ever circulated without Chapter 21, and thereby concluded that it is authentic. But most other modern scholars disagree based on the shift in literary style in Chapter 21 and how the ending in Chapter 20 apparently concludes the book:
 +
 +
*C.K. Barrett - he found at least 28 Greek words or expressions used in Chapter 21 that do not appear in any of the preceeding chapters.
 +
* Fr. Raymond E. Brown - as the preeminent [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic]] scholar on the [[Gospel of John]], Fr. Brown concluded that Chapter 21 was added after John had died.
 +
* Rudolf Bultmann - a leading 20th-century German theologian and skeptic felt that Chapter 21 was added to boost Peter and merge his community with John's followers.
 +
*Bart Ehrman - a prominent, but non-believing, former student of Bruce Metzger), views Chapter 21 as an afterthought and that John 20:30–31 is intended to be the book's conclusion.
    
== See also ==
 
== See also ==
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,445

edits

Navigation menu