LIBERTY THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
ON APORIA IN THE 21ST CHAPTER OF JOHN
DRAFTED FOR PROFESSOR THOMAS CAMPBELL
IN PARTIALLY FULFILLMENT FROM THE COURSE
NBST 655 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN
SIMPLY BY DENISE WATSON-SMITH #221890
Come july 1st 15, 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTIONвЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦... 3 DISCOURSE ANALYSISвЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦.. вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦.. 3
M. A. CarsonвЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦. 3
T. Hall Harris IIIвЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦. some
Leon MorrisвЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦. 6 DISCUSSION/EVALUATION вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦. вЂ¦вЂ¦. 6 CONCLUSIONвЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦.. вЂ¦вЂ¦.. several BIBLIOGRAPHYвЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦вЂ¦9
Within the Gospel of John lies a tremendous amount of texts that offer some controversy or irregularities. With some of the problems that are offered by these types of controversies, problem can be asked if the Gospel of David was authored by much more by a few different people. Looking at the scriptures and the keeping of these things, any difficulty . one composed one thing and one composed another and in addition they all gathered later. These texts or perhaps scriptures cause a problem to several readers on this gospel because they do not match either chronologically or topically and at moments it appears that the narration seems to flow in a manner that is certainly not consistent. The aporia for this particular project is the controversy of John 21. Does the same writer as chapters 1-20 writer this particular phase, and if therefore , where would the controversy stem? By viewing commentaries by G. A. Carson, W. Area Harris 3 and Leon Morris, we can bring evidence that this section along with chapters 1-20 were indeed authored by the same person, yet the time when it was written was at a much after date which will would give method to the controversy. COMMENTARY EXAMINATION
Commentary 1~ D. A. Carson
Carson offers and approach to the situation at hand this way. He says that the phase in question was indeed authored by the same creator that published chapters you through 20, along with the fact that it was created with the remaining Gospel of John. This type of chapter presented a balance should you will inside the book of John by providing explanations of things that may have been still left unanswered during the previous chapters. Carson offers four items to be considered when ever discussing the authorship with this particular section. He initial item he mentions is definitely the observation by Bultmann who have noticed there are a great amount of terms in this particular chapter which can be have a striking similarity to the terminology in the Gospel of John. Carson testimonials the words in the previous chapters in Steve and notices that they phrases in chapters 1-20 like the words in chapter twenty one offer a uncommon usage pattern.
Another item that Carson illustrates is the fact that there are scholars with shown matter that they feel as if chapter 20 of this Gospel was the conclusion, and phase 21 must have been added later, mainly because everything that must be said was concluded in the last verses of chapter twenty.
The third items which Carson outdoor sheds light about is that he sees this type of chapter while the proverbial icing on the cake in the sense that it increases the chapters it adds to the gospel itself simply by tying up any thing that was at present left unfastened.
The final item that Carson talks on to support authenticate the authorship with this Gospel through stating " there is not fiel evidence that the book was ever printed without John 21. вЂќ With the data that was presented simply by Carson, this individual concludes that this does not matter in the event the chapter 21 years old was added at a later date, it absolutely was still penned by the same author as with the previous chapters. Commentary 2 ~ Watts. Hall Harris III
Harris III, nevertheless his thoughts and opinions is certainly one of a traditional nature, his views act like that of Carson. Harris claims that in the event chapter twenty-one was added at a later time to this particular Gospel simply by another publisher, it would had to have been added early enough...
Bibliography: Gary M. Burge, Interpreting the Gospel of John, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1992),
Carson, The Gospel According To David, 665
Watts. Hall Harris III, Commentary on the Gospel of David, (Biblical Studies Press, 2006)
Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, The newest International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: William N