Re: John 21:1

From: Eric Weiss (
Date: Sun Aug 31 1997 - 08:52:39 EDT

> Edgar Krentz wrote:

> I want to react briefly to Carl's comment about the style of John 21.
> While the sentence structure may resemble John 1-20, the
> vocabulary is very different. Check the lists in Charles Kingsley
> Barrett's commentary on John.

> It supports the view that John 21 is an addendum, by a different
> member of the Johannine school.

> (Edward Hobbs now:)

> Edgar certainly has virtually all the best Johannine scholars in
> support of his comment. We dare not engage in arguments about
> authorship on this List, since theological factors enter into the
> issue for some among us. But the vocabulary differences have been
> noted, since early times.

A "popular" treatment dealing with this issue is The Unfinished Gospel :
Notes on the Quest for the Historical Jesus, by Evan Powell (Shot Tower
Books, October 1994, ISBN: 0963965069). Amazon books says this is now
out of print, but I've still seen it in book stores. As I recall (I only
skimmed the book - 2-1/2 years ago, too), the author's thesis is that
John 21 is actually the "missing ending" of Mark's gospel, and it was
tacked on to the end of John's gospel to cast Peter in a good light
again because the author of John's gospel had taken certain steps to
warn his readers against Peter (e.g., referring to Judas [of] "Simon"
Iscariot near references to "Simon" Peter). Powell is not a scholar, in
fact I think he is a reporter, but he discusses the Greek and the
vocabulary differences between John 21 and the rest of the gospel, and
may use the vocabulary differences to support his thesis that the style
is Markan. I've never read any reviews of it.

"Eric S. and Karol-Ann Weiss"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:26 EDT