From: Ben Crick (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Mar 30 1998 - 00:38:36 EST
On Sat 28 Mar 98 (19:14:47), firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> The one aspect of the account thats giving me trouble, however, is John
> 21:15ff. There Peter is told to follow Jesus and is further informed
> that he will die a death which results in the GLORIFICATION of God. How
> are we to view this part of John's Gospel vis-a'-vis the thematic
> strand of DOXA?
Yes, I overlooked 21:19a. This verse 19a appears to be in parentheses. Now
"all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable...": we can't
say one verse is 'more inspired' than another. Is 19a an editorial comment,
an explanatory gloss to the reader?
It's wonderful that anyone can glorify God in their lives; but that is
understandable. What is harder to appreciate is that someone can glorify
God in their death [gulp!]. Jesus' death glorified God (13:31-32); ere long
Peter's death (by crucifixion) will glorify God too. "Precious in the sight
of the LORD is the death of his saints" (Psalm 116:15).
> Does this literary unit constitute an inclusio?
Do you mean, does John 21 belong to "John"?
Interesting question. BW Streeter suggested over 60 years ago that John 21
could be the "lost ending" of Mark. Looking at Mark 16:7, what sort of
ending can be anticipated? An appearance in Galilee, to several disciples
*and Peter*? From Mark 14 there must be some follow-up to Peter's denial;
possible a threefold restoration to match the threefold denial? Luke 24:34
records an appearance to "Simon"; "He appeared to Cephas" (1 Corinthians
15:5. John's Gospel appears to end at 20:31; so, ergo, 'John' 21 is the end
of Mark. John 21:2 is the appearance in Galilee to a group of disciples
among whom Peter is prominent. 21:15ff is the threefold restoration. There
is even the Mary Magdalene connection, John 20:11.
Mark had friends in Asia (Colossians 4:10); he sent them his first copy.
Immediately soldiers burst in; Mark's MS is snatched away, and the last
sheet is torn off. The Roman church added Mark 16:9-20 to round off their
copy; so therefore, when the severed page was later recovered, and it did
not correspond to the 'added' Mark 16:9-20, it was tacked on to the Fourth
Gospel (John) as an appendix. "Either the end of Mark is irretrievably
lost, or it is incorporated as John 21" (Streeter). Hmmmmmmm. The style is
different for starters. No "KAI EUQUS...".
> Is it to be taken as a volitional imperative? Or, is this an example of
> John moving from particularity to generality?
From Jesus (particular) to the disciples (general)? I'm not sure I understand
the question here. Jesus' prophecy about Peter's death is a future, not an
imperative; although if Christ prophesies something, we know it will happen!
One normally goes from the General to the Particular; from the group of seven
disciples, Peter is singled out. Is the /Quo Vadis/ legend relevant here?
But say if I misunderstood your question.
-- Revd Ben Crick, BA CF <email@example.com> 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK) http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:20 EDT