Talk:Gospel of John/2011/January

Regarding a footnote by D.A. Carson

The original citation might leave readers with the impression that Carson himself rejected the Johannine authorship

D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo. An introduction to the New Testament. Zondervan; 2 New edition. 2005. Pg 233 “The fact remains that despite support for Johannine authorship by a few front rank scholars in this century and by many popular writers, a large majority of contemporary scholars reject this view.”

However viewing the quote in context shows quite the oposite. "The fact remains that, despite support for Johannine authorship by a few front-rank scholars in this century, and by many popular writers, a large majority of contemporary scholars reject this view. As we shall see, much of their argumentation turns on their reading of the internal evidence. It also requires their virtual dismissal of the external evidence. This is particularly regrettable. Most scholars of antiquity, were they assessing the authorship of some other document, could not so easily set aside evidence as plentiful, consistent and plainly tied to the source as is the external evidence that supports Johannine authorship. The majority of contemporary biblical scholars do not rest nearly as much weight on external evidence as do their colleagues in classical scholarship."

Stmcculloch (talk) 21:10, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure. As long as we treat Carson's view as the minority view, it's all good. Leadwind (talk) 01:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)