Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 21:24

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 21:24” utilice nuestra app.

This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

24. which testifieth ] Better, which beareth witness. Whether ‘these things’ refers to the whole Gospel, or only to the contents of chap. 21 cannot be determined.

wrote ] Note the change from present to aorist. The witness still continues at the present time; the writing took place once for all in the past.

we know ] Because S. John uses the singular, ‘he knoweth,’ in Joh 19:35, it does not follow that he would not use the plural here. It would have been out of place in the middle of his narrative to add the testimony of the Ephesian elders to his own as to details which he saw with his own eyes at the foot of the cross. But it is not unnatural that at the close of his Gospel he should claim them as joint witnesses to the fidelity with which he has committed to writing this last instalment of evangelical and apostolic traditions. Comp. 1Jn 5:18-20; 1Jn 5:15; 1Jn 3:14; 1Jn 1:1; 3Jn 1:12.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

24, 25. Concluding Notes

Again the question of authorship confronts us. Are these last two verses by the writer of the rest of the chapter? Are they both by the same hand? The external evidence, as in the case of the preceding verses, is in favour of their being both by the same hand, and that the writer of the first twenty-three verses, and therefore S. John. No MS. or version is extant without Joh 21:24, and all except the Sinaitic, have Joh 21:25 also; nor is there any evidence that a copy was ever in existence lacking either this last chapter or Joh 21:24.

The internal evidence is the other way. The natural impression produced by Joh 21:24 is that it is not the writer of the Gospel who here bears witness to his own work, but a plurality of persons who testify to the trustworthiness of the Evangelist’s narrative. So that we possibly have in this verse a note added by the Ephesian elders before the publication of the Gospel. The change to the singular in Joh 21:25 would seem to imply that this verse is an addition by a third hand of a remark which the writer may have heard from S. John.

But the internal evidence is not conclusive, and the impression naturally produced by the wording of the verses need not be the right one. The aged Apostle in bringing his work a second time (Joh 20:30-31) to a conclusion may have included that inmost circle of disciples (to whom he had frequently told his narrative by word of mouth) among those who were able to guarantee his accuracy. With a glance of affectionate confidence round the group of devoted hearers, he adds their testimony to his own, and gives them a share in bearing witness to the truth of the Gospel.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

This is the disciple … – This proves that the beloved disciple was John.

We know – That is, it is known; it is universally admitted. It was so decidedly his character that he always declared the truth, that it had become known and was unquestioned, so that he himself might appeal to the universal testimony in his behalf. In this case, therefore, we have the testimony of a man whose character for nearly a century was that of a man of truth – so much so that it had become, in a manner, proverbial, and was put beyond a doubt. It is impossible to believe that such a man would sit down deliberately to impose on mankind, or to write a book which was false; and if not, then this book is true, and that is the same as saying that Christianity is a religion from heaven.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Joh 21:24-25

This is the disciple which testifieth of these things

The Gospel of St.

John

I. ITS TRANSCENDENT THEME.

The things which Jesus did.

1. Their number–many.

2. Their variety–other.

3. Their importance. So deep had been the impression made by them that they were even then remembered and could have been written down.

4. Their significance. The world would not contain, &c.

II. ITS UNAMED AUTHOR–the disciple whom Jesus loved. That this was John

1. The Gospel indirectly attests.

2. Ecclesiastical tradition confirms.

III. ITS VERACIOUS CHARACTER.

1. The testimony of the authors consciousness, if verse 24 be authentic.

2. The testimony of his contemporaries, probably the Ephesian

Elders, if verse 24 be non-Johannine.
Lesson: Gratitude

1. To God for His Son, Jesus Christ.

2. To Jesus Christ for the things which He did.

3. To the Holy Spirit for this sublime Gospel (T. Whitelaw, D. D.)

The revealed and the unrevealed in Christs biography

I. VERY MUCH HAS BEEN REVEALED. His four biographers have said very much about Christ, and each has presented Him in some fresh aspect.

II. MUCH MORE MIGHT HAVE BEEN REVEALED (Joh 21:25). What volumes it would have taken to record the deeds and words of Him who never spent an idle hour, but went about doing good! Conclusion:

1. We should fully appreciate the amount revealed. It teems with truths, and pulsates with inspiration. A larger amount, perchance, would have been obtrusive rather than helpful.

2. We may anticipate wonderful studies. All the unrevealed will be brought under our observation. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

The authentic and apocryphal Gospels

There are very many things written concerning Christ which are believed by others, but which I do not believe. The evidence from without I care little for, regarding only the evidence from within. Therefore it is that the reading of the uncanonical Gospels is useful in showing what a fine instinct, what a spirit of good taste, what a divinely inspired knowledge of what Christ was, the men who wrote our Four Gospels had. Between the two there is that singular difference which strikes a man of fine taste between the consummate work of a true artist and the work of a dauber, between a work of art wrought in love and one wrought only for bread. For the spirit of an artist creeps into every stroke of his brush; and in the writing of the Gospels, in settling which are canonical, every stroke is a betrayal. The apocryphal Gospels are not only a curious picture of the floating traditions of the Church; they are earthen vessels full of earthly dregs. They gather about Christ the stains of human stupidity and ignorance. Just as a man of fine taste has no difficulty in judging in a moment between a Raphael and what a coarse picture dealer declares to be one; just as one accustomed to the fine aromas of the wine of Hamburg can distinguish it from the spurious rubbish that is brought to imitate it; just as those who know the ring of true gold are proof against being deceived by the counterfeit, so there need be no difficulty in judging of these writings, as compared with the four Gospels now in use. (George Dawson, M. A.)

There are also many other things

The magnitude of Christs life

Such words as these are called strong language and exaggeration. But strong language is always true to the poet, natural to the passionate, truthful to the large-minded; and only obnoxious to the small, feeble, chill-blooded, to those who find human language big enough to live in. Human language is often felt to be like that bed of old, which was so short that a man could not stretch himself on it; and in trying to cover himself with the coverlid, found it to be too narrow. So as the next thing to having an adequate spoken language, men do what they can by extravagance to make it up. A great poet like Shakespeare presses the universe into his passion. He tells the woman he adores that her eyes outvie the brightness of the rising morning. One great ancient wished he was a star that he might look down always on her he loved. So these souls, feeling deeply, in order to say what they wish to say, since words wont do it, call upon all things to help them–the rose of Sharon, the lily of the valley–all things are called in, that the beloved may be set forth in glory. Strong language is objectionable, is it? Yes, when it is but the emphasis of emptiness; when little people make a great noise, using language stronger than the occasion requires, the sin and shame of it is that they have no feeling adequate to it. But when the heart is all aglow, and the thing to be said infinite, then the most extravagant language is poverty stricken. To hear some commentations over the phrase is charming–This passage must not be taken literally; of course the Apostle meant–Oh, thank you for nothing! I want not your dry bread of sand. What John meant was that there were so many things that might be told about Christ, that the world could not contain it all. Beautiful expression! And how adequate! Now, what does it teach? If any mans biography were to be daily written down it would make a big book. One of the most charming books was written by a man on a tour round his chamber. Put some people in a room and they behold no more than a blind horse would. But not so with the instructed man. He would pause at every part of the room, and tell tales about the woodwork, tales of the trees from which the wood came, and or the climate in which they grew–tales that would run back to Adam. Franklin tells us that he rose at six and washed. But if he had stopped to tell us all about rose, what a volume would be wanted, and so on with washed and dressed. And so one might come to think with the great poet, that the best portion of a mans life lies in the little nameless, unrecorded acts of kindness. It is the unwritten things of life that uphold the great things. So, when we think of Christs life, and of the little that is said about Him, we know there must have been much that might have been written. (George Dawson, M. A.)

The many things which Jesus did

Does St. John end his Gospel with an exaggeration? What shaft we say?

I. THERE ARE SEVERAL SOLUTIONS.

1. That the passage has been interpolated. But this view has no foundation. The verse is only wanting in one MS.

2. That it is only St. Johns way of expressing his sense of the immense diligence of Christs life, and the unparalleled number of His good works; and that, to convey that idea, he uses language which is, indeed, after the Eastern language, hyperbolical; but which could not mislead.

3. That St. John is speaking of all which Christ had done, and is doing, and will do to all eternity–in which acceptation the words would be strictly true–for then we should be dealing with the Everlasting and the Infinite–which, of course, exceeds the compass of the universe. But thecomment is strained and far-fetched.

4. That the word contain is ambiguous, and that it might be translated, the world, i.e., the ungodly world, would not receive the whole of what Jesus did.

5. That St. John is speaking not of the mere outward actions, but of what they represented and involved. And this is none other than a literal truth that if all these were written, seriatim, the world itself could not contain the account which should be written.

II. The last seems to be the only true understanding of St. Johns words: THE INCOMPREHENSIBLE FULNESS THAT THERE IS IN THE MINUTEST PORTION OF CHRISTS MINISTRY.

1. Remember

(1) It is the life of the Son of God who came to this earth for about thirty-three years, of which we have the history of only three, and in those three only a few leading, salient features.

(2) That the object of this short visit was the salvation of the whole world.

(3) That infinite love, wisdom, and power met in His every word and act.

(4) That the record, which has been given us, has been left for His Church to read, and live upon for ever. There is enough to satisfy the whole intellect and affection of the race. And if the gospel be such as this–what a weight, what an infinity, there must be in every iota. If we waste a crumb, it must be at our peril, and with great damage! Here is our duty, and here is the great work of the Holy Ghost, to find the latent senses of each fraction of that portentous narrative. The secret of the Lord,–covered thoughts, intentions sealed except to the initiated–the secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him.

2. You must consider also

(l) Every action of Christ was first a great beautiful fact, standing out to be admired.

(2) It was an illustration of His character, in which we are to read out His sympathy, wisdom, power, faithfulness, &c.

(3) We are to read, through Him, God–the only real delineation we have of the Invisible Father.

(4) It is the illustration and the pledge of what Christ is and does now He is in glory.

(5) It is our pattern and example that we may copy.

(6) It is an allegory–a parable of spiritual things which always lie underneath it.

3. Now, take any one event in our Lords ministry, and divide it into all these parts: see it in all its lights; and what a volume will be there! Regard, in this way, His baptism, or His temptation, or His transfiguration, or His death, &c., or any one of His miracles; or a prayer, a touch, a look; and into what masses and mountains of thought it all swells! What piles upon piles might be said and written!

4. Think of all that, for nearly nineteen centuries, has been said and written by the Church on those four Gospels; and yet it is not exhausted. New thoughts, new beauties, new comforts are coming up every day. And were the world to last nineteen thousand centuries more, it would be just the same! And will not these things be the themes of faculties infinitely higher, than now, throughout eternity? Do not the angels still desire to look on them?

5. Then, we must add to the account that there were many things which Jesus did which St. John knew but did not record; many more, which none knew, or could know. But all would bear the same development.

6. Then, when, for a moment, we try to draw these together and conceive the total of such an aggregate, is the language one whir too strong?

III. LET ME GATHER SOME INFERENCES.

1. When we have to do with the life of Christ, we are dealing with the most solemn immensities. The more we study it, the more we shall feel with St. John–that we are standing on the shore of a boundless ocean; that what we see is nothing compared to what lies beyond the horizon. That all human intellect put together, and all the largest hearts of men of love, if that love could go on for ever, could not contain the half of what Christ did, and what Christ was. Is that too much to say? You will not think so if you love Him and know Him.

2. Therefore you must come to the contemplation of every part of Christs life very modestly. There is much more than you have any idea of. If you think you know any verse of the Bible, you have yet a great deal to learn. You will never empty it. And, seeing it so exceeds all our proportions, you must pray for the enlargement of your own soul, that you may be able to contain it.

3. For a heart enlarged by the Holy Ghost has a greater capacity than the universe. The universe could not contain it; but, by the working of the Holy Ghost, it is promised you shall be able to comprehend with all saints, what is the length, and breadth, and depth, and height, and know that love of Christ which passeth knowledge. (J. Vaughan, M. A.)

The unwritten sayings of Jesus

When I see how much has been written of those who have lived; how the Greeks preserved every saying of Platos; how Boswell followed Johnson, gathering up every leaf that fell from that rugged old oak, and pasting it away, I almost regret that one of the disciples had not been a recording angel, to preserve the odour and richness of every word of Christ. When John says, And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written, it affects me more profoundly than when I think of the destruction of the Alexandrian Library, or the perishing of Grecian art in Athens or Byzantium. The creations of Phidias were cold stone, overlaid by warm thought; but Christ described His own creations when He said, The words that I speak unto you, they are life. The leaving out of these things from the New Testament, though divinely wise, seems, to my yearning, not so much the unaccomplishment of noble things, as the destruction of great treasures, which had already had oral life, but failed of incarnation in literature. (H. W. Beecher.)

The sufficiency of the Gospels

Supposing a complete biography of Christ to have been written, let us consider

I. ITS MAGNITUDE. In every life there are many transactions which would add nothing to the completeness of a biography. There are many things in the experience of us all which are like blades of grass. To distinguish them in a picture would be to impair it and give us not the field but the grass. But things were otherwise with Christ. Every miracle, prayer, look, &c., was worthy of a picture by itself. And suppose instead of our present summary we had all the details what a library there would be. And then there are many things which it takes a longer time to describe than to do.

II. ITS CUMBROUSNESS.

1. What life would be long enough to produce it.

2. What means could be adequate to disperse it.

3. What man could read, let alone remember it. Conclusion: Let us see the impossibility of making any improvement in Gods Word. There is wisdom as well in its limits as in its matter and form. (Mathematicus.)

St. Johns Gospel a collection of specimens

The materials which he has actually made use of are few in number compared with the store from which he might have drawn; he omitted many things, the record of which might have over-filled the world with books; with only a few selections from his rich treasury, he shows us the glory of the Incarnate Word–as if a painter should take a bit of grey rock, a tuft of maidenhair fern growing in a crevice, some patches of grass and heather, a tree or two, a human figure, a dim-seen mountain range, the infinite blue sky, and putting these into a picture should show us the glory of God in nature. (J. Culross, D. D.)

Christ an inexhaustable treasure

Treasures many are contained in the Bible, but not all. There are more treasures in Christ than even in the Bible. He could not transfer all the treasures of His person into a book, for if they should be written, &c. Blessed be God for the treasures contained in this precious volume before me, but the day will arrive when they shall be all exhausted. But after exhausting the treasures of the Book, the treasures of the Person will still remain. Blessed be His name for the treasures which have come through Christ, thrice blessed for the treasures that are in Christ. Dwelling in Him are treasures enough to make a dozen new Bibles, the Bibles of eternity. (J. Cynddylan Jones, D. D.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 24. This is the disciple] It is, I think, very likely that these two verses were added by some of the believers at that time, as a testimony to the truth of the preceding narration; and I allow, with Bishop Pearce and others, that it is possible that John may mean himself when he says WE know, c., yet, I think that it is very unlikely. It is certain that this Gospel loses no part of its authority in admitting the suffrage of the Church of God: it rather strengthens the important truths which are delivered in it and in the mouths of so many witnesses the sacred matters which concern the peace and salvation of the world, are still more abundantly established. See the last note on the preceding chapter. See Clarke on Joh 21:25.

We know] Instead of , we know, some have written , I know indeed; but this is mere conjecture, and is worthy of no regard. It is likely that these verses were added by those to whom John gave his work in charge.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

John, who wrote this Gospel, was that disciple whom Jesus loved, who leaned on our Saviours breast at supper, and inquired who should betray Christ; of whom Peter spake, Joh 21:21, and who testifieth these things, both concerning Peter, and concerning himself, and the church: the ancient church knew his testimony was true.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

24. This is the disciple whichtestifieth of these things, and wrote these thingsthusidentifying the author of this book with all that it says of thisdisciple.

we know that his testimony istrue(Compare Joh 19:35).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

This is the disciple which testifieth of these things,…. Recorded in this chapter concerning the appearance of Christ to his disciples at the sea of Tiberias, and what were done by him in their presence, what passed between them; particularly the conversation he had with Peter, both concerning himself, and the disciple John: and also, of all things that are written in this whole Gospel. These are testified to be true by this very disciple John, concerning whom the above report went upon a mistaken sense of Christ’s words, and who himself

wrote these things; all that is contained in this book, as well as the particulars relating to this conversation of Christ with Peter:

and we know that his testimony is true. The testimony of one that was an eye and ear-witness, as John was, of all that he testified and wrote, must be known, owned, and allowed by all to be true, firm, and unquestionable; and therefore the apostle speaks in the plural number, as being not only his own sense, but the sense of all men. Though some take this to be the attestation of the Ephesian church, or of the bishops of the Asiatic churches, who put John upon writing this Gospel; of which they give their judgment and testimony, as believing it to be a true and faithful narrative.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

That is ( ). The one just mentioned in verse 20, “the disciple whom Jesus loved.”

And wrote these things ( ). Here there is a definite statement that the Beloved Disciple wrote this book.

We know (). The plural here seems intentional as the identification and endorsement of a group of disciples who know the author and wish to vouch for his identity and for the truthfulness of his witness. Probably we see here a verse added by a group of elders in Ephesus where John had long laboured.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

1) “This is the disciple which testifieth of these things,” (houtos estin ho mathetes ho marturon peri touton) “This one (the writer of this Gospel, John) is (exists as) the disciple who is witnessing (in this Gospel) concerning these things,” thus attesting that he is the one referred to as “The disciple whom Jesus loved,” Joh 21:20; Joh 13:23.

2) “And wrote these things,” (kai ho grapsas tauta) “And he is the one who has written these things,” recounted these matters of accuracy, revolving around the life and ministry of: 1) John the Baptist, and 2) Jesus, the men might believe in Him, Joh 20:30-31.

3) “And we know that his testimony Is true.” (kai oidamen hoti alethes autou he marturia estin) “And we know that the witness (testimony) of him is true,” genuine, accurate, or trustworthy, as an eye-witness of Him from the beginning, Joh 15:26-27; 1Jn 1:1-4. This is John’s certificate of accuracy of what he had written in this book, a certification of inspiration for it, Joh 19:35; 2Ti 3:16-17.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

24. This is that disciple. Having hitherto mentioned himself in the third person, John now declares that it is himself; that greater weight may be attached to the statements of one who was an eye-witness, and who had fully known all that he relates.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

Overwhelming Evidence

Text: Joh. 21:24-25

This is the disciple that beareth witness of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his witness is true.

And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they should be written everyone, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that should be written.

Queries

Which disciple wrote these things?

Why were the many other things which Jesus did not recorded?

Paraphrase

The same disciple of whom it was rumored, He will not die, is the one that is hereby giving his testimony to these things in the life of Jesus Christ and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is reliable for it is eyewitness testimony, Of course, there are many other deeds and words of Jesus, and I suppose that if each one were written down in detail, there would not be room in the whole world for all the books required to contain the record.

Summary

John ends his record of Jesus life with an affirmation as to the reliability of his testimony and an apology that it was impossible for any one to have written a complete record of Jesus deeds and words.

Comment

We hesitate to comment on these last two verses inasmuch as there is good manuscript evidence to show that it was not a part of the original. The Sinaiticus manuscript (c. 350 A.D.otherwise known as Aleph), gives evidence that Joh. 21:24-25 were added and the original Aleph manuscript was subjected to inspection by ultra-violet process and it was found that these verses were not included in the Sinaiticus codex when it was first written but were added later. The Bodmer II Papyrus (P66) omits these two verses (Bodmer II dates about 250 A.D.). It is reported that one of the best manuscripts of John found just recently, designated P75, also omits these two verses (this manuscript also dates sometime between 200300 A.D.). The latest revision of the Greek text by Nestle in its critical apparatus notes that Aleph omits Joh. 21:25. Perhaps more manuscript evidence will be forthcoming soon to establish either the omission or the inclusion of these verses. Until then we will make comments, with the reservations stated above, on these two verses.

Foster thinks that the elders of the church at Ephesus, where John probably resided when he wrote the Fourth Gospel, added Joh. 21:24-25. Hendricksen is of the same opinion and so is Westcott. Their argument is based upon the change of person which they say indicates a change of authorship. Macknight, however, in his Harmony of The Gospels, says it is agreeable to Johns manner (cf. Joh. 19:35) to speak of himself in the third person (cf. also 1Jn. 5:18 and 3Jn. 1:12). Macknight then believes John himself to be the author of these two concluding verses. Whoever authored them they are a strong affirmation of the reliability of his record. If it is by the Ephesian elders they probably were endowed with the supernatural gift of the Holy Spirit to discern the spirits and were adding their verification to the record for the benefit of the churches in which the record would be read.

Joh. 21:25 is hyperbolic. It is a common figure of speech of the people of that area. One has only to read the Prophets to see this. This exaggeration serves to express the great magnitude and importance of the words and deeds of Jesus which were recorded.

Scripture itself testifies that there were things said and done by Jesus not recorded in the books about His life (the Gospels). In Act. 1:1-4 we are told that Jesus appeared to the disciples and spoke concerning the kingdom of God over a period of 40 days. Some of these things are recorded, some are not. In Act. 20:35 we have recorded a statement of Jesus not to be found in any of the Gospel accounts.

There are many spurious apocryphal gospels and other accounts which purport to be records of deeds and sayings of Jesus. They are so utterly out of harmony with the tenor of the inspired accounts and the historical evidence is so definitely against their canonicity that they are completely unreliable.

The main point is that John has recorded enough that men might come to believe and love Jesus Christ and become heirs of salvation in His name (Joh. 20:30-31). If men will not believe on the basis of what has been written, they will not believe even if someone would rise from the dead (cf. Luk. 16:31). John has written enough. The omnipotence, omniscience, compassion, love and glory of Jesus Christ has been recounted with factuality, emotion and a moral penetration that is able to capture the volition of man. Anything less would be insufficientanything more would be redundant. Let us remember the admonition of this same apostle when he wrote the Revelation he received on Patmos (Rev. 22:18-20). We say, Amen to Lenski when he closes his commentary with, Soli Deo GloriaGlory to God alone is our prayer for this commentary.

Turn right now, without letting another moment go by, and reread the Prologue, Joh. 1:1-18. After these hours of soul-gripping study of Johns Gospel can you not say with all that is in you, The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth!

Quiz

What manuscript evidence is against Joh. 21:24-25 being a part of the original?

Who wrote these verses (if they are a part of the text)?

Prove that Jesus did and said things which are not recorded in the gospel accounts.

Is the brevity of the gospel record detrimental?

Special Study No, Four Outline Notes

By Russell Watts

Introductory Notes:

The number of the Lords appearances during the forty days following the resurrection, before His ascension, is generally said to be nine. Of these, five were on the day of the resurrection, one on the Sunday following, two at some later period, and one when He ascended. As to place, five were in Jerusalem, one in Emmaus, two in Galilee, and one perhaps on the Mount of Olives. If to these we add the appearance to James (mentioned only by the apostle Paul in 1Co. 15:7), which probably was at Jerusalem; then add also the appearance to Paul mentioned in 1Co. 15:8, we have eleven appearances. Most writers come to this conclusion, differing only on some fine points concerning some of the appearances.

However, we do not need to say that these recorded and stated appearances were the only actual ones. Act. 1:3 To whom he also showed himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing unto them by the space of forty days, and speaking the things concerning the kingdom of God. It is quite possible that there were other unrecorded appearances during this period of forty days.

The appearances on the day of the resurrection, (5)

To Mary Magdalene, at the Tomb, just outside Jerusalem.

Problem of when was this, at what time in the morning?

How to harmonize Mat. 28:1 with Mar. 16:2; Luk. 24:1 and Joh. 20:1.

The first part of the verse must be interpreted by the added specification of what is added in the last part of the verse.

When did the women arrive at the tomb?

Luke says, Very early in the morning.

John says, early, while it was yet dark.

Mark says, and very early on the first day of the week

Matt. says, as it began to dawn, toward the first day of the week.

We must consider where they came from. Probably from Bethany about two miles away.

The time was probably about 5 A.M. for at this time of the year the sun would rise about Joh. 5:30 A.M. Objects would be discernible one-half hour before sunrise very likely.

Problem: did Mary come alone or with others and perhaps run on ahead so that she was first at the tomb?

She undoubtedly came with the rest. Then, seeing the stone rolled away, she ran immediately to tell John and Peter before even going to the tomb.

When telling Peter and John, Mary used the pronoun we signifying that she was not alone.

After telling Peter and John she returned to the tomb, probably following Peter and John. Then while she was alone outside the tomb the Lord appeared to her.

John writes of this appearance in detail, Joh. 20:11-18.

The account is personal to Mary.

She alone acknowledged the questions of Jesus.

Jesus addressed her in the singular.

The other women, soon after appearing to Mary; while they are on their way to tell the message of the angels. (Mat. 28:9-10)

Who were these other women? How many were there? (Luk. 24:9-11)

Mar. 15:41, says that many other women came up to Jerusalem.

These names are mentioned: Mary Magdalene, Mary, mother of James, Salome, Joanna, Susanna and many others.

John mentions only Mary Magdalene.

Matt. mentions Mary Magdalene and the other Mary. Mat. 28:1.

Mark mentions Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome.

Luke mentions Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the other women.

Thus we see there are five, and possible others.

Many variations of order are given for this account, due to our not being able to tell whether these women arrived at the tomb in one or two groups.

Jesus appears to Peter. (1Co. 15:5; Luk. 24:33-34)

McGarvey places this before the appearances to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus and at Emmaus.

R. C. Foster writing in Standard Bible Teacher, Vol. 38, No. 2; Apr.-May-June 1936, article The Risen Christ in Galilee, places this appearance after the Emmaus appearance.

Wieand Harmony places the appearance to Peter first.

Lightfoot supposes one of the two at Emmaus to have been Peter.

Since there are not actual details given, it is hard to harmonize the accounts.

From Luk. 24:34, it seems as if Jesus did appear to Simon (if the Simon talked of is Peter) before He did to the two disciples at Emmaus. McGarvey harmonized this verse with 1Co. 15:5.

Jesus appears to the two Disciples going to Emmaus. Mar. 16:12-13; Luk. 24:13-35.

Who were these two disciples? One was Cleopas, of whom nothing further is known. (Luk. 24:18)

Some say the other was Luke, for he writes almost like one that might have been present during this experience.

Lightfoot (mentioned above) supposes him to be Peter.

About Emmaus and its location from Jerusalem.

Luk. 24:13, village named Emmaus which was three score furlongs from Jerusalem.

How far is this? If the ruins called el Kukeibeh is the ancient city of Emmaus, then it would be a distance of seven and thirteen-sixteenths of a mile from Jerusalem. The village has not yet been identified beyond dispute.

Time of this meeting. Probably leaving Jerusalem about noon, and allowing for a slow walk, they would arrive in Emmaus a good while before sundown.

Although the Lord met these two while on their way, their eyes were holden until the meal was being eaten. Luke gives the cause in Luk. 24:31, And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. Mark gives the affect or their reaction in Mar. 16:13, And they went away and told it unto the rest: neither believed they them.

Jesus appears to the ten. Luk. 24:36-43; Joh. 20:19-25.

Thomas is absent at this time.

Place and time?

Place In Jerusalem, In all probability, they were gathered in the same room in which they had eaten the paschal supper.

b. Time In the evening, for the two disciples who went to Emmaus arrived back in time to tell them of their experience.

The actual appearance of Jesus in the room.

John writes that when they saw Jesus they were glad.

Luke writes that they were terrified and affrighted.

Why the apparent difference?

Luke tells the immediate reaction as Jesus stands in the midst of them. How did he get here? They knew nothing of the possibilities of a resurrected body.

John tells their attitude after they had been satisfied this was not a ghost, but their Lord!

II.

Jesus appears to the eleven, Thomas being present this time. Mar. 16:14; Joh. 20:26-31; 1Co. 15:5.

When and Where? In Jerusalem, probably the same place as where Jesus appeared to the ten. When? The following first day of the week. (Joh. 20:26).

Main object of thought. Getting Thomas to believe.

While so doing, this was also reassuring proof for the others.

Thomas asked to place his hand into Jesus side.

Thomas answer, My Lord and my God! (Joh. 20:28).

III.

Jesus appears to the Seven disciples by the Sea of Galilee. Joh. 21:1-25. Only John records this incident.

Time Some suggest the next Lords Day; the day is actually unknown.

The seven disciples: Simon Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, James and John, and two other disciples.

Order of events that happened:

Peter and the others probably gathered in Peters home in Capernaum.

This waiting made then impatient. Thinking of an honest means of getting food, Peter said I am off to fish tonight. The rest join in, We are going with you.

With all the old enthusiasm, they go fishing, but luck was against them that night, remindful of an experience three years earlier.

At early morning someone appeared on the beach and asked, Lads, have you anything to eat? Their answer was, No!

Advice from the man on the shore. Cast on the right side of the boat.

The results; 153 fishes were caught in the net.

John at this, turned to Peter and said, It is the Lord.

Peter immediately started swimming for the shore.

They all had fish for breakfast.

Jesus turned to Simon Peter and probed the recesses of Peters heart to secure for him the humility necessary for service.

Peter asks about John.

Jesus answer: Joh. 21:22, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me.

IV.

Jesus appears to the five hundred in Galilee. Mat. 28:16-20; 1Co. 15:6.

Problem: Some would separate this appearance, and make two appearances here, one to the eleven separately, then to the eleven as counted with the five hundred.

If Jesus gave the Great Commission at this time, would he give it to the eleven gathered together with so large a group?

But in Mat. 28:17, some doubted, could be evidence that the groups were together.

Solution, if we separate these two appearances it eliminates this problem.

Where is this mountain that is spoken of in Mat. 28:16?

Some possible places:

The Place of the Sermon on the Mount
The Mount of Transfiguration
The place where He choose the twelve
The place on the east side of the lake where Jesus fed the 5,000.

Jesus appears to James. 1Co. 15:7.

No details given of this appearance.

Who is this James?

Possibly one of Jesus half-brothers, who had been converted after the resurrection.

Later served as pastor of the Church at Jerusalem.

VI.

Jesus appears to the eleven in Jerusalem and leads them to the place of Ascension. Mar. 16:19-20; Luk. 24:44-53; Act. 1:2-12.

Luke, who also wrote Acts, gives us the account of this in both of his writings, one a continuation of the other.

What Jesus told them at this time.

Charged them not to depart from Jerusalem.

They were to wait for the promise of the Father.

Jesus told them they would be baptised in the Holy Spirit not many days hence.

They questioned Him about restoring the kingdom to Israel at this time. He answered, It is not for you to know times nor seasons, which the Father hath set within his own authority.

Jesus charged them to be witnesses for Him in all places, Judea, Samaria, and the uttermost parts of the earth.

Jesus ascends into heaven.

VII.

And last of all, as to a child untimely born, he appeared to me also. 1Co. 15:8. This is the last appearance, which is to the Apostle Paul, and is recorded for us by Luke in Act. 9:3-9. A. Paul says he saw the Lord.

Summary:

The forty days, or five weeks and five days, beginning on the day of the Resurrection which was from Sunday, April 9th, (17th Nisan) to Thursday, May 18th, may be divided into three periods. (1) That in Judea from Resurrection day to the departure into Galilee, (About twelve days). (2) That in Galilee, (About twenty-three days). (3) That after the return to Jerusalem to the Ascension, (About five days).
During the first period, from Resurrection Sunday to the Sunday following inclusive, there were six appearances, five on Resurrection Sunday: (a) to Mary Magdalene; (b) to the other women, 5?; (c) to the two at Emmaus; (d) to Peter; (e) to the Ten; on the next Sunday (f) to the Eleven.
During the second period, after the arrival in Galilee, there were three recorded appearances: (a) to the seven disciples at the Sea of Galilee; (b) to the five hundred, the eleven being with them or separately just before them; (c) to James.
During the third period, after the return to Jerusalem to the ascension, there were two appearances actually counted as one; (a) to the apostles first assembling somewhere in the city; (b) to them in the city to lead them out to Bethany.
Last of all, time and place, A.D. 37 on the Damascus Road He appeared to Saul, later called Paul. Some reasons or purposes for the Lords appearances:

To convince the disciples that He was indeed risen. The appearances are proof of the resurrection, the empty tomb, grave clothes, testimony of the angels, were proof and the disciples continued to doubt.

For continuity and the progressive nature of the Lords redemption work. (Not only in seeing the Lord in His resurrected body, but most important, hearing what He taught after His resurrection.)

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(24) This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things.Comp. Joh. 20:30-31. As we have there the formal close of what seems to have been the original Gospel, we have here the formal close of the epilogue. The words are, however, too wide to be limited to the epilogue, and clearly refer to all that has preceded. They identify the writer with the disciple just mentioned, i.e., the disciple whom Jesus loved, and the form of the sentence implies that he who wrote these things was still living, and bearing witness to their truth. He is still testifying to the things of which he wrote.

And we know that his testimony is true.Our first and natural thought is that these are not the words of the writer of the Gospel, but the additional witness of persons knowing him and testifying to his writing. It is usual to explain the we know by referring to 1Jn. 5:18-20; but the plural of a letter ought not to be quoted to explain the plural in an historic document, and it is probable that the natural thought is the true one. But though the words are an addition, they are a contemporaneous addition present in every important MS. and version, and an undoubted part of the original text. We cannot tell who are the persons whose words we here readAndrew it may be, or Philip, or some of the seventy disciples who had been witnesses of the work of Christ, or some of the Ephesian Church, as Aristion or John the Presbyter, who felt that the Apostles personal character gave the stamp of truth to all he said, and add here the conviction that all these words were true. (Comp. Introduction, p. 377.)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

The attestation and conclusion, Joh 21:24-25.

Against the arrogant pretensions of modern factitious criticism, “criticism run mad,” we repudiate the notion that these verses are added by a later hand It is a modern invention, that about the Ephesian Church giving us this testimony to John! His own spirit and style breathe in every clause. This, is certain, that if it were by any other hand, the spurious writer does his best, with great success, to counterfeit the authorship he professes to authenticate. The additional verses are composed either by the apostle or by an impostor. But we believe that the Church of that day could not have been imposed upon, and would not impose upon us a counterfeiter’s endorsement of this memorable Gospel.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

24. This is the disciple Spoken in John’s usual manner of himself, in the third person.

We know Speaking in full apostolic and inspired authority for and with the apostolic Church. From that Church, the gifted Church, endued with the discerning of spirits, we receive the sacred canon, and thereby amply prove that its books were selected under divine guidance. Even if the authors were not inspired, this testimony of the then living Church fully establishes the New Testament as the authentic announcement of the facts and doctrines of Christ’s religion. That the apostle here passes into the plural number, we know, is a dignified assumption of representative character, in communion with that Church.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘This is the disciple who bears witness of these things and wrote these things, and we know that his testimony is true.’

These words are the equivalent of a witness’s signature. A group of important Christians confirm that the Gospel was written by the beloved disciple, who was still alive and bearing witness, and that they had good reason to know that it was true. This verification may suggest that other less reliable writings had begun to circulate around the turn of the century so that verification had now become important. Thus on completing his book John asked his fellow-elders to subscribe their testimony.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Epilogue of John the Apostle The final two verses of John’s Gospel serves as an epilogue which summarizes and concludes the five-fold testimony that he has written about in this book.

Joh 21:24 Comments Everett F. Harrison says the plural “we” used in Joh 21:24 most likely refers to a group of leaders over the churches in Asia Minor, perhaps even the church in Ephesus, who encouraged John to write his Gospel. [310]

[310] Everett F. Harrison, Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, c1964, 1971), 218.

In the Lugandan language of Uganda, East Africa, it is customary to convert the first person singular pronoun “I” into the plural form “we” during the course of a conversation. This is because in many less developed societies people still have strong family bonds and social bonds, which make them think as a group rather than as an individual. In contrast, we in America love our independence and think of ourselves as an individual who makes independent decisions separate from a group. However, the opposite is true in many societies. John was probably writing his epilogue with the mindset of strong social bonds, especially within the church.

Comments The Gospel of John is a testimony of Jesus as the Son of God.

Joh 21:25 “And there are also many other things which Jesus did” – Comments This statement reveals that John was clearly selective in choosing the miracles that he did record in this Gospel. John appears to have chosen miracles that bear witness the most to Jesus as the Son of God sent from the Father.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Conclusion:

v. 24. This is the disciple which testifieth of these things and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.

v. 25. And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Here John, in a final note, defends the trustworthiness of the record which he has offered in his gospel. He has not written on the basis of questionable sources, but he knows that the witness which he hereby bears is true: Incidentally he affirms that if all the sayings and all the miracles and signs of Jesus had been recorded and described, it would be such a great mass, as one might say, that the world could not contain all the books, could not comprehend and grasp the wonders thus offered. But what John has recorded is fully sufficient for his purpose and that of the Spirit that spoke through him, namely, to teach the deity and the redemption of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world, that all that believe on Him might not perish, but have everlasting life.

Summary. Jesus appears to seven disciples at the Sea of Galilee, gives them another miraculous draught of fishes, and, in a searching interview, reinstates Peter into his discipleship.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Joh 21:24. This is the disciple which testifieth, &c. Though the inspired writer of this gospel is here spoken of in the third person, it is agreeable to St. John’s manner. See ch. Joh 19:35. 1Jn 1:1-5 and ch. Joh 5:18-20.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Joh 21:24 . Conclusion by John to this his supplement, Joh 21:1-23 , which he makes known as his work, and the contents of which he maintains to be true . To his book he had given the conclusion, Joh 20:31 ; all the less should the apostolic legitimation be wanting to the appendix added by him at a later time.

and refer to the supplementary narrative in Joh 21:1-23 .

Observe the change of participles, pres . (for his witness, i.e . his eye- and ear-witness, still continued a living one in an oral form) and aor . . [292]

] Not (Chrysostom, Theophylact); but John, as he has avoided throughout in the Gospel, in accordance with his delicate peculiarity, the self-designation by I , here speaks out of the consciousness of fellowship with his readers at that time , none of whom the aged apostle justly presupposed would doubt the truth of his testimony. With this good apostolical confidence he utters his . He might have written, as in Joh 19:35 , (Beza so conjectured). But his book up to this appendix, chap. 21, had belonged in truth already for a considerable time to the narrower circle of his first readers; they could not therefore but know from it how truly he had testified concerning all that he had written; all the more could he now, when by way of supplement he further added the appendix, conceive what was to be said concerning the truth of the contents in the above form of fellowship, and as he conceived it, so he says it; as he is in so doing certain of the concurrence of his readers (comp. 3Jn 1:12 ) with his own consciousness, so he writes it. According to this, no satisfactory reason is apparent for recognising in a composer different from the (Bleek, Baeumlein), and conceiving of the Ephesian presbyters or friends of the apostle as the subject, whether the chapter be now ascribed to them (or to an individual among them) (Grotius, Lcke, Ewald, Bleek, and several others), or only Joh 21:24-25 (Tholuck, Luthardt, Godet, and several others), or again merely Joh 21:24 , Joh 21:25 being rejected (Tischendorf).

[292] Note also how the witness is identical with the , so that John himself expressly announces himself as the composer of the appendix, and consequently also of the whole Gospel, with which the assumption that the Gospel proceeds from the apostle through a second hand , stands in contradiction.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

IV
IV. The Testimony of John and the Testimony of the Church. Infinitude of the Evangelical History

Joh 21:24-25

24This is the disciple which [who] testifieth [ ] of these things, and wrote [who wrote, ] 27 these things: and we know that his testimony is true. 28 29 25And there are also many other things which 30 Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain 31 the books that should be written. Amen, [omit Amen.] 32

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Joh 21:24. This is the disciple [ ].Self-designation of John, as in Joh 19:26. [A conclusion corresponding to the one Joh 20:31, and traced to John also by Meyer anti Alford.P. S.]

Of these things [ ].Referring to the contents of the 21st chapter.And who wrote these things [ ].Particularly, also, to the setting of the Christians right in regard to the tradition which had commenced to gather form. [Mark the difference of the tenses: the testimony continues, the writing is an accomplished act.P. S.]

We know that his testimony [ Different interpretations:

1. [I know] (Chrysostom, Theophylact). An exegetical conjecture (similarly Bezas ).

2. An indication of the ungenuineness of the conclusion or of the whole chapter (modern criticism).

3. John made himself one with his readers (Meyer). [So also Alford; comp. Joh 1:14; 1Jn 4:14; 1Jn 4:16; 1Jn 5:18.]

4. Probably a later addition from the Ephesian church. Not because, as according to Lcke, John never wrote in the first person, either of the plural or of the singular. See on the contrary, Joh 1:14. But the corroboration of his own testimony with the words; We know that his testimony is true, would be too strikingly singular. The expression Joh 19:35 runs differently. We have therefore bracketed the words we know, etc., considering them to be the only later Ephesian addition in the whole chapter.

[Meyer regards only Joh 21:25 as a later addition; Tholuck, Luthardt, Godet, etc., Joh 21:24-25; Lcke, Bleek, Ewald, etc., the whole chapter; Lange, Alford and Wordsworth accept the whole as Johannean,Lange, however, excepting the second clause of Joh 21:24.P. S.]

Joh 21:25. But there are also many other things [ ].Mayer: Apocryphal conclusion of the whole Gospelafter the addition of the Johannean supplement Joh 21:1-24. The Evangelist thinks it important that he should remind his readers that he has not written as a chronicler, but has selected and arranged things in conformity to an organizing principle, as did also his predecessors, though not in the equal power of a concentrated, unitous, ideal view. 33 That this note of the Gospel has not at all an apocryphal aspect, but would, on the contrary, be qualified, were more attention accorded it, to strip our modern criticism of many apocryphal opinions (particularly, of the continually recurring idea that the Evangelists were chroniclers, that their writings were grounded upon one another, etc.), is evident.

If they should be written every one one by one [ (quippe qu, utpote gu, referring to the largo number) (piece for piece), (ne ipsum quidem mundum) 34 Comp. a somewhat analogous expression Ecc 12:12 : Of making many books (or chapters) there is no end. Different interpretations of ,capere: 1. Locally: Unable to hold (capacitas loci). Restricted by Ebrard: No place in literature. 2. Intellectually: Unable to understand (capacitas intellectus). Jerome, Augustine, Calov, Bengel (hoc non de capacitate geometrica, sed morali accipiendum est). 3. Figuratively and hyperbolically: Any number of books would not exhaust the subject. Similarly Godet: Divin de sa nature, lobjet de lhistoire vanglique est plus grand que le monde et que toutes les narrations que le monde pourrait contenir. Lcrivain exprime, par une image matrielle, le vif sentiment quil a de la richesse infinie de cette histoire.P. S.] According to the conclusion of the Evangelist, the world itself would be unable to contain the books that would then be written continually (). Even Tholuck agrees with Meyer (who refers to similar hyperboles in Fabricius ad Cod. Apocryph. I., p. 321) in thinking this proposition1 hyperbolical. The apparent hyperbolism of the expression, however, very clearly illustrates the pure infiniteness in the life-development of the Logos, by a quantitative, local measure. We make use of a hundred similar expressions without their hyperbolism being deemed improper or apocryphal, for instance: O dass ich tausend Zungen htte (O that I had a thousand tongues)Den aller Weltkreis nie umschloss (Whom the whole world did neer enclose) 35The whole world lieth in wickednessin the Evil One, etc. Weitzel has entered the lists in defence of the propriety of the expression, Studienu. Kritiken 1849, p. 633; comp. my Leben Jesu III., p. 760. L uthardt: For only an absolute external compass corresponds with the absolute contents of the person and life of Christ; whereupon Meyer remarks: Inevident to me! Aber, Freunde, im Raum wohnt das Erhabene nicht (But, O friends, the sublime dwelleth not in space), says Schiller elucidatively. The Evangelist, however, in submitting his book to the Church, may well come forward with an unwonted in order, by a strong expression, to dissuade the reader from the chronistic apprehension of the Gospel, and to urge him to the historico-symbolical view which recognizes in the organically articulated selection of ideally transparent facts, the historical life-picture of the infinite fulness of the life of Jesus.36

This symbolical character, presented in pure but speaking facts, is possessed, in a peculiar degree, by the closing chapter, to which the closing words primarily have reference. The interpretation of Jerome, Augustine and others: The world would be spiritually incapable of grasping such books,would apply even to the four small Gospels, though in sooth a Gospel developed in infinitum would pass the comprehension not only of the present world, but also of Christendom as it here exists. Here, however, emphasis is laid not upon the onic unfathomableness of the life of Jesus, but upon its ideal infinitude, in the symbolical explicitness of the evangelical history. 37

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The absolutely dynamical view of the world, as the specifically Christian view of it, is the fundamental feature and the key of the Johannean Gospel, of Johannean theology. The personal principle is the royal life-principle of the world. The personality of God in the personality of Christ, annihilates the power of the anti-personal, Satanic essence, and appoints the impersonal world to the service of life; it is diffused in the personality of the Apostles, in order that it, may lift the whole world out of the abyss into the light of glorification, in which the world, as the old world, vanishes, in order to shine forth again as the eternal House of the Father, the eternal City of God. In conformity to this dynamical view, Christs pre-temporal rule in the world is finally summed up in the testimony of John the Baptist; His post-temporal rule, in the ministry of the twelve Apostles; the draught of fishes of the seven; the simple contrast of the following disciple and the tarrying one; finally, in the type of a friendship with Christ which remains until the Lord comes.

With this dynamical character, then, the apostolic presentation of the evangelical history also corresponds. That history is not chronistically, but onically, executed; not atomistically expanded, but principialiy concentrated; the whole infinitude and fulness of the signs of Jesus must be reflected in a concentric selection of speaking facts, translumined by the idea. Not in outward extensionin transparent concentration, the expression of eternal life is accomplished.
2. The great distance between Johns view of the essence of evangelical historiography and the opinions or prejudices of modern criticism, becomes evident from the foregoing, and from the last Exeg. Note.

3. Even the Christian Gramma may err in the way of profuse book-making. Against this the Christian spirit of a John opposes its final words of warning; the like did the Preacher Solomon in the Old Testament (Ecc 12:12), and also Plato in Phdrus 60. The Christian spirit-word does not aim at converting the world into a vast library of sacred writings, but into the Divine House of the adorned Bride of Christ and of the marriage of the Bridegroom. To this end, Christian literature, with its testimony concerning Christ, is indeed to work, drawing all literature into His service; but the more it extends itself through the world, the more it should concentrate itself, shaping itself into the transparent life-picture of the glory of God in Christ.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The testimony of the friend of Jesus concerning his Lord and Master.Together with the faithful testimony concerning Christ, the testifying disciple unconsciously immortalizes himself.And we know that his testimony is true: 1. We know: a. we believe it, b. we not only believe it, we know it, c. we not only know it (in the sense of the worlds knowledge), we experience it. 2. We know, concerning his testimony, that it is sealed with the water and blood of Christ. 3. That it is true: a. true in spite of all the objections and contradictions of the world, b. true in the might of the Spirit who hath overcome the world.How it is impossible, and yet possible, to depict the glory of Christ: 1. Impossible by the multitude of words, discourses and writings; 2. possible by the simple word of the Spirit concerning His great signs.The evangelical life-picture of the Lord: 1. In respect of its finite form; 2. in respect of its infinite contents; 3. in respect of its New Testament, eternally new operation.

Strke: That which by grace we have received from God and done for the honor of God, we may well make known to others, taking care only that all boastfulness on account of our own persons is avoided, 1 Corinthians 11.

Braune: An individual once appeared on earth who, merely by moral omnipotence, conquered remote times and founded an eternity of His own. It is that calm Spirit whom we call Jesus Christ. Only quiet teaching and quiet striving formed the melodies wherewith this higher Orpheus tamed human beasts and converted rocks into sanctuaries of God. And yet out of so divine a life,as it were, out of a thirty years war against a perverse, insensible people,we are familiar with but a few weeks. What transactions, what words of His may have been swallowed up from our knowledge before He became acquainted with the four writers of His history, those men by nature so dissimilar! If, then, out of so divine a life-book only scattered leaves have fluttered to us, so that perhaps greater deeds and words of that life are forgotten (?) than were detailed, repine not, nor pass judgment over the ship-wreck of little works and men, but recognize in that Christianity which nevertheless blossomed afterwards, the fulness with which the (All) Spirit yearly suffers the perishing blossoms to exceed in number those that thrive, without therefore forfeiting a future spring (Jean Paul).

Schleiermacher: For a long time there has been a fable current among men, and even in these days it is (still) frequently heard; unbelief invented it, and little faith receives it. Thus it runs: There shall come a time, and perhaps it is already here, when His right shall befall even this Jesus of Nazareth. Every human memory is fruitful but for a certain period; much doth the human race owe to Him, great things hath God accomplished by Him, yet He was but one of us, and His hour of oblivion, too, must strike. If He was in earnest in desiring to make the world absolutely free, He must likewise have willed to make it free from Himself, that God might be all in all. Then men would not only perceive that they have strength enough in themselves to fulfil the divine will, but in the true understanding of the same, they would be able to exceed His measure, if they did but wish. Yes, only when the Christian name is forgotten, shall a universal kingdom of love and truth arise, in which no germ more of enmity shall lie, such as has been sown from the beginning betwixt those that believe on this Jesus and the rest of the children of men. But it shall not be realized,this fable; since the days of His flesh, the Redeemers image has been indelibly stamped on the race of men! Even though the letter might perish, which is holy only because it preserves us the image, the image itself shall last for ever; too deeply is it graven upon men ever to be effaced, and what the disciple said, shall always be truth: Lord, whither shall we go? Thou alone hast words of eternal life!

Heubner: The pernicious making and reading of books has been greatly prejudicial to the reading of the Book of Life, and to the Christian life. Luther himself on this account often wished his books done away with, Works i. 1938; xiv. 420; xv. Anh., p. 90; xx. 1031; xxii. 85.

Yet doubtless only in a qualified sense. The books of faith should promote life,hence should be, as living books, strictly articulated organisms of life. Their foundation and aim is the Book of Life. This is above all true of the Holy Scriptures, particularly of the Gospels, most particularly of our Gospel.
[Craven: From Burkitt: Joh 21:25. The wonderful activity, industry, and diligence of the Lord Jesus Christ; He was never idle, but His whole life was spent in doing good.

[From M. Henry: Joh 21:25. If it be asked why the gospels are not larger, it may be answered, I. It was not because they had exhausted their subject; II. Bat 1. It was not needful to write more; 2. It was not possible to write all; 3. It was not advisable to write much.

[Schaff: Joh 21:24-25. Though but little has been written on the life of Christ by the Evangelists, that little is of more accountthan all the literature of the world, and has been more productive of books, as well as thoughts and deeds, than any number of biographies of sages and saints of ancient and modern times. The Gospels, and the Bible generally, rise like Mount Ararat high above the flood of literature; they are the sacred library for all nations, the literary sanctuary for scholars and the common people; they combine word and work, letter and spirit, earth and heaven, time and eternity. The eloquent tribute of an English divine 38 to the influence of the Bible applies especially to the Gospel of John, and may appropriately conclude this Commentary. This collection of books has been to the world what no other book has ever been to a nation. States have been founded on its principles. Kings rule by a compact based on it. Men hold the Bible in their hands when they prepare to give solemn evidence affecting life, death, or property; the sick man is almost afraid to die unless the Book be within reach of his hands; the battle-ship goes into action with one on board whose office is to expound it; its prayers, its psalms are the language which we use when we speak to God; eighteen centuries have found no holier, no diviner language. If ever there has been a prayer or a hymn enshrined in the heart of a nation, you are sure to find its basis in the Bible. There is no new religious idea given to the world, but it is merely the development of something given in the Bible. The very translation of it has fixed language and settled the idioms of speech. Germany and England speak as they speak because the Bible was translated. It has made the most illiterate peasant more familiar with the history, customs, and geography of ancient Palestine, than with the localities of his own country. Men who know nothing of the Grampians, of Snowdon, or of Skiddaw, are at home in Zion, the lake of Gennesaret, or among the rills of Carmel. People who know little about London know by heart the palaces in Jerusalem, where those blessed feet trod which were nailed to the Cross. Men who know nothing of the architecture of a Christian cathedral, can yet tell you all about the pattern of the Holy Temple. Even this shows us the influence of the Bible. The orator holds a thousand men for half-an-hour breathlessa thousand men as one, listening to his single word. But this Word of God has held a thousand nations for thrice a thousand years spell-bound; held them by an abiding power, even the universality of its truth; and we feel it to be no more a collection of books, but the Book.P. S.]

Footnotes:

[27]Joh 21:24.[The article before is omitted by 1 A. C. X. Orig., Tischend., inserted by B. D. lat. (et qui scripsit.) Lachm., Treg., Alf., West. Cod. B. inserts before .P. S.]

[28]Joh 21:24.[Dr. Lange brackets the last clause: , considering it an addition of the elders of Ephesus and friends of John, while he ascribes all the rest, including Joh 21:25, to John. See Exeg.P. S.]

[29]Joh 21:25.This verse is wanting in Cod. 63 [?],a circumstance of no importance, however. (On the Sin. see Tischend.) [Lachmann, Tregelles, Alford, and Westcott retain Joh 21:25, except the concluding , Westcott, however, separates it from the preceding text. Tischendorf alone, ed. VIII., excludes it from the text on the sole authority of the Sinaitic MS. which indeed contains the verse, but, as he asserts, written by another hand, see his note, p. 965. But in the large quasi-fac-simile ed. of the Cod. which I have used all along, there is no perceptible difference. He then also corrects an error with regard to Cod. 63, which was quoted by Mill, Wetstein, Griesbach, Lange (in the preceding remark), etc., in favor of omission, but according to Scrivener, the last page of that Cod. with the 25th verse is lost. Tischendorf here gives too much weight to Cod. Sin. which he had the good fortune to discover. The omission, if such could be proven, has little weight in view of the many instances of carelessness on the part of the copyist, and of the filling up of the lacuna by the first corrector, who, according to Tischendorf, was cotemporary with the copyist. All other known MSS. contain Joh 21:25, though many state in a note that it was regarded by some as a later addition.P. S.]

[30]Joh 21:25.The reading in accordance with Codd. . B. D. * etc., Lachmann [Treg., Alf., West., instead of text rec. which is retained by A. C.2 D. and expresses the quantitative relation, quet quanta, quotquot, what and how many; comp, Rev 1:2.P.S.]

[31]Joh 21:25.[Lachm., Alfd. , with A. B. C.2 D. text. rec.; Treg., Tisch., West. , with . B. C *.P. S.]

[32]Joh 21:25.The of the Recepta (Codd. E. G. H. K. M. etc.) is wanting in Codd. [.] A. B. C. D. etc. [Amen is a liturgical or devotional addition, and justly omitted by Lachm., Treg., Alf., Westc. and H.P. S.] On the various subscriptions: (A. C. E. [a]); (B.) etc., comp. Tischendorf. K. M. U. X. [also .] have no subscription. [Tischendorf states that the subscription in is not written by the same hand, but by corr.la On the Latin subscriptions, see Tischend. p. 967.P. S.]

[33]

[So also Alford: The purpose of this verse seems to be to assert and vindicate the fragmentary character of the
Gospel, considered merely as a historical narrative:for that the doings of the Lord were so manyHis life so rich in matter of record,that, in a popular hyperbole, we can hardly imagine the world containing them all, if singly written down; thus setting forth the superfluity and cumber-ousness of anything like a perfect detail, in the strongest terms, and in terms which certainly look as if fault had been found with this Gospel for want of completeness, by some objectors.P. S.]

[34][Or, according to the other reading infin. aor. , which after without is pure Greek, and expresses more strongly the faith in the certainty of the fact stated than the fut. .P. S.]

[35]

Vom Himmcl steigend Jesus bracht

Des Evangcliums ewige Schrift,
Den Jungern las Er sie Tag und Nacht;
Ein gttlich Wort, es wirkt und trifft.
Er stieg zurck, nahms wicder mit,
Sie aber hattens gut gefhlt,
Und Jeder schrieb so Schritt fr Schritt,
Wie ers in seinem Sinn behielt.
Verschieden: Es hat nickts zu bedeuten
Sie hatten nicht gleiche Fhigkiten;
Duck damit kinnen sich dic Christen
Bis zu dem jngsten Tage fristen.

(Goethe).]

[36][Wordsworth puts into the first person singular , which John nowhere else uses in the Gospel, the intention of the writer to guard against the inference that Joh 21:25 was written by a person different from John, who wrote in the plural in the preceding verse. But this would have been done more effectually by using the singular in both cases. Godet conjectures that the subject of the is one of the apostles present with John at Ephesus, probably Andrew, who, with John, was the oldest disciple of Christ (John 1).P. S.]

[37][Lines of two celebrated German hymns. To these may be added similar expressions in English hymns, as,

Oh! for a thousand tongues to sing, etc.

Had I a thousand hearts to give, etc.

Were the whole realm of nature mine, etc.

But these and similar expressions are desires poetically expressed, while here we have a statement in prose.P. S.]

[38][I saw it in a respectable Magazine attributed to the Rev. F. Robertson, the late gifted preacher of Brighton, but I have been unable to verify the quotation and cannot vouch for its accuracy.P. S.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

Ver. 24. This is the disciple ] Not the doctor, the master, as Magistri nostri Parisienses. So the Sorbonists will needs be styled. The schoolmen have their Doctor Angelicus, Doctor Seraphicus, Doctor resolutissimus. So Bacon the Carmelite was called, because he would endure no guessing or maybes. The Italian friars, as they increase in their supposed holiness, so they proceed in their titles, from Padre Benedicto to Padre Angelo, then Archangelo, Cherubino, and lastly, Cerephino, which is the top of perfection. Our evangelist delights not in any of these swelling titles. He doth not so much as name himself in all this work of his, takes no other style than the beloved disciple, makes no more of himself than a witness to the truth, a recorder of what he had heard and seen. The proud person speaks “great swelling words of vanity,” 2Pe 2:18 ; he loves uppermost rooms, and to be called Rabbi, Rabbi, to be cried up and pointed at for a nonesuch,Mat 23:6Mat 23:6 . I hear, saith Tertullian (speaking of the pope, who then began to peep out), that there is a decree published in peremptory terms, Pontifex scilicet Maximus, Episcopus episcoporum, &c. I ever hated the pride of that Roman Church, saith Basil. a Ambition, like the crocodile, groweth while it liveth; like the ivy, which rising at the feet, will overtop the highest wall; or, like the marigold (a flower of no good smell), which opens and shuts with the sun. Humility, on the contrary, is like the lily, saith Bernard, or violet which grows low to the ground, hangs the head downward, and hides itself with its own leaves. It prefers the Euge well done of conscience before the Hic est This is of the world: and were it not that its fragrant smell betrays it to the observation of others, would choose to live and die in its well contenting secrecy.

a Odi fastum illius ecclesiae. Hunc appellare solitus est.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

24, 25. ] IDENTIFICATION OF THE AUTHOR, AND CONCLUSION. See remarks below.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

24. ] and certainly refer to the whole Gospel, not merely to the Appendix and are quite in John’s style: see ch. Joh 12:41 ; Joh 20:31 .

is in John’s style see reff.: also 1Jn 4:14 ; 1Jn 4:16 alli [263] . fr. On . . see 3Jn 1:12 , and ch. Joh 5:32 .

[263] alli = some cursive mss.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Joh 21:24

24This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and wrote these things, and we know that testimony is true.

Joh 21:24 “wrote these things” Does this refer to (1) Joh 21:20-23 : (2) chapter 21; or (3) the whole Gospel? The answer is uncertain.

“we know that his witness is true” The specific group referred to by the pronoun “we” is uncertain. It is obvious that others are being brought into the affirmation of the truth of the Gospel of John. This probably refers to the Ephesian elders. This was the area in which John lived, ministered, and died. Early tradition asserts that the Ephesian leaders urged the aged John to write his own Gospel because of the death of all the other Apostles and the growing heresies about Jesus. See Special Topic: Witnesses to Jesus at Joh 1:8.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

testifieth = beareth witness. Greek. martureo. See See book comments for John, note 4.

of = concerning. Greek. peri. App-104.

testimony. Greek. marturia. Compare Joh 19:35, and see book comments for John.

true. Greek alethes. App-175.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

24, 25.] IDENTIFICATION OF THE AUTHOR, AND CONCLUSION. See remarks below.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Joh 21:24. , this) Therefore at that time, as yet the disciple was remaining, and his remaining showed the truth of the Lords words, after so many years had elapsed, and the power of His will [If I will].- ) He who was testifying) viz. in his words, as yet surviving. The , he who wrote, corresponds to this.- , and we know) John himself may have prescribed this clause to the Church, which accordingly would, with no unwillingness, read it in public, and acknowledge it as obligatory with believing assent. But if the Church has added this, it does not derogate from the authority of the work, any more than that little verse which Tertius interwove with the Epistle to the Romans: or, if I may add this, than the little clause added to the Commentaries of Sleidanus concerning his death, and which was perhaps begun by himself and finished by a friend.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Joh 21:24

This is the disciple that beareth witness of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his witness is true.-John who heard these things wrote them down and affirms their certainty.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

we know: Joh 19:35, 1Jo 1:1, 1Jo 1:2, 1Jo 5:6, 3Jo 1:12

Reciprocal: Mat 10:2 – John Joh 12:17 – bare Joh 13:23 – whom Joh 15:27 – ye also Joh 19:26 – whom Joh 20:2 – to the Joh 21:7 – that disciple Joh 21:20 – seeth 1Jo 5:13 – have I Rev 1:2 – bare

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

This verse, together with other passages, shows us that the disciple “whom Jesus loved” was John. (See chapter 13:23.)

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

[And we know that his testimony is true.] The evangelist had said before, Joh 19:35; “He knoweth that he saith true”; and here in this place he changeth the person, saying, “We know that his testimony is true.”

I. One would believe that this was an idiotism in the Chaldee and Syriac tongue, to make ‘We’ know; and ‘I’ know; the same thing: which is not unusual in other languages also; Jos 2:9; I know. The Targumist hath which you would believe to be We know. 1Sa 17:28; I know. Targumist, We know.

II. We suppose the evangelist, both here and Joh 19:35, referreth to an eyewitness. For in all judicial causes the ocular testimony prevailed. If any person should testify that he himself saw the thing done, his witness must be received; for true when it is said of any testimony, does not signify barely that which is true; but that which was to be believed and entertained for a sure and irrefragable evidence. So that the meaning of these words is this: “This is the disciple who testifies of these things and wrote them: and we all know that such a testimony obtains in all judgments whatever; for he was an eyewitness, and saw that which he testifies.”

Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels

Joh 21:24. This is the disciple which witnesseth concerning these things, and wrote these things. To what has been said above upon this clause we may add that the use of the present tense, witnesseth, seems to point out John as the writer of these words: any other would probably have written witnessed, in conformity with the word that follows, wrote. The word witnesseth is used with great solemnity, and in the sense which It commonly bears (comp. note on chap. Joh 1:7) in this Gospel. The writer means more than that the things stated by him are true; he is uttering a Divine testimony to their inner reality and value. By his witnessing he claims to be more than a historian: he proclaims himself a prophet of God, commissioned to announce great verities to men.

These things must be understood to refer not only to the things spoken of in this chapter, but to the Gospel as a whole. The analogous passage in chap. Joh 20:30, together with Joh 21:25 of the present chapter, renders this interpretation absolutely necessary.

And we know that his witness is true. As has been already said, it seems to us best to regard these words as an addition made by the elders of Ephesus. They could not fail to notice how different this Gospel was from its predecessors. It might seem to them that hesitation would be felt in receiving it, and they stamp it with their authenticating seal. Or, if such were not their motive, the words may be little more than a kind of involuntary breathing out of their awe and wonder, as again and again they brought the reading of this Gospel to a close.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

The great modesty of the holy evangelist St. John, is all along throughout his gospel very observable; he mentioneth himself hitherto under a third person; he calleth himself a disciple, a learner, who excelled the most accomplished doctors of the ages ever since. Here he speaks more plainly and expressly concerning himself, declaring that he was an eye-witness and an ear-witness of what he wrote, for the greater certainty therof. And this protestation here made by the evangelist of the truth of what he wrote, was highly necessary, lest any should think that Christ’s extraordinary love and affection to him, (he being the beloved disciple) should move him to exceed (as we are prone to do) in writing the history of their lives who are dear to us, and we to them.

Learn hence, that this gospel was written by John the beloved disciple, and the narration is of divine truth, worthy to be embraced and received by us as a perfect rule of faith and life. We know that his testimony is true.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Joh 21:24. This is the disciple which testifieth these things Being still alive after he had written them. From this verse Grotius and some others infer, that the Ephesian bishops added this whole chapter to St. Johns gospel, after his death. But, as Dr. Macknight observes, it evidently proves the contrary, for it assures us that John wrote the things contained in this chapter. And we know that his testimony is true The church probably added these words to this gospel, as Tertius did those to St. Pauls epistle to the Romans, Rom 16:23. Further, though the evangelist seems to conclude his gospel, (Joh 20:31,) it is no unusual thing with the sacred writers to add new matter after such conclusions. See the epistle to the Romans, and that to the Hebrews, at the end. As to the writer of this gospel being spoken of in the third person, it is agreeable to Johns manner; (see Joh 19:35;) who likewise speaks of himself in the plural number, 1Jn 5:18-20. To conclude, the verse under consideration is shown to be genuine, by a similar passage in the conclusion of the third epistle, Joh 21:12. In detailing the events subsequent to the crucifixion, the reader may readily observe, that much matter is recorded in a small compass; and that though each evangelist has given his particular and connected narration, much new matter is introduced by each one, unnoticed by the others. To frame a general narrative by a combination of the whole, and to dispose the various circumstances in the order they are supposed to have occurred, have been objects of difficulty to harmonists. On these accounts, the following concise summary of the events, in the order they may rationally be supposed to have happened, is introduced, as arranged by Dr. Benson, and afterward adopted by Archbishop Newcome.

On the morning of the first day of the week, Jesus rises from the dead; a great earthquake happens about the time of his resurrection; and an angel appears, who rolls away the stone that closed the mouth of the sepulchre, sits upon it, and strikes the keepers with great fear; thus causing them to remove to such a distance, as to remain unnoticed by the women and others hereafter, Mat 28:2-4. After his resurrection, many bodies of the saints rise from their graves, and are seen by many in Jerusalem, Mat 27:52-53. Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, Salome, Joanna, and other women, (Mar 16:1; Luk 24:1; Joh 20:1,) go very early to the sepulchre, intending to embalm the body of Jesus, (having bought spices the preceding evening for that purpose.) In their way they consult about removing the stone from the door of the sepulchre. Perceiving it already taken away, they enter into the sepulchre, yet find not the body of the Lord Jesus, Mar 16:3-5; Luk 24:2-3; Joh 20:1. Mary Magdalene, hastily returning to Jerusalem, relates to Peter and John that they had taken the Lord out of the sepulchre, Joh 20:2. The other women remaining in the sepulchre, two angels appear unto them, and one of them requests the women to inform the disciples, and Peter in particular, that Jesus was risen, &c., Mat 28:5-7; Mar 16:4-7; Luk 24:4-8. The women return from the sepulchre, relate these things to the apostles, and are discredited, Mat 28:8; Mar 16:8; Luk 24:8-11. Peter and John having heard Mary Magdalenes report of his having been taken away, and the womens of his having risen, run to the sepulchre, and find the body removed according to their information, and wondering at what was come to pass, return home, Luk 24:12; Joh 20:3-10. The resurrection having been stated to the disciples at Jerusalem at this period, (Luk 24:22-24,) Cleophas and his companion leave their brethren to go to Emmaus. Mary Magdalene goes again to the sepulchre, tarries there after the apostles, (Joh 20:11,) and converses with the two angels who had before appeared to the women. Turning herself back, she perceives Jesus, who gradually makes himself known unto her; she consequently hastens to the city, and announces this his first appearance to the disciples, but they believe not, Mar 16:9-11; Joh 20:11-18. The other women, having told the disciples of his resurrection, continue in the city, while Peter and John visit, and Mary Magdalene revisits, the sepulchre: they then go back again, and upon finding it deserted, return toward Jerusalem. On their way, Jesus meets and requests them to direct his disciples to depart into Galilee, Mat 28:9-10. This is his second appearance. The guards about this time leave the neighbourhood of the sepulchre, and inform the Jewish rulers of what had occurred within their knowledge, Mat 28:11-15. According to Paul, (1Co 15:5,) the third appearance is to Cephas; and the fourth, to the two who some time prior to this left their brethren to proceed to Emmaus; who, immediately returning to Jerusalem, relate it to the other disciples, and are not credited, Mat 16:12-13; Luk 24:13-36. The last time of his being seen on the day of his resurrection, being the fifth, was by the apostles as they sat at meat in the absence of Thomas, 1Co 15:5; Mar 16:14-18; Luk 24:36-49; Joh 20:19-23. This concludes the great and glorious transactions of the important day on which Jesus rose from the dead. About the eighth day after his resurrection, he again, the sixth time, appears to his disciples, when Thomas was present, Joh 20:24-29. His seventh appearance occurs between the eighth and fortieth day, at the sea of Tiberias, to his disciples, (Mat 28:16; Joh 21:1-24,) and his. eighth, to them upon the mountain in Galilee, Mat 28:16-20. Paul (1Co 15:6) relates his having been seen of above five hundred brethren at once, many of whom, at the time of his writing this epistle, were living witnesses to this the ninth appearance. His tenth is to James; and his final appearance, being the eleventh, is to the apostles, on the ascension, 1Co 15:7; Act 1:3-12; Mar 16:19-20; Luk 24:50-53.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Conclusion of the Appendix: Joh 21:24-25.

Vv. 24, 25. This is the disciple who testifies of these things and who wrote them;and we know that his testimony is true. 25. There are also many other things which Jesus did; and if they were written in detail, I do not think that the world itself could contain the books which would be written.

This postscript attests two things: 1. The composition of the Gospel by the apostle John (Joh 21:24); 2. The infinite richness of the evangelic history, which would not let itself be confined in any written word, whatever might be its extent (Joh 21:25).

There are three very different opinions respecting the origin of these two verses. Some (Hengstenberg, Weitzel, Hoelemann, Hilgenfeld, etc.) ascribe them both to the author of ch. 21, who is at the same time the author of the entire book, either the apostle John (the first three) or a pseudo-John (Hilgenfeld). So Lange and Schaff, who ascribe only the words: And we know that his testimony is true, to another hand. Meyer, Tischendorf, etc., ascribe Joh 21:24 to the author of the whole, but they see in Joh 21:25 a later interpolation. The third party (Tholuck, Luthardt, Keil) regard Joh 21:24-25 as both added by another hand than that of John, the author of the whole of ch. 21. De Wette, Lucke, Weiss ascribe them also to the author of the appendix, but without admitting that he is the apostle.

The pronoun , he, can only refer to the disciple whom Jesus loved (Joh 21:23), and the pronouns and , these things, only to the contents of the entire book. For the appendix alone (Joh 21:1-23) would not have importance enough to occasion such a declaration. It may even be asked whether ch. 21 is itself included in the expression: these things in this case we should also have in Joh 21:24 the attestation of the Johannean origin of this chapteror whether it is not rather the author himself of this ch. 21, who concludes the appendix by bearing witness to the Johannean origin of the Gospel properly so called. This second view seems to me more probable; for, as we have seen, the connection of Joh 21:23-24 is so close that it is difficult not to ascribe them to the same pen.

As the conclusion Joh 20:30-31 ended the Gospel, so this new conclusion, an imitation of the previous one, closes the entire work, completed by the appendix. The author of this postscript says of the beloved disciple, that it is he who testifies ( ) of the facts related and who wrote them ( ). If we do not hold that there is a pure and simple imposture here, we must acknowledge that this declaration, which is so precise, excludes all possibility of a merely indirect composition by the apostle John. Thus Weiss expresses himself in answer toWeizsacker and Hase; we add: and to Reuss. The latter thinks that the redactors of this supplement (those who say: we know) may have acted in good faith in erroneously ascribing the redaction of the Gospel to the apostle John. At a certain distance they may have mistaken the distinction which the author had himself expressly made between his person and that of the apostlewitness in the passage Joh 19:35 (Theol . joh., p.

105). But Reuss surrenders himself here to an amiable illusion. By affirming the Johannean redaction of the Gospel, these men give themselves out as persons who are acquainted with the state of things, who even know the apostle personally (see below); an involuntary error is therefore impossible. They say: who testifies and who wrote. The present testifies refers, according to most (Weiss, Keil, etc.), to the permanence of the testimony in this writing composed by John. But in this case the epithet , who testifies, should have been placed after : who wrote, and who thus testifies in the Church in a lasting way. But the priority of the words who testifies and the contrast between this present par ticiple and the past participle which follows do not allow any other meaning than: who testifies at present, still at this hour (Meyer, Luthardt, etc.). This postscript was added, therefore, during the lifetime of the apostle, Johanne adhuc in corpore constituto, as a manuscript of the Vatican says, citing Papias (Tischendorf: Wann wurden uns. Ev. verf., p. 119); which agrees with the design of the appendix. Who, more than John, should have been anxious that the meaning of the saying which the Lord had uttered with respect to him should be set right?

The verb , we know, cannot have as its subject John himself, either alone, as Chrysostom would have it, reading , I know undoubtedly, or in company with the persons who surround him (Weitzel), or even the readers (Meyer). It can only be a plurality of individuals outside of which John himself is found. Who then? The Fragment of Muratori places on the scene the apostle Andrew and other apostles (Philip perhaps) who lived in Asia at that time, and then the bishops of Ephesus. If the question is of apostles, the we know signifies: that, knowing of themselves the facts related, they can testify to their accuracy; recognoscentibus cunctis, says the same Fragment. But if this wedesignates the Christians who surrounded John at Ephesus, this we know means that, having lived personally with John, they know his sincerity and declare him incapable of relating anything false. There is nothing to prevent us from uniting in the we these two classes of persons, in whose number may also be found Aristion and the presbyter John, of whom Papias speaks. The persons who speak thus were in any case the depositaries in whose hands the apostle had placed his work and who had received from him the charge to publish it at a suitable time. It was in the discharge of this commission that they added, no doubt, the appendix of ch. 21, and then they affixed to it the attestation of Joh 21:24. Perhaps it was rendered necessary in their view by the striking differences which existed between the history of John and the Synoptic narratives which were already spread abroad in the Church.

Does Joh 21:25 come from the same plurality of witnesses? Three indications prevent us from thinking so:

1. The grammatical and syntactic form is more complicated than that of Joh 21:24;

2. The singular , I think, forms a contrast with the plural , we know.

Finally, 3. The exaggeration, not without emphasis, which characterizes this verse is in contrast with the simple gravity of Joh 21:24.

On the other hand, we have no right to conclude from this that this verse was interpolated at a time posterior to the publication, as Meyer and Tischendorf think. True, theSinaitic MS. omits it, but this MS. is alone in this case, and we know how it abounds in omissions and inaccuracies. We may suppose, moreover, an intentional omission occasioned by the strange hyberbole which distinguishes this verse. As it is wanting nowhere else, it is probable that, as in Joh 21:24, it was added to the Gospel at the time of its publication. It is probably a personal addition proceeding from that one of the friends of John, who, in company with all his associates, had drawn up the 24th verse. He afterwards added, of his own impulse, Joh 21:25. Hence the change from the first person plural to the first person singular, a thing which proves his good faith. Hence also may come, perhaps, the difference of style between these two verses. The tone of the latter is not without some resemblance to that of the emphatic descriptions of Papias, in his picture of the millennial reign, or in his story of the death of Judas, and one might be tempted to find in the aged bishop of Hierapolis the subject of the verb: I think.Herein may be the truth pertaining to that strange note in the manuscript of the Vatican which we quoted just now, according to which Papias was the secretary of John in the redaction of his Gospel. In any case, the author of this verse means to say that, if this Gospel is all of it the truth (Joh 21:24), it is not the whole truth. And in speaking thus, the object of his enthusiasm is evidently not the apostle and his writing, but the Master and His work. A complete evangelic narrative is, in his view, a task which cannot be realized by reason of the boundlessness of its subject. He expresses this just and profound sentiment by means of a somewhat strange Oriental hyperbole, such as we find constantly in the letters of Ignatius, but taking care to weaken it by the words: I think. It is, indeed, that the infinite inevitably goes beyond the finite, and that the category of the spirit is always absolutely superior to that of space. Let writings be added to writings to describe the glory of the only begotten Son of God, full of grace and truth, one of two things must follow: either this series of writings will not exhaust the subject, or, if they exhaust it, they will not be contained in the world!

From this study of the twenty-first chapter we conclude: 1. That the story, Joh 21:1-23, comes, if not from the hand, at least from the oral narration of the author of the Gospel; 2. That Joh 21:24 is an attestation emanating from the friends who surrounded him and who, after having called forth the composition of his work, had received it from him in trust to publish it at the fitting time; 3. That Joh 21:25 proceeds from the hand of the one among them who had drawn up the postscript, Joh 21:24, in the name of all; 4. That the addition of this solemn attestation (Joh 21:24-25) was made, also, during the lifetime of the apostle.

After this, it only remains to hold: either that John is the author and the redactor of our Gospel, as those who publish it testify, or that the anonymous author who composed it in the second century (after having presented himself to the world in this narrative with all the characteristics of the apostle) has carried his shamelessness so far as to cause to be given out by an accomplice of his fraud, or ratherfor to such a man nothing is impossiblehas himself given out, as if in the name of one or several of John’s friends, a certificate of his identity with the apostle. If any one is willing to accept such a story, let him accept it. In our view, it contains its own refutation.

The work, the study of which we are closing, traces out the realization of an ideal which, as we have more than once observed, in order to be described must have been beheld, and in order to have been beheld, must have been lived. It is not an abstract description, like a character of La Bruye:re; it is a concrete picture, detailed, abounding in positive and precise facts, as well as in sayings original and full of appropriatenessa true human life which is like the transparency through which the divine life shines even upon us.Every sincere heart will always feel itself as incapable of denying this ideal as it is powerless to create it.

ADDITIONAL NOTES BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR.

Vv. 24, 25. It is worthy of notice that the most full and complete designation of the disciple who is nowhere mentioned by name in this Gospel is given in this place, and this is immediately followed by the words, This is the disciple who wrote, etc. We have, therefore, in this verse the strongest affirmation that this disciple is the writer of the book. If the contrast in the tenses of the two participles and , which Godet presses, is to be insisted upon, the evidence of the sentence is very strong that the author of the Gospel was still living when this verse was written. It will follow from this understanding of the words, also, that the verse was either written by the author himself, designating himself by the use of the third person as in other places, or by contemporaries who could say of his testimony, We know that it is true. Weiss, however, claims that determines nothing as to this question, and Westcott says that it may not determine the point. The position of Westcott may be admitted.

But the passage Joh 1:15, to which both of these writers appealJohn bears witness () and has cried (), saying, etc.is hardly altogether parallel. The perfect in that passage may, not improbably, be used in the sense of the present (see Meyer on that verse), and the propositional present form is adapted to the character of the statements in the Prologue. Here, however, there is a natural contrast, as in Joh 19:35 between and , and if there were a reference to a permanent testimony in the book, it would more naturally be set forth either by putting the expression in such a form as to declare it distinctly, or at least by placing the participle which speaks of testimony after (instead of before) that which speaks of the preparation of the book.

That the disciple whom Jesus loved was the author of this Gospel is proved without this passage, as we have seen. This passage only adds, at the most, a definite and distinct declaration of what is contained elsewhere in incidental references or statements, and is suggested, above all, by the manifold evidence of his personality and his remembered experience, which we find throughout the entire history which is presented before us.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

Joh 21:24 f. Conclusion of the Appendix.In Joh 21:24 the disciple to whom this saying was addressed is said to be the witness of the events recorded in the gospel, and its actual author. The content of the gospel is his, even if he did not actually hold the pen, any more than Pilate actually penned the title on the Cross. Perhaps the solution of the question as to the authorship of the Fourth Gospel which leaves fewest difficulties is that it is the Beloved Disciple, probably to be identified with the son of Zebedee, whose teaching is set out in this gospel, the actual writer, whose thought and style have been moulded by his masters teaching, being the author of the Appendix as of the epistles. The we of this verse may be the circle to which the writer belongs, or if he himself had seen the Lord on earth, it may correspond to the use of the plural in the Prologue, the natural interpretation of which is that the writer speaks in the name of his former companions, the eye-witnesses of the ministry. But we cannot get beyond conjecture. The question of authorship is still an unsolved problem (pp. 743f.). The last verse, which is omitted by the first hand of one important MS., repeats the warning of the real ending of the gospel, that it contains only a selection from a whole too vast to be recorded.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

21:24 {5} This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

(5) The history of Christ is truly and cautiously written: not for the curiosity of men, but for the salvation of the godly.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

C. The writer’s postscript 21:24-25

Some commentators refer to this ending as a colophon. A colophon is the finishing stroke and crowning touch to a document. It is an inscription placed at the end of a book or manuscript that contains basic information about it such as the title, writer’s name, and date and place of writing. However, it is more similar to a postscript because it contains only hints of the writer’s identity. Mainly it claims that this Gospel is a reliable though limited record of Jesus’ actions.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Most careful students of this Gospel have deduced from this and other oblique references in the book that the Apostle John is the writer in view. This description of the writer stresses the reliability of his witness. [Note: See Thomas D. Lea, "The Reliability of History in John’s Gospel," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 38:3 (September 1996):387-402.] "These things" probably refers to the whole Gospel, not just what immediately precedes. The statement is general, and it occurs at the end of the book.

The identity of the "we" is less clear. They could be writers who recorded John’s verbal witness as he dictated the material in this Gospel to them. They could be editors of the Gospel. Some scholars view these people as the elders of the Ephesian church where John traditionally served late in his life. [Note: E.g., Westcott, The Gospel . . . Greek Text . . ., 2:374.] Others believe that they were influential men in his church though not necessarily in Ephesus. [Note: E.g., Bultmann, pp. 717-18.] Another view is that this is an indefinite reference similar to "as is well known." [Note: C. H. Dodd, "Note on John 21, 24," Journal of Theological Studies NS4 (1953):212-13.] Probably John himself wrote this statement in the plural, as authoritative people sometimes do. It would then be an editorial "we" (cf. Joh 1:14; Joh 3:2; Joh 3:11; Joh 20:2; 1Jn 1:2; 1Jn 1:4-7; 3Jn 1:12). Since the next verse returns to the first person, this option seems most probable to me.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles