Adam

Relax, that's a trick title, but examining Vridar's analysis of Jesus walking on the water in Mark 6:45-53 exposes that gospel's version as not from an eyewitness. Comparision with John 6:16-21, however, reveals that the latter meets all his specifications for what could pass as an eyewitness account.

. From his blog:
Godfrey argues that all the italicized phrases above could not have come from a disciple as a claimed eyewitness, but would have had to be filled in from someone else or fabricated. But none of the italicized phrases appear in the comparable John 6:16-21 verses, so Godfrey's analysis leads to the conclusion that the underlying source is close to what we see now in gJohn.

Godfrey himself would not deny this possibility:

JonA

Huh?

Solo

Forget it, Adam. It is fashionable in the apologetic circles to argue John did not know Mark and therefore count him as an independent witness of the stories which have synoptic counterpart. In this resue operation, however, John directly quotes Jesus' punch line of Mark : "It is I, do not be afraid". ("Ego eimi" being otherwise John's signature, in Jesus self-declarations)". The only other interesting observation to be made here is that John transparently wants to argue with Mark as to the intended vs. achieved destination of the passage. Mark, lampooning the superstitious, miracle-mongering disciples lets the boat, originally aiming for Bethsaida on Jesus orders (Mk 6:45), land at Gennesaret with Jesus on board (Mk 6:53). This was evidently too much of an insult to John's sense of Jesus being in control at all times.

Best,
Jiri

Adam

Forget what, Jiri?
I never said that there were two independent accounts of Jesus walking on the water, but that there was one underlying source that is better preserved for us in John 6:16-21. I said that that original account gave only information from the perspective of an eyewitness. As occurs so often in the gospels, Jesus's words are preserved more exactly than the narrative details. In John the destination is Capernaum, which is near to Gennesaret.
As so often happens in Mark, the geography is not good, because Bethsaida as a destination is four miles away from Capernaum. Here again, John looks more accurate, more true to the original.

outhouse

godfrey is wrong. or your misinterpretation of his work


some oral tradition in small segments may be old, and new parts are being discovered through scholarship.


but no one at all doubts the 3 different unknown author's or unknown groups of authors from a johanine community over a long period of time

Toto

Please name the scholars you rely on, especially any who claim there is no doubt of 3 different authors...

Solo

I don't think so, Adam. For one, Mark was not as clueless about Galilean geography as you suppose. You are dealing with someone who puts into Jesus' mouth an eleventh commandment. But even if he wasn't clear about where the places really were, the boat landed off the planned destination - which was evidently intended by Mark. The fact that John argues with Mark - why would he need to assure his readers that the boat ended at its destination: wasn't Jesus in command ? - itself speaks volumes of the theological underpinnings of the story.

Best,
Jiri

outhouse

facepalm, dude seriously this is common knowledge

hows about

Brown
Bultmann
Ehrman

and many more, the majority of scholars claim this

Toto

Please write in complete sentences. What exactly is common knowledge? By three different authors do you mean three different authors of John or three different gospel authors? What new information is being discovered through which scholarship?

outhouse

they are finding older sources in some information within the gospel that does contain some historicity, as apposed to some scholars that claimed there was no historicity within it and all newer information.

John's Gospel. wiki

A prominent example is the archaeological discovery of the pool of Siloam in Jerusalem in 2004—a discovery that in a small way undermines much of the criticism leveled at John during the 20th century. Recent evidences such as the pool and a turn away from the vestiges of positivism as evidenced by the growing number of books addressing the historicity of John reveal that the final word has not been said on how much of the historical Jesus inhabits John's gospel.





3 authors or groups of authors


Gjohn