Scholars have long argued that the Gospel of John -- named after Jesus' disciple John the Son of Zebedee -- was in fact written by someone else. Only later in Christian tradition was it ascribed to John. In that view, the author himself is not a "forger" -- that is, he did not claim to be a famous person knowing he was someone else. The book was *anonymous*: the author never names himself and so can't be blamed for later readers mistaking his identity. But in fact *is* there evidence that the author wanted his readers to think he was one of Jesus' closest disciples, and that he left hints for them in the book. If so -- and if he wasn't who he intimated he was -- isn't John a forgery?
Fler avsnitt av Misquoting Jesus with Bart Ehrman
Visa alla avsnitt av Misquoting Jesus with Bart EhrmanMisquoting Jesus with Bart Ehrman med Bart Ehrman finns tillgänglig på flera plattformar. Informationen på denna sida kommer från offentliga podd-flöden.
