Historical Reliability Of John's Gospel Book Review
The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel Book Review
Summary:
It is felt that some readers would encounter difficulty in comprehending some of the material. Unless the author’s target audience is bible scholars or students of Seminary College, better word choices could have been used to attract a broader audience. With that being said, the book asks or suggests that readers should be convinced that either John was or was not the author of the Gospel of John. If one thinks about it, does it really matter if John was the author? The answer lies within each reader’s belief system based on his or her knowledge and understanding of the word of GOD (The King James Version, New King James Version, etc.) as well as other documented evidences such as this book. The author’s account, for the most part, is merely his …show more content…
Was Blomberg’s accounts and interpretations of other critics an exercise in adding to the debate as to John’s significance to the life of Christ? It could be that all this author is presenting a parallel to the facts as well as myths as to why certain accounts were left out of the Bible or did not follow a sequential process as it has been suggested for other books of the Bible. It is noteworthy to state that unless the critics had an opportunity to witness for themselves what really took place (and we know that would be impossible since the suggested accounts took place more than 2000 years ago) no one really, truly knows. All we are left with is whether or not we accept what others, including Blomberg, has so carefully presented as evidence of who John was and whether or not he had enough of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ to have left us with the accounts as illustrated in versions of the Holy Bible, other books, journals, articles as well as The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel. Based on what viewers believe or choose to believe, one walks
Summary:
It is felt that some readers would encounter difficulty in comprehending some of the material. Unless the author’s target audience is bible scholars or students of Seminary College, better word choices could have been used to attract a broader audience. With that being said, the book asks or suggests that readers should be convinced that either John was or was not the author of the Gospel of John. If one thinks about it, does it really matter if John was the author? The answer lies within each reader’s belief system based on his or her knowledge and understanding of the word of GOD (The King James Version, New King James Version, etc.) as well as other documented evidences such as this book. The author’s account, for the most part, is merely his …show more content…
Was Blomberg’s accounts and interpretations of other critics an exercise in adding to the debate as to John’s significance to the life of Christ? It could be that all this author is presenting a parallel to the facts as well as myths as to why certain accounts were left out of the Bible or did not follow a sequential process as it has been suggested for other books of the Bible. It is noteworthy to state that unless the critics had an opportunity to witness for themselves what really took place (and we know that would be impossible since the suggested accounts took place more than 2000 years ago) no one really, truly knows. All we are left with is whether or not we accept what others, including Blomberg, has so carefully presented as evidence of who John was and whether or not he had enough of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ to have left us with the accounts as illustrated in versions of the Holy Bible, other books, journals, articles as well as The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel. Based on what viewers believe or choose to believe, one walks