The last sixty years have witnessed quite different results on the topic of the reception of the Fourth Gospel in the second century. It is however at hand to notice that these significantly differing results are indebted to the dissimilar methodological approaches assumed by each scholar. The main aim of this paper is to reassess methodologically the bibliography on the reception of John in the second century. Given that we are far from having a consensus on the question of how to seek for John in the earliest Christian texts, some concluding considerations are offered on future possible development of the topic.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarrettC.K.1982 [1978]The Gospel According to St John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text (London: SPCK).
2.
BatoviciD.2009 ‘The Oxford Conference on the Synoptic Problem’, CBR7.2: 245-271
3.
van BelleG1994The Signs Source in the Fourth Gospel: A Historical Survey and Critical Evaluation of the Semeia Hypothesis (BETL, 116; Leuven: Leuven University Press).
4.
BellinzoniA.J.2005 ‘The Gospel of Luke in the Apostolic Fathers: An Overview’, in GregoryTuckett (eds.) 2005c: 45-68.
5.
BraunF.-M.1959Jean le Théologien et son Évangile dans l’Église Ancienne (Paris: Gabalda).
6.
ClaussenC.2005 ‘The Eucharist in the Gospel of John and in the Didache’, in GregoryTuckett (eds.) 2005c: 135-63.
7.
CzacheszI.2010 ‘The Gospel of the Acts of John: Its Relation to the Fourth Gospel’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 49-72.
8.
DraperJ.A.2006 ‘The Apostolic Fathers: The Didache’, ExpTim117: 177-81.
FosterP.2005 ‘The Epistles of Ignatius of Antioch and the Writings that Later Formed the New Testament’, in GregoryTuckett (eds.) 2005b: 159-860.
11.
FosterP.2006 ‘The Epistle to Diognetus’, ExpTim118: 162-68.
12.
GoodacreM.2007 [2001]The Synoptic Problem: A Way through the Maze (London and New York: Sheffield Academic Press).
13.
GregoryA.2003The Reception of Luke and Acts in the Period before Irineus: Looking for Luke in the Second Century (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
14.
GregoryA.2006 ‘1 Clement: An Introduction’, ExpTim117: 223-30.
15.
GregoryA.TuckettC.2005a ‘Reflections on Method: What Constitutes the Use of the Writings that Later Formed the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers?’, in GregorTuckett (eds.) 2005b: 61-82.
16.
GregoryA.TuckettC. (eds.) 2005bThe Reception of the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
17.
GregoryA.TuckettC. (eds.) 2005cTrajectories through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
18.
HakolaR.2010 ‘The Reception and Development of the Johannine Tradition in 1, 2 and 3 John’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 17-47.
19.
HeadP.M.2011 ‘Textual Criticism and the Synoptic Problem’, in Foster. (eds.), New Studies in the Synoptic Problem. Oxford Conference, April 2008. Essays in honour of Christopher M. Tuckett (BETL 239; Leuven, Paris and Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2011): 115-156.
20.
HillC.E.2004The Johannine Corpus in the Early Church (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
21.
HillC.E.2010 ‘“The Orthodox Gospel”: The Reception of John in the Great Church Prior to Irenaeus’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 233-300.
22.
HillmerM.R.1966The Gospel of John in the Second Century (ThD dissertation, Harvard University).
23.
HolmesM.W.2005a ‘Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians and the Writings that Later Formed the New Testament’, in GregoryTuckett2005b: 187-227.
24.
HolmesM.W.2005b ‘TheMartyrdom of Polycarpand the New Testament Passion Narratives’, in GregoryTuckett2005c: 407-432.
25.
HolmesM.W. (ed.) 2007The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 3rd edn).
26.
de JongeH.J.1978 ‘On the Origin of the TermApostolic Fathers’, JTS29: 503-505.
27.
KaestliJ.-D.PoffetJ.-M.ZumsteinJ. (eds.) 1990La communauté johannique et son Histoire: La trajectoire de l’évangile de Jean aux deux premiers siècles (Paris: Labor et Fides).
28.
KeeferK.2006The Branches of the Gospels of John: The Reception of the Fourth Gospel in the Early Church (JSNTSup, 332; London and New York: T & T Clark International).
29.
KiefferR.1992 ‘Les premiers indices d’une réception de l’évangile de saint Jean’, in Segbroeck. 1992: III, 2225-38.
30.
KoesterH.1994 ‘Written Gospels or Oral Tradition’, JBL113: 293-97.
31.
KöhlerW.-D.1987Die Rezeption des Matthäusevangeliums in der Zeit vor Irenäus (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr).
32.
KösterH.1957Synoptische Überlieferung bei den Apostolischen Vätern (TU, 65; Berlin: Akademie Verlag).
33.
MassauxE.1986 [1950]Influence de l’Évangile de Saint Matthieu sur la littérature chrétienne avant Saint Irénée (Leuven: Leuven University Press, facsimile edn).
34.
MetzgerB.M.1994 [1971]A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft).
35.
MeyerM.2010 ‘Whom Did Jesus Lost Most?Beloved Disciples in John and Other Gospels’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 73-91.
36.
MutschlerB.2004Irenäus als johanneischer Theologe: Studien zur Schriftauslegung bei Irenäus von Lyon (Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum, 21; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
37.
MutschlerB.2010 ‘John and his Gospel in the Mirror of Irenaeus of Lyons: Perspectives of Recent Research’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 319-43.
38.
NagelT.2000Die Rezeption des Johannesevangeliums im 2. Jahrhundert: Studien zur vorirenaischen Aneignung und Auslegung des vierten Evangeliums im christlicher und christlich-gnostischer Literatur (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt).
39.
NongbriB.2005 ‘The Use and Abuse of P52: Papyrological Pitfalls in the Dating of the Fourth Gospel’, HTR99: 23-48.
40.
NorthW.E.S.2001The Lazarus Story within the Johannine Tradition (JSNTSup, 212; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press).
41.
OsiekC.1999The Shepherd of Hermas: A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress Press).
42.
ParvisS.2006 ‘The Martyrdom of Polycarp’, ExpTim118: 105-12.
43.
PasquierA.2010 ‘Influence and Interpretation of the Gospel of John in Ancient Christianity: The Example ofEugnostos (NHC III,3 and V,1)’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 211-31.
44.
PeabodyD.B.1987Mark as Composer (New Gospel Studies, 1; Macon, GA: Mercer University Press).
45.
PerrinN.2010 ‘The Diatessaron and the Second-Century Reception of the Gospel of John’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 301-18.
46.
PetersenW.L.2005 ‘Textual Traditions Examined: What the Text of the Apostolic Fathers Tells us about the Text of the New Testament in the Second Century’, in GregoryTuckett (eds.) 2005b: 29-46.
47.
PoffetJ.-M.1990 ‘Indices de réception de l’Évangile de Jean au IIe siècle, avant Irénée’, in Kaestli. (eds.) 1990: 305-21.
48.
PoirierP.-H.2010 ‘The Trimorphic Protennoia (NHC XIII,1) and the Johannine Prologue: A Reconsideration’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 93-103.
49.
PollardT.E.1970Johannine Christology and the Early Church (SNTSMS, 13; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
50.
PryorJ.W.1992 ‘Justin Martyr and the Fourth Gospel’, The Second Century9: 153-69.
51.
RasimusT.2010a ‘Ptolemaeus and the Valentinian Exegesis of John’s Prologue’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 145-71.
52.
RasimusT. (ed.) 2010bThe Legacy of John: Second-Century Reception of the Fourth Gospel (Leiden and Boston: Brill).
53.
RöhlW.G.1991Die Rezeption des Johannesevangeliums in christlich-gnostischen Schriften aus Nag Hammadi (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 23/428; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang).
54.
SandersJ.N.1943The Fourth Gospel in the Early Church: Its Origin and Influence on Christian Theology up to Irenaeus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
55.
SegbroeckFrans van. 1992The Four Gospels 1992: Festschrift Franz Neyrink, III (Leuven: Leuven University Press).
56.
SeimT.K.2010 ‘Johannine Echoes in Early Montanism’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 345-64.
57.
ThomassenE.2010 ‘Heracleon’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 173-210.
58.
TurnerJ.D.2010 ‘The Johannine Legacy: The Gospel and Apocryphon of John’, in Rasimus (ed.) 2010b: 105-44.
59.
VerheydenJ.2005 ‘The Shepherd of Hermas and the Writings that Later Formed the New Testament’, in GregoryTuckett (eds.) 2005b: 293-329.
