Name P. Bodmer II Text John 1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26,29–30; 15:2–26; 16:2–4,6-7; 16:10–20:20,22–23; 20:25–21:9,12,17 Date 110-150 C.E. Found Jabal Abu Mana, Egypt Now at Bodmer Library, Geneva Textual Character According to recent studies done by Berner and Comfort,2 it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector (diorthōtēs), and a minor corrector. Size 39 folios; 14.2×16.2 cm; 15-25 lines per page Type Free; scribe+major&minor editors Category I Note very close to P75, B, 0162

Many readers of the Gospel of John have wondered about the abruptness of the final verses in chapter 20, which end on what appears to be a concluding note. Immediately afterward, a new chapter begins in John 21, describing another appearance of Jesus and containing additional information that carries the narrative farther. Over the centuries, some have argued that John 21 must be a later appendage by a different author, suggesting that John 20:31 was the original ending of the Gospel. Others maintain that John 21 was always part of the Gospel, composed by the same writer, or added by John himself shortly before publication. Within conservative scholarship, the prevailing conclusion is that John 21 belongs to the same hand that penned the rest of the Gospel, and that no serious historical or textual grounds exist to deem it an interpolation.

The discussion centers on whether John 20:31 truly closes the Gospel and whether the references in John 21:24-25, which shift to a third-person perspective, indicate an author distinct from the apostle John. Some have also pointed to subtle variations in style, or the mention of “we know that his testimony is true,” as signals that an editor or different writer composed this epilogue. Yet the style of John 21 fits consistently with the rest of the Gospel, and the textual transmission from the earliest manuscript evidence shows uniformity. There is no surviving manuscript that omits John 21. Even patristic writers who refer to the concluding verse of John 20 do not suggest that John 21 was missing from any copy they used. Modern readers can therefore be confident that John 21 is genuinely Johannine and that the Fourth Gospel was preserved with its final chapter included from the beginning. (John 21:1)

The burden rests on those who claim a later addition to demonstrate that John 21 circulated independently, or that a distinct text of John’s Gospel without this chapter was once in wide distribution. The weight of external and internal evidence, however, indicates otherwise. The earliest church recognized the presence of this chapter, and the style of these verses aligns with the signature features of Johannine writing seen in the rest of the Gospel. John 21 also plays a crucial role in highlighting Peter’s threefold commission, the beloved disciple’s presence, and the reaffirmation of Jesus’ resurrection appearances in Galilee. This concluding chapter underscores that Jesus’ works were numerous enough to fill far more volumes than the world could hold. (John 21:25)

The question, then, is: Was John 21 a genuine component of John’s Gospel from the start, or was it added later by another hand? The following discussion will focus on both internal considerations (style, vocabulary, thematic consistency) and external considerations (manuscript tradition and patristic statements), concluding that there is no sound basis for excising John 21 or assigning it to someone other than the apostle John. The text stands as an authentic continuation, completing the portrait of the resurrected Christ and the mission entrusted to his followers. The Holy Spirit inspired John—using his own vocabulary, grammar, and expression—to pen the entire Gospel, culminating with the final chapter of the book. (2 Timothy 3:16)

The Textual Context of John 21

In the concluding verse of John 20, the evangelist states: “But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:31) This sentence could indeed function as a robust conclusion. Some individuals have suggested that what follows was appended at a later time, because John 21 opens with the phrase “After this Jesus manifested himself again” (John 21:1), creating a new scene. Arguments for a later addition at times rest on a notion that John could not have written both a formal conclusion and an appended epilogue. However, biblical authors in both Old and New Testaments sometimes weave multiple conclusions or expansions into their works, without necessitating a change in authorship.

The final chapter describes a post-resurrection appearance by the Sea of Tiberias, also known as the Sea of Galilee, which it calls “the third time Jesus was manifested to the disciples.” (John 21:14) It highlights a miraculous catch of fish, the threefold directive from Jesus to Peter to feed his sheep, and a prophecy about Peter’s future. The beloved disciple, often understood to be John the apostle, also appears, and Jesus indicates that this disciple might endure longer than Peter, though without promising he would remain until the conclusion of the present age. (John 21:22-23) The text then ends with an affirmation that the beloved disciple is the one who testifies to these events, along with a note that if everything Jesus did were written in detail, the world itself would not be able to contain all the books. (John 21:24-25)

The uniform witness of Greek manuscripts testifies to the presence of John 21. Even the earliest papyri that preserve portions of this chapter show that it was integral to the Gospel. Papyrus 66 (about 150 C.E.) includes verses from John 21 (specifically 1-9, 12, 17). Papyrus 109 (110-150 C.E.) holds verses 18-20 and 23-25. Codex Vaticanus (325-350 C.E.) and Codex Sinaiticus (330-360 C.E.) contain the full text without a break. Additional manuscripts such as Papyrus 122 (300-325 C.E.), Codex Bezae (circa 400 C.E.), Codex Alexandrinus (400-440 C.E.), and Papyrus 59 (7th century) all testify to John 21. There is no lacuna or textual tradition that lacks it, nor any marginal note in surviving manuscripts suggesting that it was considered a later addition. This overwhelming testimony of ancient copies, from papyri to vellum codices, tells us that John 21 was present from the earliest recoverable period.

The Alleged Conclusion at John 20:31

John 20:30-31 reads: “Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” Some textual critics and commentators note that this passage serves as a perfect summation of the stated purpose for the Gospel. The mention that “Jesus did many other signs” apparently aligns with John’s typical formula for concluding an argument or theme.

Yet biblical authors often present a closing summary, only to add further material that is complementary or epilogical. John 20:31 offers a theological purpose statement, clarifying why the Gospel includes certain signs and teachings. However, the Gospel may continue to record additional events that happen after Jesus’ resurrection, especially since John 20 focuses on appearances to the disciples in Jerusalem. It is quite plausible that John desired to incorporate the Galilean appearance of chapter 21, together with the Lord’s exchange with Peter. There is no principle in writing that forbids an author from giving a summative statement before adding an appendix or a final highlight.

An example in biblical literature can be seen in Ecclesiastes, where one might argue that certain statements act as conclusive words, yet the text continues with more reflection. Another instance is the Book of Numbers, which closes some legislative sections only to introduce further regulations. These are not uncommon literary moves. Therefore, reading John 20:31 as an indisputable sign that no additional content could follow is unwarranted. It is consistent with the author’s style to include theological commentary and then to shift the scene to another vital narrative. (John 21:1)

Third-Person References in John 21

John 21:24 states: “This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true.” Those who question Johannine authorship note that the verse moves from first-person or direct discourse to a collective “we.” This shift, they claim, shows that an editorial committee or group appended the final chapter, vouching for John’s reliability. On the surface, such reasoning might appear persuasive, yet the presence of such a shift does not demand a separate author.

In the ancient world, authors sometimes referred to themselves in the third person for stylistic reasons. John’s Gospel even includes references to “the disciple whom Jesus loved” in earlier chapters, without naming him directly as John. Some interpret the phrase “we know that his testimony is true” as a modest means for John, or a close circle around him, to confirm that the witness is indeed valid. It may be a rhetorical flourish. John 20:31 uses the singular first-person perspective to highlight the reason for writing, whereas John 21:24 shifts into a more communal tone, possibly to link the beloved disciple’s testimony with the broader Christian community that received and recognized it. This rhetorical device does not require that an entirely different hand penned the material.

Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black note that interpreting the “we” of John 21:24 as a group of church leaders endorsing the testimony may be possible, but there is no strong evidence that an external “school of John” wrote chapter 21 after John’s death. Another option is that the disciple is expressing his testimony in a way that underscores its trustworthiness. The apostle Paul, for instance, occasionally interjects “I, Paul, say” within letters recognized as his own, which is not the same phenomenon but demonstrates the range of stylistic approaches a biblical writer may adopt without surrendering the pen to someone else. (2 Thessalonians 3:17)

Moreover, no early Christian source claims that John’s Gospel ended at chapter 20. Tertullian (160-220 C.E.) references the conclusion of the Gospel at John 20:31, but he does not state that chapter 21 did not exist. He simply highlights the strong final statement of purpose in John 20. If Tertullian or other early church fathers had known of any manuscript lacking chapter 21, they presumably would have mentioned it, because disputes over additions or omissions to canonical works were of considerable importance. Instead, the uniform tradition attests to John 21 being original.

Style and Vocabulary in John 21

Some scholars claim stylistic differences between John 21 and the preceding chapters, yet these variations are not nearly as pronounced or decisive as critics propose. The Greek vocabulary, syntax, and narrative flow remain consistent with the rest of the Gospel. The references to Jesus “manifesting himself” (John 21:1) align with his appearances in John 20:19-29. The term “manifested” is not unique to a separate hand; it is part of Johannine language. The mention of “the disciples” as a group around Jesus likewise continues from earlier contexts.

The theme of recognition or non-recognition that marks other resurrection appearances (such as Mary Magdalene not recognizing Jesus at first in John 20:14) recurs in John 21:4, where the disciples at first do not realize that the person calling to them from the shore is the resurrected Christ. The Christological focus on Jesus as the risen Lord, recognized through a miracle or direct revelation, also appears in John 20 (Thomas’ confession, “My Lord and my God!” in John 20:28). The continuity of thought is plain.

The presence of the beloved disciple in John 21:7, quickly identifying Jesus, echoes the intimate closeness portrayed in John 13:23-25 and John 19:26-27. That disciple’s acute perception and closeness to Jesus is a hallmark of the Fourth Gospel. Even the activity described—fishing on the Sea of Tiberias—echoes the Galilean setting that occurs earlier in John’s narrative, where Jesus conducts a portion of his ministry around the Sea of Galilee (also called Tiberias in John 6:1). Nothing within the language or setting of John 21 requires a foreign author. Its structure reads seamlessly as a conclusion to the post-resurrection events.

Admittedly, John 21:25 has a hyperbolic style—“And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books…” That rhetorical flourish, however, is consistent with John’s approach in John 20:30, where he speaks of Jesus doing many other signs not recorded in the Gospel. Such hyperbole appears elsewhere in Scripture to emphasize the vastness of God’s works (compare John 20:30). The style is not a foreign intrusion but a continuation of John’s expressive manner.

Manuscript Evidence for John 21

The earliest manuscript evidence is unequivocal in its inclusion of John 21. Papyrus 66, dated around 150 C.E., preserves portions of this final chapter (verses 1-9, 12, 17). Papyrus 109, possibly as early as 110 C.E. or slightly later, also includes verses 18-20 and 23-25, reinforcing that the last verses were in circulation quite early. Codex Vaticanus (325-350 C.E.) and Codex Sinaiticus (330-360 C.E.) contain all twenty-one chapters continuously, with no suggestion of an abrupt ending at chapter 20 or a separate treatise for John 21. Papyrus 122 (300-325 C.E.) has verses 11-14 and 22-24, and later manuscripts like Codex Bezae (circa 400 C.E.), Codex Alexandrinus (400-440 C.E.), and Papyrus 59 (7th century) carry the same text.

Manuscript support for John 21 is as comprehensive as for any other portion of John’s Gospel. Whenever a fragment covers the relevant portion, it attests to the final chapter. There is no known variant reading or scribal note indicating that John 21 was contested in antiquity. If it had been widely questioned, one might expect marginal commentaries or references in church writings to an alternate ending, much as we see with Mark 16:9-20 in some manuscripts. Yet no such evidence exists for John 21.

Though textual critics have discussed possible editorial layers within the Gospel of John, the extant manuscript tradition exhibits a unified text. Even slight variations in spelling or minor word order do not point to the absence of the entire chapter. This consistent witness underscores that if John 21 were truly absent in the earliest forms of the Gospel, we would expect to find some manuscripts lacking it or at least some patristic note of its non-inclusion. Since that is not the case, one can conclude that John 21 was present from the beginning.

Early Christian Awareness of John 21

Early Christian writers quote or paraphrase from various portions of John’s Gospel, including the final chapter. Eusebius of Caesarea (circa 260-339 C.E.) catalogs the recognized canonical works in his Ecclesiastical History without any mention of an incomplete version of John. Church fathers such as Clement of Alexandria (circa 150-215 C.E.) and Origen (circa 184-253 C.E.) reference John extensively. Although direct citations of John 21 by these fathers may be less frequent than references to other sections, they never indicate that the Gospel ended at chapter 20. For an addition of such magnitude to be accepted across the entire Christian realm in the second and third centuries, with no recorded controversy, would be extraordinary and contrary to what we know of early church debates.

Writers like Tertullian, who lived between 160 and 220 C.E., comment on the powerful statement in John 20:31 but do not say that the Gospel ended there. He draws on that verse to emphasize the purpose of the Gospel, using it apologetically. In a time when the canon was forming, any suspicion of a late insertion of an entire chapter would likely have led to some remark in the extant works. Yet the uniform acceptance of John’s Gospel as we have it stands out.

If, hypothetically, the Gospel circulated for decades in a form ending at John 20, and only later gained an entire additional chapter, we would expect at least a handful of manuscripts or a patristic complaint about the “new ending.” Instead, the entire textual tradition, from Egyptian papyri to major codices, testifies that the Gospel’s final shape includes chapter 21. That widespread agreement aligns best with the conclusion that John 21 was present from the earliest distribution of the text.

The Nature of a Johannine Epilogue

John’s Gospel is known for its unique structure and style compared to the Synoptic Gospels. While Matthew, Mark, and Luke share many parallel passages, John’s Gospel takes a different path, focusing on fewer miracles that are called “signs” and containing extensive theological discourses by Jesus. John often uses a technique of revelation followed by reflection, culminating in a deeper understanding of who Jesus is. Chapter 21 fits this pattern because it offers a reflective postscript to the resurrection narratives in chapter 20.

An epilogue does not negate the authorship or authenticity of the rest of the text. Such an addition could have been composed by John shortly after concluding the main body, before final publication. Some scholars, including the notable B. F. Westcott of earlier generations, suggested that John completed the main text, and then later (but not too long after) appended chapter 21, perhaps because he realized he wanted to document another resurrection appearance in Galilee that had significant implications for the community of believers, especially concerning Peter’s role. Once finished, the entire Gospel was published and distributed with the final chapter included. That scenario supports the uniformity of the manuscript tradition.

John 21 has sometimes been called an “epilogue” or “appendix,” yet that is simply a literary description, not a statement of authorship. Epilogues in antiquity were commonly attached by the main writer. They could serve to finalize a narrative, clarify a specific point, or address a particular concern. In John 21, the concern seems to involve Peter’s reinstatement after his earlier denial (John 18:25-27), the calling for him to shepherd Christ’s people (John 21:15-17), and the mention of the beloved disciple’s unique role (John 21:20-23). The transition from chapter 20’s climatic statements about belief in Jesus as the Son of God, to a final anecdote about the disciples’ experience in Galilee, is characteristic of a concluding reflection.

The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple

One question often posed is why the disciple John would repeatedly refer to himself as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” rather than using the first person. That question extends to the final chapter, where the beloved disciple identifies Jesus on the shore. (John 21:7) Some suggest that this is an example of humility or wonder that the apostle would highlight Jesus’ love, rather than naming himself. The identity of the beloved disciple is a longstanding debate, but conservative scholars generally affirm he is John the apostle, son of Zebedee, who also wrote Revelation and three epistles.

The phrase in John 21:24, “This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things,” asserts that the beloved disciple is the primary author of the Gospel. The third-person reference, “and we know that his testimony is true,” need not be from a different writer. The possibility exists that John used an editorial style or that a group of believers associated with John affirmed the reliability of his account in a single final statement. The content of John 21:24 remains consistent with the voice of the beloved disciple as the primary witness, not a separate figure rewriting or extending the Gospel.

Jesus’ statement about the beloved disciple, “If I will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?” (John 21:22), is sometimes read as a rumor or misinterpretation among the early Christians that the disciple would not die. John 21:23 clarifies that Jesus did not affirm the disciple would remain forever, only that it was not Peter’s concern. The mention of this rumor suggests a final editorial note explaining the beloved disciple’s status. It is understandable that if John was advanced in years and still living, some may have speculated about the meaning of Jesus’ words. Thus, John 21 addresses that misunderstanding. This explanation does not require an author other than John; it could be that John saw the need to clarify the rumor regarding his own longevity before sending out the completed Gospel.

The Miraculous Catch of Fish and Continuation of Johannine Themes

John’s Gospel repeatedly highlights the theme of new recognition of Jesus after the resurrection, from Mary Magdalene’s initial blindness in John 20:14-16 to Thomas’ confession in John 20:28. John 21 continues in the same vein: the disciples initially do not recognize the figure calling to them from the shore, but at the sign of the large catch of fish, the beloved disciple declares, “It is the Lord!” (John 21:7) This recognition theme runs throughout the Gospel, marking significant spiritual insight. Similarly, in John 9:35-38, the formerly blind man comes to a deeper realization of Jesus’ identity.

Another parallel is John’s tendency to reveal Christ’s identity through signs, from turning water into wine (John 2:1-11) to raising Lazarus (John 11:38-44). In John 21, the large catch of 153 fish functions as a post-resurrection sign. The number 153 has drawn much discussion, but the focus is that the net, although full of large fish, did not break, and this miracle assured the disciples of Jesus’ presence and power. Such sign-oriented narrative is typically Johannine. If this were a later editorial expansion, one might expect the style or theological emphasis to diverge more distinctly from the rest of John’s Gospel.

The motif of feeding or nourishment also appears earlier, such as Jesus referring to himself as the bread of life in John 6:35, or offering living water in John 4:10-14. The final scene in John 21 shows Jesus preparing breakfast for the disciples, and then telling Peter three times to feed his sheep (John 21:15-17). This commission emphasizes spiritual nourishment, matching the broader theme of Jesus as the one who provides sustenance and life. There is no contradiction or shift in theology. It dovetails with the rest of the Johannine picture of Jesus’ identity and ministry.

Peter’s Restoration and Its Significance in John 21

The core event in John 21 is Jesus’ threefold query to Peter: “Do you love me?” (John 21:15-17) The Gospel that recorded Peter’s denial (John 18:15-18, 25-27) now shows Jesus entrusting Peter with pastoral responsibility: “Feed my lambs… Tend my sheep.” Peter’s transformation and reinstatement highlight forgiveness and renewed purpose. Rather than concluding at chapter 20 with Thomas’ confession, John’s Gospel includes the account of Peter’s restoration, balancing the earlier negative portrayal of his denial.

Readers note that the parallelism between Peter’s threefold denial (John 18:17, 25, 27) and the threefold affirmation here is so characteristic of John’s literary style, which frequently uses repetition for emphasis. The narrative strategy underscores that Peter’s love for Jesus is reaffirmed as Jesus commissions him. Critics have observed that the entire Gospel of John focuses on love (John 13:34-35, John 14:15, John 15:9-10), culminating in the beloved disciple’s presence. Thus, a concluding scene in which Jesus probes Peter’s love and commands him to shepherd others fits seamlessly within the overall message.

Had the Gospel ended without addressing Peter’s future role, some might question whether Peter’s denial permanently excluded him from leadership. The final chapter resolves that question, offering a redemptive resolution. This thematic coherence further supports that John 21 belongs with the rest of the narrative. A postscript added by a different writer might not so elegantly integrate the earlier theme of Peter’s failings with his reinstatement. The smooth alignment with John’s motif of love, forgiveness, and discipleship underscores that the same creative mind likely produced the entire account.

Addressing Modern Critical Theories

Modern scholarship sometimes posits that the Gospel of John went through layers of composition or editorial processes, with a so-called Johannine community shaping the text over time. Advocates of these theories might view John 21 as a final layer by disciples of John, compiled after his death. They hypothesize a “school of John” that curated various traditions, culminating in multiple editions of the Gospel. Raymond Brown, for example, proposed a complex editorial history for John, though he admitted that such reconstructions remain speculative.

The historical-grammatical approach recognizes that ancient authors could revise and refine their works but sees no compelling evidence that John 21 is a late insertion by someone else. The text itself proclaims the beloved disciple’s eyewitness testimony (John 21:24). If a Johannine “school” had added this chapter long after John’s demise, one would expect less uniform acceptance across the manuscript tradition. Instead, the earliest manuscripts show no such variation.

It is, of course, impossible to recreate every step of the writing process. The apostle John could have composed the bulk of the Gospel, paused, reflected, and then added chapter 21 before releasing it to the broader Christian congregation. That scenario requires no complicated multi-stage theory. Early Christians, guided by the apostolic witness, evidently recognized the final shape of John’s Gospel as we have it. Since modern redaction theories are largely built on presuppositions about how ancient texts evolved, one must weigh their arguments carefully. They can be interesting hypotheses, but they do not override the strong manuscript and historical evidence for the unity of the text.

The Unanimous Witness of Christian Tradition

John the apostle, son of Zebedee, is traditionally identified as the author of the Fourth Gospel. He was one of the twelve chosen by Jesus (Matthew 10:2). He is also linked to the three Epistles of John and the book of Revelation, though the latter’s authorship can be a separate discussion. The earliest patristic sources—such as Irenaeus (about 130-202 C.E.), who was a disciple of Polycarp, who in turn was said to have known John—testify that John wrote this Gospel during his later years in Ephesus. They do not speak of a truncated version that ended with chapter 20.

This aligns with the internal evidence of the beloved disciple’s presence at the cross (John 19:26), the fact that John was close enough to Jesus to recline next to him at the Last Supper (John 13:23-25), and the repeated references to him as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” While the Gospel never names John directly, the consistent tradition is that he wrote it. Moreover, there is no record of an edition concluding at chapter 20. Had there been an ancient dispute about whether to accept chapter 21, we would almost certainly see mention in writings defending or rejecting the chapter.

The acceptance of John’s Gospel with all twenty-one chapters is evident in the canonical lists and references throughout the second and third centuries. Writings from that era demonstrate that the Gospel circulated widely as a single text. The influence of John’s final chapter on early Christian theology, especially regarding Peter’s restoration and the beloved disciple, strongly indicates that it was never an optional or appended piece. Those who read the Gospel from an early date considered the entire account, including the epilogue in Galilee, to be authoritative Scripture. (2 Peter 1:16-21, where Peter’s eyewitness status is mentioned in another context)

The “Added Later” Theory Examined

If John 21 had been added later by someone other than John, it raises critical historical and textual questions. Who was this person with enough authority to expand John’s Gospel, yet remain undetected by the broader Christian community that was extremely vigilant about textual integrity? The early decades of the second century saw rapid distribution of the Gospels across the Roman Empire. For a major addition to appear, one would need to revise many circulating copies simultaneously, or else the Christian world would end up with two versions: one that ended at John 20 and another that extended to John 21. There is no historical trace of such a scenario.

If a single scribe or group “secretly inserted” John 21, it would have left footprints in the manuscript tradition. Large-scale additions or omissions are typically signaled by marginal notes, or by a localized tradition that lacks the passage. The fact that we have no manuscripts lacking John 21—even among early papyri discovered in Egypt—speaks strongly against the notion of a late insertion. The unity of the textual tradition across geographical regions suggests that John 21 was part of the Gospel from the outset.

Some point to the remark in John 21:25 that “even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written” as an editorial flourish by a pious follower. Yet the same type of hyperbole appears in John 20:30. Both statements emphasize the abundance of Jesus’ works beyond what is recorded. Observing the parallels, one sees a consistent narrative device. A single author repeating his rhetorical style is more plausible than a second composer forging an entire final chapter.

Internal Unity of the Gospel’s Theme

John’s Gospel is a sustained theological argument for the identity of Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, who offers life to believers. From the opening prologue—“In the beginning was the Word” (John 1:1)—to the climactic confessions in John 20 and 21, every chapter contributes to portraying Jesus as the incarnate Word, performing signs that reveal his glory. The mention of the Sea of Tiberias in John 21:1 connects well to earlier references (John 6:1). The motif of “follow me,” echoed in John 21:19 and 21:22, resonates with the calls in earlier chapters (John 1:43, John 10:27). The idea of Jesus revealing himself to the disciples is thematic throughout the Gospel (John 2:11, John 9:3, John 17:6, John 21:1).

Those who propose separate authorship for John 21 struggle to explain why the same Christ-centered theology, the same interest in personal interactions with Jesus, and the same language patterns consistently appear. The final chapter’s mention of fish and the number 153, while unique details, do not dislodge the broader thematic structure. The commission to Peter is in harmony with the repeated notion of Jesus entrusting his mission to his disciples, as in John 17:18, “As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world.” That missional emphasis culminates in the command to feed Christ’s sheep, symbolizing spiritual leadership.

If John 21 were an afterthought by a different mind, we might expect a more disjointed conclusion, perhaps a theological or stylistic divergence. Instead, the text remains thoroughly Johannine. Even the final note (John 21:25) parallels the earlier statement in John 20:30 that “many other signs were not written.” This repeated motif underscores the thematic continuity: the Gospel does not purport to give an exhaustive account of all Jesus’ deeds but provides sufficient testimony for belief. Such continuity lends credence to the view that John 21 is not a foreign insertion.

The Beloved Disciple’s Eyewitness Perspective

John’s Gospel is characterized by a personal, eyewitness viewpoint. The beloved disciple is portrayed as present at key events: leaning on Jesus during the Last Supper (John 13:23-25), standing near the cross when Jesus entrusts Mary to him (John 19:26-27), and arriving at the empty tomb (John 20:2-8). Chapter 21 maintains that same vantage point, showing the disciple quickly recognizing Jesus from the boat (John 21:7). This suggests a continuity of perspective that runs from the first mention of the beloved disciple in John 1 all the way to this final scene by the Sea of Galilee.

In both John 1 and John 21, the beloved disciple is closely linked to the events surrounding Jesus. Scholars have observed a literary “inclusio of eyewitness testimony,” beginning with the disciple’s introduction in John 1:35-40 and ending with his final appearance in John 21:24-25, framing the Gospel narrative with the testimony of one who followed Jesus from the start. That structural device hints that the same creative mind shaped the entire Gospel, ensuring that the beloved disciple’s presence was featured both at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry and at the concluding chapters of his earthly ministry. (John 21:24-25)

The beloved disciple’s vantage point underscores the authenticity of the account. The text itself declares, “This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things… and we know that his testimony is true.” (John 21:24) Rather than introducing an unknown voice, the Gospel claims the same eyewitness who wrote the rest. No abrupt shift in persona occurs, only a final emphasis on this unique witness. Even if the phrase “we know” includes some form of community endorsement, it still acknowledges John as the core author.

The Historical-Philosophical Context of Doubts About John 21

During the Enlightenment and continuing into the modern era, certain critics began applying higher-critical methods to biblical texts, questioning traditional authorship claims. The Gospel of John, being distinct in style from the Synoptics, drew particular scrutiny. The final chapter, with its epilogue-like character, came under suspicion from those who assumed multiple editors and expansions. This approach often leans on subjective literary analysis rather than the objective historical-grammatical method.

Critics sometimes argue that the presence of any editorial activity should cast doubt on apostolic authorship. Yet even if John revised or updated his material before final release, that does not negate his authorship. No direct historical evidence exists to show that John 21 was attached by an anonymous redactor posthumously. Instead, the consistent voice of the early church identifies John the apostle as the writer, and no alternative tradition arises to challenge that conclusion.

Some modern theories are shaped by a reluctance to accept the Gospel’s internal claim to eyewitness testimony. They try to deconstruct John’s narrative into layers, hypothesizing a base text, a signs source, and multiple expansions. While interesting as literary constructs, such theories often cannot demonstrate textual evidence for a version of John lacking chapter 21. The hypothetical layers remain conjectural, with no ancient manuscript reflecting an earlier stage minus the final chapter. (John 21:2)

Hence, conservative scholars affirm that John 21 is integral to the Gospel, having been composed by John under divine guidance. Believers can trust the internal and external evidence upholding its authenticity. The advanced age of John, possibly writing late in the first century C.E., and the distribution of his Gospel across the Mediterranean world do not conflict with the standard view that he penned all twenty-one chapters.

Early Patristic Commentary on John 21

Although explicit early patristic commentaries on John 21 are less abundant than on some other sections of Scripture, certain fathers do reference or allude to its verses. Clement of Alexandria references the restoration of Peter in contexts discussing repentance and service. Origen, known for his extensive commentary on John, does not label chapter 21 as secondary or spurious; rather, he engages with various aspects of the Gospel as a whole. Later patristic exegetes, such as Augustine (354-430 C.E.), provide homilies on all chapters of John, including the final one, never implying that it was a later addition.

Augustine, for example, speaks at length about the significance of the Lord’s questions to Peter and how this threefold affirmation parallels the threefold denial. If any suggestion had existed among Augustine’s sources that John 21 was suspect, he would likely have addressed it. Instead, Augustine treats it as fully canonical and integral to the Gospel’s message of love and restoration. The same acceptance permeates the Christian tradition onward, with no recognized historical schism over the chapter’s authenticity.

The Value of John 21 in the Overall Narrative

Concluding the Gospel with John 21 provides a satisfying closure to the events introduced in earlier chapters. Peter, who had declared loyalty (John 13:37) yet subsequently denied Jesus (John 18:25-27), receives a commission from the risen Christ. The beloved disciple’s presence is affirmed one last time, along with a clarification about his life expectancy. These details matter to readers who followed Peter’s journey throughout the Gospel and wondered about the role of this unnamed disciple who remained close to Jesus. The continuity of theme and narrative resolution suggests an intentional finishing touch by the same inspired author. (John 21:15-17)

The mention of the sea also harks back to the feeding of the 5,000 by the Sea of Tiberias (John 6:1). Jesus’ post-resurrection presence at the same body of water highlights his continuing ministry to his disciples. Even though he was risen and had appeared in Jerusalem, his guidance and care remain tangible in Galilee. This is consistent with Jesus’ earlier promise that after his resurrection, he would go ahead of them into Galilee (Mark 14:28, though in a different Gospel, the synergy among Gospel accounts is noteworthy). The final chapter thus demonstrates Jesus’ abiding concern for his followers, bridging the events of John 20 with the broader apostolic mission seen in the book of Acts.

How John 21 Fosters Confidence in Scriptural Integrity

The debate over John 21 underscores larger issues of how Scripture has been preserved and transmitted. If a major addition like a whole chapter could quietly enter the biblical text without historical traces, that would cast doubt on the reliability of the manuscripts. Yet all surviving evidence indicates that no such significant insertions occurred. The existence of multiple early papyri, codices, and patristic references to the entire Gospel of John as a unified work bolsters confidence. (Psalm 119:160)

Believers can rest in the truth that the Holy Spirit safeguarded the integrity of the inspired Word. Though God did not provide the original autographs to be supernaturally preserved for every generation, He ensured that the manuscripts faithfully transmitted the message. John 21 is not a contested addition; it is an integral part of the Gospel. The teacher or preacher who expounds on the miraculous catch or Peter’s restoration can do so with assurance that these verses reflect Johannine authorship and the apostle’s firsthand testimony.

Relevance of John 21 for Understanding Apostolic Succession and Authority

John 21 also offers a glimpse into the roles of Peter and the beloved disciple. Peter is charged with shepherding, implying leadership among the believers. The beloved disciple’s longevity, on the other hand, is left in Jesus’ hands. The text does not institute a formal hierarchical structure, nor does it mention later apostolic successions. Instead, it highlights Jesus’ personal instruction to Peter to care for the flock and clarifies that the beloved disciple’s destiny was not for Peter to question.

This emphasis on personal commission from Jesus complements earlier passages in John’s Gospel. Jesus earlier prayed for all his followers, asking that they be sanctified in truth. (John 17:17) Now, in John 21, he entrusts tangible responsibilities to Peter, which indicates that leadership in the Christian congregation flows from Christ’s calling rather than from a purely institutional or genealogical source. It remains consistent with the broader New Testament portrayal of leadership gifts in the congregation. (Ephesians 4:11-12) Seeing how integral that passage is to John’s portrayal of post-resurrection leadership further testifies to chapter 21’s authenticity.

Assessing the Statement “We Know That His Testimony Is True”

John 21:24 says, “This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true.” Some interpreters see a shift to a collective voice (“we know”) as proof of a second writer. Yet the shift can also be a stylistic device to underscore communal affirmation. John might have included this phrase to convey that not only he, but the circle of believers around him, confirm the reliability of what he wrote. Another possibility is that John used “we” in reference to his own literary technique, akin to the editorial “we” sometimes employed in ancient texts.

In ancient Jewish and Greco-Roman writings, authors occasionally spoke of themselves in the third person to add gravity or modesty to their statements. This is not unusual and does not, by itself, demand a second author. The main point is the emphasis on the beloved disciple’s eyewitness status. The expression “his testimony is true” echoes John 19:35, where a similar assertion is made about the reliability of the one who saw blood and water flow from Jesus’ side. That repeated motif is typically Johannine: an eyewitness testifies so that others may believe. It carries forward the same theme of testimony found throughout the Gospel. (John 1:7)

No Extant Evidence for an Alternate Ending

Despite centuries of manuscript transmission, none have been discovered that end with John 20 or show a scribal note disclaiming John 21 as unauthentic. Even manuscripts that sometimes contain marginal commentary on minor variants (like certain references to the pericope of the adulterous woman in John 7:53–8:11) show no parallel disclaimers about chapter 21. If an entire chapter had been suspicious or absent, the witness would be significant. The silence across the textual tradition suggests that no alternative version circulated widely, if at all.

Claims that the entire Christian community accepted a forged addition of twenty-five verses with no record of dispute or local textual variations strain credulity. The early church was quite vigilant about textual changes. Controversies arose over far lesser additions or omissions in the second and third centuries, so the lack of controversy regarding John 21 is telling. That uniform acceptance underscores that John 21 originated with the apostle John or, at the absolute minimum, was recognized from the earliest era as belonging to the Gospel. (John 21:25)

Literary and Theological Coherence

Students of John’s theology note recurring themes: life in Jesus’ name, signs that point to Jesus’ identity, belief versus unbelief, and personal encounters that bring deeper understanding. Chapter 21 continues all these threads. It shows the disciple’s belief manifesting yet again, as the beloved disciple recognizes Jesus (John 21:7). It underscores the significance of relationship and mission, as Jesus commissions Peter to feed his lambs (John 21:15). It culminates the motif of seeing and believing (John 20:29) in an actual scenario on the lake. (John 21:12-14)

Jesus’ interactions with his disciples in John’s Gospel are strikingly personal, from Nicodemus in chapter 3 to the Samaritan woman in chapter 4, to Lazarus’ family in chapter 11, to Mary Magdalene, Thomas, and others in chapter 20. John 21 continues this pattern. The shift from a group setting to a personal conversation with Peter mirrors the individual conversations that characterize John’s portrayal of Jesus. The consistent approach to narrative detail, theological focus, and personal engagement strongly suggests a single authorial hand guiding the final composition. The narrative never indicates a jarring break or an abrupt insertion by another author.

Addressing the Form of Conclusion in Biblical Writings

Scripture includes numerous examples of multiple “concluding statements” within the same book. For instance, some of Paul’s epistles appear to end with doxologies or concluding remarks, only to continue with further exhortations or greetings. That does not prove multiple authorship. Similarly, John 20:31 can stand as a major thematic conclusion, highlighting the purpose of what has been written, while John 21 can serve as an extension that relates a specific post-resurrection event. The existence of more than one closing formula is not alien to biblical literature. (Romans 16:25-27 might be considered a doxology that appears near the end of Romans, though Paul continues with greetings in verses prior.)

The anchor of John’s purpose remains 20:31, focusing on believing in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, leading to life. Chapter 21 then illustrates how Jesus continued to instruct his disciples after that powerful theological statement. The two sections do not conflict but rather complement each other: one underscores the entire aim of the Gospel, and the other provides a final narrative that aligns with that aim, showing Jesus at work among his followers. That structure is well within the realm of typical biblical authorship, without forcing us to assume a later editor.

Conclusion of the Gospel of John in Light of the Whole Canon

When the Gospel of John is viewed alongside the other New Testament books, the presence of a concluding epilogue is far from unusual. Similar expansions or epilogues can be seen in other biblical writings, and none are automatically ascribed to later additions simply because of a transitional phrase. The entire canon accepted John as an inspired text, including chapter 21, which stands in harmony with the rest of Scripture.

The rest of the New Testament, particularly Acts and the apostolic epistles, acknowledges Peter’s leadership role (Acts 2, Acts 10) and the ongoing apostolic testimony. John 21’s emphasis on Peter’s commission to shepherd and the beloved disciple’s role fits well within that overall narrative. It provides an essential link for how the disciples moved forward with the mission after Jesus’ resurrection, reinforcing the continuity with the earliest church developments described in Acts.

Those who label John 21 a later addition have yet to produce evidence from historical manuscripts, patristic testimony, or internal contradictions that would justify removing it from the Gospel or attributing it to a different hand. The demand for a strictly final closure at John 20:31 arises from modern literary expectations, not from the actual practice of ancient authors. The best explanation remains that the apostle John wrote all twenty-one chapters, with the Holy Spirit guiding him to pen a purposeful theological account of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, concluding with these final verses of commission and testimony. (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21)

Thus, readers can trust that the entire Gospel of John, including chapter 21, stands as a unified work composed by John, preserving reliable testimony about the resurrected Christ and his instructions to the disciples. The textual and historical evidence upholds that no extant witness suggests a different authorship or a text ending at chapter 20. The church from early on treasured John 21 as part of divine revelation, and modern scholarship has no concrete basis to cast that unity into doubt.

You May Also Enjoy

Does the Abundance of Manuscript Variants Undermine the Reliability of the New Testament Text?

About the Author

Online Guided Bible Study Courses

SCROLL THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLICAL STUDIES / BIBLE BACKGROUND / HISTORY OF THE BIBLE/ INTERPRETATION

EARLY CHRISTIANITY

HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC EVANGELISM

TECHNOLOGY AND THE CHRISTIAN

CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY

CHRISTIAN DEVOTIONALS

CHRISTIAN FICTION