Schnackenburg's commentary on John (this is Vol. 1 of 3 volumes) is an excellent text for mining the depths of this gospel. It belongs in the library of anyone serious about the Johannine text along with Raymond Brown's two-volume commentary. Indispensible for serious study

Rufolf Schnackenburg's commentary on the Johanine Letters is one of the best ever written. The author works with the historical critical method, and he has made a work that can enrich your spiritual life. His work does not have as encyclopedic size as Raymond E Brown's, but you fill find it always helpul, because Schnackenburg takes time to offer sound solutions that any johananine reader can find. This new revised edition is a serious need if you consider that R. Schnakenburg has been humble enough to accept somebody else was right and he was wrong (by example he accepts now that 2 Jn's phrase ''to walk en aletheia'' doesn't simply mean ''to walk'', but to walk in the truth in its particular johanine sense. Rudolf Schnakenburg is a believer exegete and this really is a good notice. Buy this book, read it with a prevous prayer and Jesus will make you happy.

It is good to find a scholar who is also a believer. Jesus is more than a collection of sayings. To understand Jesus, one must believe in Jesus. Professor Schnackerburg has done a good work on the connection between faith in the Jesus of history and the Christ. To really know Jesus, we must have the Jesus of history and the Christ proclaimed.

This is a good work and well worth your time.

In a time when biblical scholarship teases the minds of pop culture with raw historical criticism, Rudolf Schnackenburg carries us back into the four Gospel accounts of the canonized New Testament with vigor. His concern is rather contrary to what seems to be the "contemporary" discourse surrounding the question of who Jesus of Nazareth really was or is. Only sparingly engaging the debate of the historicity of Jesus, Schnackenburg offers us a refreshing and rather classic view of how one may discover and know who Jesus was. His argument is that it is only through the canonized gospels that, when read in conjunction and in conversation with each other, we may be able to discern who Jesus of Nazareth really was and indeed, how the appropriation of what we read in the gospels with faith aids and illuminates our understanding. Not only is this a good argument for how one may discover who Jesus really was aside from raw historical criticism (supported by the Jesus Seminar), it also offers us a good resource summarizing each gospel account in its own right and then brings them into conversation with each other to get at one enduring picture of who and what we can know Jesus to be for us.