One might see in the synoptic gospels an exhortation to understand the Jesus was the Jewish Messiah.However, one might see in the gospel of John a different emphasis.
If written around 90AD, the temple in Jerusalem would have been destroyed for 20 years. There would be no expectation of an immanent return of Jesus to establish the kingdom as had been expected by the disciples (Acts 1:6).
It is conjecture, since we are not told in the gospel, however, it might not be unreasonable to think that what makes the gospel of John distinct is that it was written for second and third generation believers distant in both time and place from the events described.
In this way the gospel of John would be more resonant with contemporary believers as we also are removed from the events described.
Discussion on a particular book of the bible.
1 post • Page 1 of 1