BibleScholar

  In John, John emphasizes the last things that have already begun to break into the present. This kind of expression is found in some places: “but the hour is coming and is now here” (4:23; 5:25) and “the hour has come” (12:23). These expressions display the realized character of Johannine dualism. A new order has come (realized eschatology): the Law came through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus (1:17). Those who cling to the law orient themselves around a past revelation (Jn.1:17), but those who come and believe in him whom God has sent (Jn.8:42) receive the light of the present revelation which has come but also still to come (Jn.15:26; 4:16ff). [1] The contrast between the water from Jacob’s well from which one would thirst again (4:12) and the water which Jesus gives (Jn.4:14) displays the present quality of John’s eschatology. One of the undeniable aspects of Johannine dualism is that while the soteriological task of Jesus of Nazareth has been completed, God’s revel

             How are we to assess the value of the Fourth Gospel, both as a contribution to an understanding of the historical Jesus and as a theological statement of Christ? For a significant period of the critical study of John, the gospel has served as a stepchild, considered to be late and derivative. Its value as a source for historical information has been downplayed or ignored. And its theological perspective has been viewed as late, Hellenistic, and the result of situations arising within a particular community of Christians who may not be representative of early followers of the Jesus movement. This perspective of the Fourth Gospel remains dominant today. For some time, however, scholars have raised questions about the dominant paradigm. Questions about John’s relationship to other gospels, its reliance on information about Jesus that might be independent and possibly superior to the Synoptics, and even its relative date of origination have been raised and continue to be raise