John in Contrast with the Synoptic Gospels

Get ready, this is a bit long. But not Wayne Grudem long.

            John’s account of the Gospel is unique from the synoptic Gospel accounts in that it combines the timelessness of Mark with the deep connection to Jewish tradition of Matthew and the profundity of Luke, resulting in a work that is in many ways enigmatic and in many ways accessible, all the while carrying an undertone of a connection much deeper than Jesus being nominally Jewish. That is, John’s account of the Gospel can be characterized as a departure from the synoptic Gospels in that it shows Jesus in the role of not just being the fulfillment of the foretold of Jewish messiah but also truly divine. These contrasts are best exemplified in three ways: the people included in the narrative, the variety of miracles that John records, and Jesus’ teachings and statements in comparison and contrast to the other accounts. The problem with individually pointing out any of these aspects is that they are all deeply interwoven. So, for the sake of meaningful discussion, we will examine John’s explanation of Jesus’ identity, the nature of teachings that differ from other accounts, and John’s record of Jesus’ chronological ministry in contrast with the other accounts.

            John’s Gospel account included many scenarios in which Jesus interacts with people from many different back grounds, including Jewish authorities, lower class Jewish people, and even outsiders like the Samaritans. The other three Gospel accounts also include Jesus talking with and speaking about these different parties, but John’s account includes many examples and a much greater proportion of content dedicated to recording these interactions as opposed to various parables and teachings. Additionally, John records the interaction of Jesus, John the Baptist, and their respective disciples at length. To be sure, part of the purpose of these conversations and speeches being written down is to espouse and to teach the reader, but, perhaps more importantly, they are meant to show the reader something about Jesus’ identity by way of epitomizing parts of His character. It is clear that John is operating on the basis of Jesus being one with Elohim, evidenced by the introduction’s language about Jesus being the creative Word or Logos and incarnate God:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. …  And the Word became flesh, and ^[k]dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of ^[l]the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.”

-John 1, NASB (excerpts)

Following this section of scripture is the account of John’s first ‘testimony,’ in which he denies himself being the Messiah, but tells the Jews that the Christ is coming. Throughout the entire book, John either records dialogue about Jesus being God or records actual conversations in which Jesus is clearly identifying Himself as one with God. Some examples of passages include Jesus talking to the Samaritan woman, giving the teaching at Capernaum about being the ‘bread of life,’ and when he tells the Jews that ‘before Abraham was, I am.’ Clearly, John is casting Jesus as completely separate from every other person. In contrast to the suffering servant of Mark or the healer of Luke, John’s point, including setting the scene of Jesus interacting with the ‘Jews’ (of which He was one) is to make the point that He is completely separate, above human authority by the authority of God, with Whom He was and is one (also see Jesus’ discourse with the blind man in John 5). Obviously, John is not denying that Jesus is a teacher and a healer, but instead showing that He is not just that, that He is truly holy in the truest sense of the word: completely set apart.

            Perhaps the easiest difference to recognize between John and the Synoptic Gospels is the nature of Jesus’ teachings. Even on the surface level, John’s account of Jesus’ teachings differs radically from the others in that John contains almost no moral teachings, but instead contains teachings on the Kingdom of God, the nature of God, and the relationship of men to God each other, in the individual and corporate sense. Additionally, John records many more teachings about Himself than are present in the other Gospels. That is, it seems that Jesus is not interested in instructing people how to treat one another (such as in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew or the parable of the prodigal son in Luke), but instead how to think about God, calling them to literally repent (change their minds) about their notions of God by directly challenging them and saying some things that are incredibly difficult to accept and to understand. The situational epitome of this idea is the passage in chapter 6 where the ‘crowd,’ wanting more bread after Jesus had just fed them, had pursued Jesus around the Sea of Galilee because they wanted more bread. Jesus responded to their request not by telling them yes or no, but that they had missed the point. In teaching that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood, He puts so many of them off that they don’t want anything to do with following Him any longer. Interestingly, John casts Jesus not in the role of correcting or rebuking behavior as a normative practice, but instead as the a teacher that is offering teachings that no one understands, presumably on the premise of no one being right in heart in such a way that they could comprehend what He was saying. As a note, it is because John is so lacking in moral teachings that passages such as 7:53-8:11 (the story of the women caught in adultery) only make sense in the light of Jesus not saying something about the woman’s sin, but about the nature of people.

            Lastly, and perhaps the least significant of the three I have pointed out, there seems to be a different variety of timescale in John’s Gospel account. Unlike Mark, who makes Jesus’ ministry seem outside of a real time and also unlike Matthew and Luke, who put Jesus in a very specific place in history, John seems to show Jesus’ ministry to not be about the time, but about setting it inside the Jewish world and its history. That is, John portrays Jesus living in real time around in a Jewish culture (in that He attends festivals and events that any good Jew would), but also as an eternal being stepping into time and living, but somehow being transcendent of it. This is of course a natural progression of thought when John first describes Jesus as the creator and then describes Him stepping into His own creation. In keeping with the rest of the theme of the Gospel, John is in this respect revealing another aspect of how Jesus is truly divine and truly God incarnate.