Thread: Christ Last Coming

You see, although these quotes from the Gospel of John are lovely, they are meaningless. These passages from John are lifted straight out of Platonic Philosophy, and were written by a Greek employed by a Paulist Congregation. It has nothing to do with what was the legitimate Messianic Jewish Movement that Christ Himself had been advancing and which was continued by his true Apostles. Unfortunately, this Messianic Movement was largely destroyed when Jerusalem was destroyed in 71 A.D. Yes, there were some Messianic elements included in the Gospel of John, that somewhat mitigate the worst Antichristical Doctrines from Paul, but not nearly enough. Because the Document of the Gospel of John is not entirely Paulist, and yet not entirely Messianic of the True Apostles, I would place it as 2nd Century Document -- a political Compromise between Sects that were distant enough from their formative beginnings where they could consider compromise. In the First Century no True Apostle could have compromised with the Paulists, and we have in the Paulist Letters instructions for no Paulist to ever compromise with the True Apostles. Only subsequent generations could have betrayed these original principles so cavalierly. So what the Gospel of John was created to be was a revisionist version of what these various sects could agree upon regarding Christ and His Mission. It is more of a Political Statement. If one wants something approaching the Truth, then one must refer to the other 3 Gospels. But it is silly to look at a Neo-Platonic Philosophical Tract, written by a Greek, that incorporates doctrines and controvercies that arose only after Christ was long gone, it is silly to assign to it any Spiritual Importance, it if one can only appreciate the Truth of Things, then the Gospel of John should be entirely dismissed.

But, yes, as an example of Neo-Platonic thought, it may be fascinating, and, yes, it does document the positions of the 2nd Century Paulist Church very well, and so it does bear some Historical importance. But to take it to heart is ridiculous.