The Gospel of John

[Christian3]

The death of Apostle James is recorded in Acts, circa 64AD.

It seems incredible that the deaths of James the brother of Jesus, the deaths of Peter and Paul and the fall of the Temple should not have been included in the New Testament, including the Gospel of John, if they had been written after 70 AD?

Doesn't this suggest the the Gospel of John was written before these events?

[Thoughtful Monk]

What would be the reason to include events after Jesus's ascension into Heaven? The Gospel of John is about the life and ministry of Jesus. I see no reason to include the events you list in it.

So the answer to your question is no.

[mossrose]

What would be the reason to include events after Jesus's ascension into Heaven? The Gospel of John is about the life and ministry of Jesus. I see no reason to include the events you list in it.

So the answer to your question is no.

Yes, and John was specifically pointing to Christ's deity in his gospel.

[Faber]

The death of Apostle James is recorded in Acts, circa 64AD.

It seems incredible that the deaths of James the brother of Jesus, the deaths of Peter and Paul and the fall of the Temple should not have been included in the New Testament, including the Gospel of John, if they had been written after 70 AD?

Doesn't this suggest the the Gospel of John was written before these events?

James, the brother of John and one of the twelve disciples/apostles, was murdered around AD 44 by Herod Agrippa, grandson of Herod the Great. (Acts 12:1-2). The other James, brother of Jesus, was murdered around AD 64. Maybe AD 62, following the chronology of Josephus (Antiquities xx.9) or maybe during the siege of Jerusalem, around AD 90. Whether he was clubbed to death or thrown off the pinnacle of the temple, is subject to debate and results from various accounts.

[Christian3]

What would be the reason to include events after Jesus's ascension into Heaven? The Gospel of John is about the life and ministry of Jesus. I see no reason to include the events you list in it.

So the answer to your question is no.

Because they were important events.

The Fall of the Temple was predicted by Jesus.

[Thoughtful Monk]

Because they were important events.

The Fall of the Temple was predicted by Jesus.

Yet they still didn't occur during the Incarnate life of Jesus so would be irrelvent to a recounting of His life.

[Christian3]

This is the document I am using for a possible early date of the Gospel of John:

http://www.ristosantala.com/rsla/Nt/NT07.html

[Thoughtful Monk]

This is the document I am using for a possible early date of the Gospel of John:

http://www.ristosantala.com/rsla/Nt/NT07.html

I will leave it to better minds than mine to argue over when the Gospel was written. Since any scenario puts the Gospel being written in the life of John, I'll focus on the message and impact that it should have on my life.

[mikewhitney]

[Christian3]

Analysis of the date of the Gospel of John by Daniel B. Wallace.

https://chab123.wordpress.com/2014/1...-four-gospels/

Click on Gospel of John:

https://bible.org/seriespage/gospel-...gument-outline

Wallace is convinced that the Gospel of John was written before 70AD; however he believes that John knew of the deaths of Peter and Paul.

Wallace presents the argument for a late date and and early date -- 65 or 66AD.

[Rushing Jaws]

The death of Apostle James is recorded in Acts, circa 64AD.

It seems incredible that the deaths of James the brother of Jesus, the deaths of Peter and Paul and the fall of the Temple should not have been included in the New Testament, including the Gospel of John, if they had been written after 70 AD?

Doesn't this suggest the the Gospel of John was written before these events?