Comparing The Gospel Of John And The Book Of Glory

The Gospel of Matthew was written anonymously. Early church elders believed that Matthew of the twelve disciples was the author, but the apparent dependence on the Gospel of Mark has caused modern day scholars to abandon that theory. This gospel represents a testimony to Peter. It is believed to have been written between AD 50 and AD 80. There are many things that lead historians to believe that Matthew was writing to a Jewish or Jewish Christian audience. The nature of Matthew’s writing suggests that it was written in the Holy Land, but some believe that it could have originated in Syrian Antioch. The church in Antioch had a large Greek speaking Jewish population at the forefront of the mission to the Gentiles, Matthew writes about how
The Gospel of John has a unique literary style which focuses on the signs of Jesus’ identity and mission. Some say this can be divided into two books, the Book of Signs, and the Book of Glory.
There are many similarities and differences in the four Gospels. All four Gospels were written Greek, ranging from Mark’s grammatically poor Greek to Luke’s elegant Greek. The Major opponents in Mark, Matthew and John included the Pharisees while Luke just talks about unjust authorities or rich, corrupt people. Mark wrote mostly to Gentiles being persecuted by their faith, Matthew wrote to educated Jews that were believers but argued over the Laws, Luke wrote to Gentile Christians, and John wrote to Jews, Gentiles, and Samaritans alike.
The Synoptic Problem or Synoptic Gospels; Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are very similar to each other. It appears that they tell the story of Jesus from the same point of view while the Gospel of John is written in a different manor. They Synoptic Gospels often have long stretches of identical text making it difficult to explain away by oral traditions. It is assumed that there is some literary dependence or someone copied someone