I don’t really know. I haven’t studied their models systematically, but based on the study I have done, I think they probably are articulating different models. Each one has a unique emphasis. But I think the models are complimentary, not contradictory. (You knew I would say that, didn’t you. ) I mean, Paul and John are very different, but their models seem strikingly similar to me in some ways.

Anyway, I’m planning to post about Paul’s model in Romans next, so maybe I’ll go into further detail about that question shortly.

And I agree that John makes Jesus-as-a-revelation-of-the-Father explicit, whereas it is more implicit in the synoptic Gospels.

Of course, some folks became enraged when they encountered Jesus. This theme is in John, too: those who love darkness were not transformed by their encounter with Jesus, but were moved to murder him. Jesus is thus crisis-inducing. His presence divides the world into two camps: those who love the light and those who prefer darkness. So seeing is not always transformative, regrettably.

In this post, you’re dwelling on one of the differences between John’s soteriology and that of Paul or Mark. Are they proposing two different models of salvation, do you think? Or is it merely a nuance?

This is good. As already / not yet redeemed believers, we become who we are by beholding what he is.