Even in Hebrew scriptures we see things like Ezekiel 9:6-11 so it is not surprising God turned his back on them.
You're suggesting God is a contingent being, who changes His mind according to circumstance ... Scripture is more nuanced than that.
They had the Spirit from Pentecost, they did not need writings to get them to it.
The
Apostles had the Spirit – the people listened and were 'confounded' (Acts 2:6), 'amazed' (v7) and 'astonished' (v12) when they heard the preaching ... the gospel ... which Peter then directed to the Jews as ones who should know better than the geltiles, and this is the gospel that Paul speaks about, that was abroad in the church before his conversion.
The letter is not Paul's gospel, the letter challenges, as you say, issues in the community, but from it we derive the essence of Paul's teaching.
This rendered the Christian understanding completely superficial as you've used it, yet you think this is deeper than the Stoic concept... it's just not.
If you think it superficial it's because I have not explained it in any great depth. You have to be aware of Jewish mystical speculation in John's era, then you's understand better.
Philo of Alexandria tried to build a bridge between Jewish concepts and the Greek.
John's use of Logos is utterly radical, to Greek ears and even, no dbout, Philo's. It's founded and directly references Genesis 1, and goes on from there to signal the Incarnation.