021. Chapter 1 - The Pre-Existence of Christ
Chapter 1 - The Pre-Existence of Christ
John 1:1-18 Eternality of Christ The life of Christ has no beginning. He is eternal: without beginning or end. This is the magnificent assertion with which John introduces his Gospel account. “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John deliberately quotes Genesis 1:1 and begins his narrative where the Bible begins. Both Moses and John thus affirm their miraculous inspiration in the very first words they record. How could mere finite man know what existed or happened before the first man came into existence? How else but by the direct revelation of God?
“In the beginning” of time or of creation. The essential elements of time are a beginning and an ending. This is true of a second, a year, or a millennium. Time is that which is between. That which was before creation had an ending at creation, but it had no beginning — it is timeless, eternal. That which will be after the judgment will have a beginning, but it will have no ending. It will be timeless, eternal.
John affirms that the Word existed before any act of creation occurred. By impressive repetition he affirms and reaffirms the eternality of Christ. He not only declares that the Word existed before creation began, but he repeats emphatically that the Word is the Creator of all. “Creator” and “created” are mutually exclusive terms. In this tremendous opening sentence John affirms (1) eternality (“In the beginning was the Word”); (2) personality (“And the Word was with God”). One person cannot be “with” another person unless he is a different personality; (3) deity (“And the Word was God”). Although we cannot understand how the Father and the Son can be the same person and yet different persons, we need to remind ourselves that we cannot understand God. But apart from God we cannot understand anything. We find the Trinity — Father, Son, and Holy Spirit — emphasized (although the term “Trinity” is not used) in Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Ephesians 6:23; Colossians 1:1-6 (and the disputed text of 1 John 5:7). The pre-existence of Christ is affirmed in John 8:58; John 17:5; Colossians 1:15, Colossians 1:17; Hebrews 1:1-4; 1 John 1:1; Revelation 22:13. The Word The mysterious title “the Word” emphasizes the unity of the Father and the Son. John the Baptist called himself “the voice of one crying in the wilderness,” citing the predictions of Isaiah and Malachi. The terms “voice” and “Word” set forth the mission to reveal. John is the only New Testament writer to use this title (cf. John 1:1, John 1:14; 1 John 1:1, 1 John 1:2; Revelation 19:13; and the somewhat similar use in Hebrews 4:12, Hebrews 4:13). John does not return to the use of this title in his Gospel and does not attempt to build any argument upon it. It is rather a grand affirmation. This preface is a profound philosophical introduction to a matter-of-fact recital of historical facts. When God gave His final revelation to man, He did not create a new language in which to reveal it. He used the universal language of the civilized world in the first century. The Greek language is unexcelled for accuracy and beauty. It is therefore plain that the words God inspired His messengers to use had been used before an incredible number of times. So with this noun logos — “Word.” But the meaning which John gives to this noun is absolutely unique. He makes it a title for Jesus Christ the Son of God. In using the term logos as a title for the Son of God, John did not coin a new word, but gave a new meaning to a word already in use. Plato had used the term in his system of philosophy as did the Stoics after him. Philo, the Jewish philosopher of Alexandria in Egypt, adopted the Greek system of philosophy which held that the world contained two elements: spirit and matter. The spirit was good and the matter bad; an intermediate being which he called “logos” came between. The Greeks used the term in the sense of “reason.” B. F. Westcott affirms the term is never used in this sense in the Scripture. When John uses the term as a title for Jesus, he introduces it without explanation. This follows the pattern of Christ’s teaching in boldly submitting extremely difficult instruction without explanation and leaving the hearers to deep reflection and intense effort to comprehend. The view that Jesus was the Word until His incarnation and then became the Son of God at His birth in Bethlehem will not bear investigation. Jesus declares, “For God sent not his Son into the world to judge the world” (John 3:17). This first sentence has sublime simplicity of style and unfathomable depth of meaning. Every word is important, but when read aloud the emphasis should be placed on the nouns rather than the two verbs (“was”) and the preposition (“with”): “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This shows the balanced nature of the grammatical structure and communicates most effectively the profound meaning. Neither the a.v. nor the a.s.v. retain the order of the Greek words in the last clause. John wrote: “and God was the Word.” A translator is not obligated to retain the order of Greek words; it may result in clumsy English. The standard translation of the a.v. and a.s.v. is beautiful and majestic. But a vital emphasis which John gave in the order of the Greek words is lost. A footnote could have supplied this information to the reader. John exhausted every means of language to give clear and emphatic affirmation of the deity of Christ.
Rules of Greek Grammar The translation of this verse in the edition of the Jehovah’s Witnesses is a classic mistranslation. Seeking to defend their doctrine that Christ is a created being, they render: “In a beginning.” The translator evidently knew enough Greek to discern that the definite article, “the,” is omitted in the Greek text. They left room for the proposition that before this beginning (the creation of the universe) there had been an earlier beginning in which the Son had been created. They turn this clause into a revolving door. The Greek language has a word for the definite article, “the”; it does not have a word for the indefinite article, “a.” There is no such rule in Greek grammar that if “the” is not stated, “a” must be supplied. The context determines whether or not a is inserted. Both the a.v. and a.s.v. italicize all words in their translations which do not actually occur in the Greek text. It is characteristic of the radical r.s.v. that they do not italicize their insertions. This sets them free to paraphrase or pervert the text at will, without notifying the reader. In this sentence the a.v. and a.s.v. do not italicize “the beginning.” The reason is that the definite article is actually in this verse by virtue of a rule of Greek grammar. The Greek noun arche means “rule, province, beginning.” When it means “beginning,” the definite article is omitted. In the last clause the translation of Jehovah’s Witnesses is: “and the Word was a God.” With this ridiculous mistranslation they affirm polytheism. Here again, the definite article is omitted in the Greek; but a rule of Greek grammar states that proper names may have the definite article or not with utter freedom. The definite article is seldom translated when used with a proper noun. But it may be: “This is the Socrates who taught in Athens.” Thus we read in the Scripture: “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” When radicals insist on having the Scripture declare Jesus is “a son of God” when the definite article is omitted (as the basis for their denial that Jesus is the Son of God, but only a son, as all of us are sons), they ignore this rule of Greek grammar and contradict the plain teaching of the Scripture. If the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ translation had retained the order of the Greek words the absurdity of their rendering would have been even more manifest: “and a God was the Word.” The view that Jesus is a created being contradicts completely John 1:3. Stating the case both positively and negatively John makes absolutely plain that Jesus is the Creator of all: “All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made.”
Light and Life The prologue is notable for the key words it contains, such as light and life, witness, grace, and truth. These words appear constantly in the entire book. While affirming that Christ created all things that have been created, John does not affirm that He created life and light. “In him was life; and the life was the light of men” (John 1:4). Life and light are eternal elements of God’s being. “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). Genesis 1:3 is to be understood not as creation of light, but of causing the divine light of His presence to shine upon the darkened void of the earth: “Let there be light [upon the earth]: and there was light [upon the earth]”. “And the light shineth in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not” (Genesis 1:5). Notice the present tense (continued action) “shineth” followed by the aorist tense which emphasizes the definite historical rejection of Jesus in His ministry. The a.s.v. has an alternate translation for “apprehend”; it gives in a footnote “overcame.” The a.v. has “comprehended.” The Greek verb usually means “to seize or to apprehend,” whether physically or intellectually. The a.v. “comprehend” is clear — did not understand, appreciate, accept. The a.s.v. “apprehend” does not make clear whether intellectually or physically. The footnote “overcome” is clear. The verb can mean “pursue, overtake, overcome.” Origen and other early Christian writers held the meaning — the darkness is perpetually pursuing the light, but never overtaking it. But John 1:7-9 make it plain that John is using “Light” as a title for Jesus. The a.v. capitalizes Light in John 1:7-9, but uses a small letter in John 1:5. The a.s.v. uses a small letter in all four verses. If “overcame” is the proper translation and Light is a title for Jesus, then the death on the cross comes into view. Although achieving His death, the devil did not overcome the Light. Whatever the specific meaning, it is here that we find the first intimation of tragedy in the book.
Jesus and John
Contrasting verses John 1:1 and John 1:6 we see the following opposites: (1) “being” vs. “becoming”; (2) deity vs. humanity; (3) eternality vs. temporality. The Word, who is God, stands in contrast with John, who was merely a man. The Word, who is eternally with God vs. John, who was sent from God. The name and personal identity of the Word remains clothed in mystery; the name of John is immediately clear. The Greek verb can mean either to be or to become. The a.s.v. “There came a man” is much superior to the a.v. “There was a man.” “Whose name was John.” Since the apostle John, the author of the book, omits his name from the entire narrative, there is no need to add here the title: “John the Baptist.” It is perfectly clear of whom he is speaking.
John 1:7. “That he might bear witness of the light.” This was the objective and the content of John’s preaching. “That all might believe through him.” Even though John’s ministry was so brief and limited to so small a geographical area, yet through the divinely inspired records of the New Testament John has preached in all times and places. Abbott insists that “through him” refers to Jesus (and not to John). Bernard replies ably that John’s Gospel never speaks of believing through Jesus (as the medium), but always “upon Jesus” (as the object).
John 1:9. “The true light, even the light which lighteth every man, coming into the world.” The participle “coming” can modify either “light” or “man.” The Light, when He came into the world, offered redemption to every man, or the Light gives to every man when he is born into the world the intellectual and spiritual gifts which light his path, or the redemptive light of the gospel, which is offered to all.
John 1:10. “He was in the world.” The mystery of the incarnation and the rejection of the Messiah by the world are recurring themes of this prologue. “The world was made through him.” He not only holds the world in His hands, but He has brought it into existence. This makes it the more tragic that “the world knew him not.” The present ridiculous “God is dead” movement is but the continuing perversity of the world in rejecting God’s revelation of Himself in His Son.
Virgin Birth in John
John 1:11. “He came unto his own.” This Greek adjective is neuter: “his own things.” It is His own world. He had made it. He was the owner, the Lord and Master. He had the right to expect joyous reception and reverent obedience. “They that were his own received him not.” The Greek adjective is now masculine: “His own people” — God’s chosen people to whom He had given the precious revelation of the Old Testament. They could be expected above all others to believe, receive, obey. The universal negative is immediately limited by the exception which is stated in the following verse. No! not everyone rejected Him. There were those who believed and who were adopted as redeemed children back into the heavenly Father’s presence.
John 1:12, John 1:13. “To them that believe on his name, who were born, not of blood [the Greek noun is plural: bloods], nor of the will of the flesh [base, ignoble desire], nor of the will of man [noble desire to have children to carry on the great enterprises of God], but of God.” One of the most interesting textual variations in the New Testament is found here: (1) the accepted text is the plural “them...who were born”; (2) the alternate text is singular: “on his name, who was born.” The first declares the spiritual birth by which a sinner becomes a Christian. The second offers a most impressive declaration of the virgin birth of Christ. Both readings fit perfectly the Greek structure of the sentence and the context, and give a sublime content to the declaration. The translators of both the a.v. and the a.s.v. felt obligated to follow the text of the majority of the most accurate manuscripts in our possession. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are so highly esteemed that the a.s.v. usually follows them, when they are in agreement, even against all the other manuscripts. Mark 16:9-20 is an exception as the evidence was too powerful in favor of this close of Mark’s Gospel for them to reject these verses (cf. p. 141; also see the section “Mark 16:9-20”. The alternate reading in John 1:13 has only slight textual support. The Old Latin version was translated at an early period when many Greek manuscripts were available which were much earlier than any we possess. Not only does the Old Latin carry the singular “who was born,” but early Christian writers defended this reading. Justin Martyr cites this reading, as does Irenaeus. Tertullian argues vigorously that the plural “who were born” was a false insertion by the Valentinian heretics. Although the Greek texts in our possession do not support the singular in this verse, three modern famous textual experts have adopted and defended this reading: Zahn, Resch, Blass. The Incarnation
John 1:14. “And the Word became flesh.” This is the point at which John makes plain the meaning of his obscure reference in “the Word.” He declares he has used this as a title for the Messiah. The manner of expression fits amazingly the virgin birth accounts of Matthew and Luke: “became flesh.” “And dwelt among us.” Here the wonder of God’s love and Christ’s humiliation of Himself to be in our midst as one of us is paramount. We beheld his glory.” John continually insists that he was actually an eyewitness (John 19:35; 1 John 1:1, 1 John 1:3). “Full of grace and truth.” Jesus was not full of grace in the sense of the unmerited favor of God, for His sinlessness and absolute perfection caused Him to merit the continual favor of God.
John 1:15. “John beareth witness.” Now we come to the close of the profound prologue and begin to contact the historical record of John’s ministry. “He that cometh after me is become before me: for he was before me.” Jesus came after John in the sense that He was born in Bethlehem six months after the birth of John the Baptist. He was before John in the sense of His pre-existence. “He was before me.” The Greek reads, “He was first of me.”
Grace and Truth
John 1:16. “For of his fulness we all received, and grace for grace.” It seems that either “grace” or “for” must be taken in a general sense in this verse. It is hard to choose between the two interpretations as both give a beautiful content. (1) “Grace upon grace” — blessing upon blessing is bestowed upon us as we follow Christ. This translates grace accurately, as we do not deserve the favor which Christ gives to us; but it does not render accurately the preposition anti, which means “in return for.” (2) “Grace for grace” means that as we seek to imitate Jesus for every grace or beautiful virtue in the divine character of Jesus, we gain a like virtue such as love, mercy, righteousness, humility, unselfishness. This does not translate “grace” accurately since Jesus had no unmerited favor. But John has already used “grace” in this more general sense in John 1:14. This inclines one to accept the second interpretation here.
John 1:17. “Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.” Now John introduces the personal name and the Messianic title to make full revelation of his meaning in the title, “Word.” He does not imply that there was neither grace nor truth in the Old Testament revelation. The very fact that “the law was given through Moses” shows how merciful God was in thus revealing Himself to man. It is in the comparative sense of the full and final revelation of grace and truth in the gospel that John makes this contrast.
John 1:18. “He hath declared him.” In critical passages such as the time Moses desired to see the face of God, it is made plain the fulfillment of this great desire was not possible (Exodus 33:20.). From the cleft of the rock where Moses stood to see God as He passed by, no description is offered of what God looked like, but rather a magnificent declaration of God’s spiritual character. But when Christ came among men, He could say: “He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father” (John 14:9).