Bible reading, John 1:14-18

The passage for study this morning is John's Gospel chapter 1 and verse 14 through 18. I would like to read a little bit in the beginning of the chapter, read the first five verses as they connect directly with the verses we're going to look at. John's Gospel chapter 1 and verse 1, in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him. They came into being through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made.

In Him was life, and the life was the light of men, and the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended or apprehended it not. Verse 14, John bear witness of Him, I mean the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory. Glory as of an only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

John bear witness of Him, and cried, saying, This was He of whom I speak. He that cometh after me is preferred before me, for He was before me. And of His fullness have all we received, and grace for grace.

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him.

Now with these good brethren around me here, I don't need to say very much, and I don't feel that there's necessary for me to rob their time. And in fact, they intimidate me a little bit, but I'm hoping for their help. I omitted verse 5 through 13 because that's parenthetical.

It has to do with the reception, His coming to the world as seen from John's witness, and the results that were resulted, the results that were seen as well, and those that received Him, as well as in those who rejected Him. I'm not saying we cannot consider them as well. But in the first four, five verses, we have directly a process, I believe, as you might say, chronologically going from eternity into, ultimately, verse 14, His coming into the world by way of incarnation.

We have eternity, His eternal existence, and His character with the Father, the eternal Word that was and always was without beginning. And then we have in verse 3, the act of creation. And of course, the words really indicate that all things came into being in one great event, not a process of time over thousands of years or millennia.

It's a great event that took place when He spoke the worlds into existence, and life existed in Him. He was never created. He was one who possessed life in Himself.

I take it that there are seven attributes of His deity in these first four verses, and they prove what John is seeking to assert in the gospel. And that is not only the absolute deity of the Lord Jesus, but also His perfect humanity. Joined, as we have it in verse 14, the Word actually became flesh.

He didn't just take on a body. He didn't just assume the appearance of a man. He literally became flesh, and He dwelt among us.

The Word would indicate His eternity, and became flesh is the incarnation in His humanity, and He tabernacled among us. That's a marvelous statement that refers back to the presence of God in the Shekinah cloud that overshadowed the tabernacle in the Old Testament. That was the type.

Here is the antitype. Here's the reality in the place of that which is only anticipatory. So the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us.

And then again we have John bearing witness in verse 14. I've noticed in the Gospel of John that John is always seen bearing witness to Christ. He bears witness to Christ to the first chapter of a number of places.

You find it again toward the end of chapter 3, and in other places he says, and John bear witness of me as one of the witnesses that proved who he was, who he asserted to the Jews that he was, and they refused to believe. So John also verifies what has been already stated, that he was the one who came after him chronologically in terms of time, but he was the one who took precedence, and he also was the one who pre-existed. He was, he existed before me.

We find that the Lord is presented in John's Gospel as the one that pre-existed all the Old Testament heroes, you might say. Before Abraham was, he says, I am. And so we have the assertion of his eternal existence that is so very important to the reality of his deity.

And then we have in verse 16 the infinite fullness and the supply, he says, of grace upon grace, or grace for grace, and I'm sure our brethren will have much to say about that. But I love the word out of his fullness. It's a word that indicates that in relation to the supply of grace he gives, there's absolutely no limit.

He's capable, without any depletion of his resources, out of his fullness we have received. The grace is in contrast to the law that was given by Moses, but grace and truth didn't come by Jesus Christ, but it existed always in Jesus Christ. Then we have divine revelation, no man has seen God in his essence at any time.

The only begotten son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he had declared him. I think we know that John is the only one that uses this expression, the only begotten son, apart from the Hebrews chapter 11 and its application to Isaac. And it's really, the emphasis is not so much on son, although that's in the picture, the thought is there's none to equal, none that is like him, none that has the capability that he has, the absolutely unique one.

But son also indicates he stood in the eternal relationship to a father. And that's an expression that we find numerous times in the gospel. So, I'm not going to go any farther.

I don't want to take any more time. I'll leave plenty of time for the discussion. Five verses is all we have, but I'm sure our brethren will expand far beyond five verses.

I think that when you look at the prologue, these first 18 verses of John's gospel, we need to search them and to appreciate the fact that John is really developing the themes that will be unfolded and expanded in the remaining 21 chapters. We find those things in the first 18 verses as he summarizes, we might say, to give an introduction to what he is going to make emphatically clear in verses that follow. So with that, we'll open the Bible reading to our discussion and trust that the Lord will give us help to do so profitably.

I listened to a man 50 years ago. He says when you read John's gospel, keep in mind three things about the Lord Jesus. The first thing is the glory of his person.

That's verse one. In the beginning was the word. The word was with God.

The word was God. There's the glory of his person. He said the second thing is the greatness of his power.

All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that has been made. Then he said the third thing is the grace of his presence. The word became flesh and dwelt amongst us.

And right through John's gospel, you see the glory of his person, the greatness of his power, and the grace of his presence. I must have been listening when you said that because I haven't written in my Bible. Worth repeating.

Very good. Other comments to introduce this passage? So Joel, as you suggested in the gospel, it's proving that this one is God. There's nothing said about the genealogy or his birth or his boyhood or his ongoing years, but it takes us back to eternity.

He always was being in the form of God. Just a general question and comment from yourself. It was just mentioned yesterday by one of the brethren, I can't remember who, mentioned the two distinct natures in the one person.

Just emphasize that a little. Well, some people think that God and there was a blending, but there wasn't. In the person of the Lord Jesus, that one person, there was distinctly God and there was distinctly man.

Now, we cannot fathom that, but it's wrong to say he did this as God and he did this as man. So we are looking at a mystery here that is just beyond us. I just thought it was mentioned yesterday and I thought we should emphasize that.

I believe that's very true that those who would speak of, as you say, things that he did as God and things as man, there were times, though, that his deity was prominent. Other times, his humanity was prominent. That's right.

But you couldn't separate the two because he's one distinct person. That's it. That's correct.

Yeah. And he still is. Yeah.

He still is God and man in one person. Joel, a good example in line of what you said is when he was asleep in the hinder part of the ship, as he slept, his humanity, he was still God. The man who slept was God.

The one who stilled the waves was God manifest in flesh. So the verses 1 through 5, we have his preexistence so far as incarnation is concerned. Now, let us ask for brethren to answer the question, why did the word become flesh? And it needs to be emphasized that it's not passive, he was made flesh.

He became because John emphasizes the deliberate, purposeful acts of the Lord Jesus. He's the burnt offering, voluntarily bringing himself and coming to the world according to his own purpose to fulfill the Father's will. So would the word that's used here for word be helpful to know what it really means? Not just the spoken word.

So it's really, how would you explain it? The essence of God coming out, it's not just a spoken word, but it's all that God is expressed in his Son. Would you agree, Joel? Joel, it's not something new, it's a new form of existence. Right.

I would take it that when you look into verse, where am I? He was in the world. That looks at his presence in the creation from the beginning. He was here.

He was here. But he wasn't visible. He wasn't in a person.

But he became flesh, first of all. I take it in John 14, he came and became a man to manifest God in his full character in the form of manhood. In a manner that man could comprehend.

I mean, there's truth that is seen in the Old Testament and the glory of God revealed in creation. But it comes down to our level to display in a person all that God is. He that has seen me has seen the Father.

And they were seeing a man, but he was truly God. You mentioned in your introduction that John is the only New Testament writer who uses the word begotten with the exception, the one exception that you indicated. There's another expression here that only John uses, word.

The word became flesh. John is the only one who uses that. When you come to Revelation chapter 1, he uses another expression that only John uses.

I turn to see the voice. The voice and the word go together. The voice articulates the word.

Could you say that the word is the expression of God? John could say I'm the voice because he was the audible expression as the one that is sent from the sight of God for witness. But the Lord was the word because the word exists before the voice. And the word is how you and I even think and reason.

We reason and think by words. I don't believe that the expression the word goes to Philo, the Greek philosopher. I believe you find in the Old Testament, he sent forth his word.

And again and again, you find the word is almost in a sense seen personified in the Old Testament. And it's the full expression of divine revelation. All that God can make known to man and a person of a son.

Would it be right to say that Christ was only made one thing? He was made sin for us. Every other time you read that word made, it could be rendered as the word became. First Corinthians 15, he was made a life giving spirit.

He became a life giving spirit. Philippians chapter two, he was made in the likeness of men. The margin says becoming in the likeness of men.

And now we have it here. The word became flesh and dwelt amongst us. So for the younger people, just emphasize what is the difference you're trying to point out there between made and becoming? Well, one would be passive.

One is what somebody else does, but became is active. It became in an active sense of the word. So what we're looking at here in verse 14 is something the Lord Jesus did himself.

Yeah. Okay. So it's important to see that.

You go to Hebrews 10, but a body hast thou prepared me. There the father seems to be emphasized. You go to Luke, the spirit.

So you get all members of the Godhead involved in this. Yeah. Well, I think it's very clear that he also became flesh because only by doing so he had consummate the work for which he had been sent.

That is to be the redeemer and to suffer and die on the cross. It was God himself who suffered on the cross because he was God, but it was not as God, it was as man. It was a real man that endured the suffering.

He became in every sense of the word. All the flesh was apart from sin. So, so there really is a mystery here beyond us, isn't there? I heard Mr. Elbert Joyce make a comment that God didn't die, but the man who died was God.

The word became flesh and tabernacled among us. I think the thought of tabernacling not only takes us back to the Old Testament picture of the tabernacle in the center of the camp of Israel. God making his presence known in that unique way that separated them from the world around them, the nations around them.

But it also indicates to my mind that he was here temporarily for a period of time, passing through time and moving through a wilderness scene because that's what is depicted for us in the gospel. It's a wilderness and he came possessing life, possessing light, displaying love, and he tabernacled among us. And even as a tabernacle was a very strong symbol of the presence of God in the midst of the camp, despite their weakness and their sinfulness and their failure, it was there.

The Lord Jesus came into the midst of a people that received him not, even his own, his own things. And he tabernacled among us. That's the condescending grace of the Lord Jesus, isn't it? That's right.

I was thinking when you said that later the tabernacle of God is with men. It doesn't say the temple of God is with men. And I think the thought is, as you described, it's grace.

Tabernacle is grace. If it's a temple, it's government. But it's used here as a grace of God, which is going to develop later on.

And that was for a very, very short period of time. Thirty-three years. And publicly, three years of his manifestation publicly to men.

So to emphasize your point, brother, it's not that he took humanity for a period of time. That would line up nicely with Hebrews 2 and 9. He was made lower than the angels just for a little short time. But that humanity is eternal.

He has it with him in heaven. Just because he became man, temporarily, should we say, as you've already alluded, he became lower than the angels. But being man doesn't mean he's lower than the angels, because the end of chapter one says he's greater than the angels.

Angels are servants. So oftentimes, the question is asked by younger people, when the Son of God took to himself humanity, did he give up any of his attributes? Or did he leave behind any of his attributes? So help us with that. No, no.

Right. That's a different subject altogether. I know.

But the thought, I also want to emphasize, became flesh means he's permanently, eternally man. Right. He will always be that.

But even though in this world he was here as a tabernacle moving through the world. You would say, Joel, he never ceased to be what he always was, but he became what he never had been, a man. And he's still a man.

That's it. In the glory. He had to be a man, didn't he? To display God to men.

But he had to be God. No man could do that fully. So he had to be God.

And the one that dwelt with God, as seen in verse one, is the same one who dwells with us, as seen in verse 14. The Word became flesh and dwelt amongst us. I would take it that the middle of this verse, and we beheld his glory down to the Father, is parenthetical because he says the Word became flesh and dwelt in a tabernacle among us, full of grace and truth.

Marvelous thing to think that while he was here in this world, he was the one who was absolutely full in every sense of the word, of all that he had been from eternity, because grace and truth subsists in Jesus Christ. It didn't come by way of Jesus Christ. It subsisted, and he displayed it.

But the middle of it is wonderful, too, because we beheld his glory. And would you limit that to the four apostles, three rather, upon the Mount of Transfiguration? Or is he taking in all of them? Because like in 1 John 1, he says, that which we have seen and heard, we saw, we handled. We recognized the reality of this unique person.

So that's what we're trying to tell you about. I had seen a difference between the us, and dwelt among us, mankind in general, and then the parenthetical, and we beheld his glory, being the disciples. So the Lord Jesus, in a unique way, displayed the Father to that little group around him, but the world did not appreciate that.

So the glory that they beheld, I mean the three on the Mount of Transfiguration, that was a display of his glory, but the glory of his life. His sojourn here, his entire sojourn here, every word that he spoke, everything about his person, was a manifestation of his glory. We would say it's moral glory.

I think it included the Mount of Transfiguration, but it goes beyond that. He says it's a unique glory. It wasn't just the glory of manhood.

It's the glory of the only begotten of the Father. Verse 11 of chapter 2, after that first public miracle. This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Canaan, Galilee, and manifest forth his glory.

The disciples believed on him, displayed or seen. It's the verse I was looking for. Thank you.

And in the epistle, Joel, John tells us again that we beheld his glory that he always had from the beginning. We have seen, we have handled. When did he behold his glory? What's your thought on that? I would take it that it's really the intimate group of disciples, all of them included, that moved with him and saw his miracles and heard his words and were caused to believe on him.

As Peter could say, to whom shall we go? They recognized the unique glory that was being displayed in him. There's none of the like him. And the Lord could say in John 17, I have manifested thy name.

And he had made those disciples know him in a way that the general public didn't know him. I would have to take it the entirety of his life as he moved before them was a display of the glory of the only begotten of the Father. That's good.

Glory is a very difficult word, isn't it? Define if you could. But sometimes it's honor. Sometimes it's distinction.

But this word here, I think, includes all those things. I think so, too. Yeah, that's good, John.

I think the best way to try to appreciate glory is a display of his excellence. You can't get beyond that. It's not beauty.

It's beyond beauty. It's linked with God. Well, I think of 2 Corinthians chapter four, where we read that we read about the God of this world has blinded their minds that they should.

It's the glory of God, anyway, in the face of a man that's being brought into view there. The glory that has been hidden from the eyes of the world, but to the believer, they appreciate and recognize his glory. So you have four things, actually, in John's gospel.

He dwelt with the Father, he delighted the Father, he declared the Father, and he depended on the Father. I can of mine own self do nothing. So he's declaring the Father, and that's where we see the glory.

I think the reference to the Father is found in John's gospel more than anywhere else. And it's insistence, not just in a general sense of the word, our Father, as in Matthew chapter five. No, it's my Father, because it's emphasizing a unique relationship that he enjoyed continually without interruption.

Well, what about this expression, full of grace and truth? Well, I don't think it's 50% grace and 50% truth. I believe it's 100% grace and 100% truth. He's full of grace and he's full of truth.

It's a perfect harmony, the perfect balance that marks the Son in relation to the Father. And isn't this the first mention of grace in the New Testament? That's right. And it's linked with the person of Christ.

Right, I agree with that. Could you say that grace was his life and truth was the light that he displayed when he was upon earth? Well, it's very interesting to see the blending together of grace and truth in the gospel of John. You have, I would suggest anyway, there are seven miracles that he performed that display his grace.

And there are seven statements, I am, that manifested the truth. But also in the dealings with men, whether Pharisees or the woman of the well, he always began from the point of grace. He begins talking to her to incite her interest and her appetite for what he had to offer her.

But then he had to come to the truth, go call your husband. And you find that in relation to the Pharisees as you come to chapter 5 and chapter 7 and 8 and so on. He begins in a kind way to try to soften their response and to cause them to respond positively to him.

Ultimately, he says, you're your father of the devil. So it's a blending together perfectly of 100% grace, but also truth. But he knew exactly when to display each one.

Yeah, it's tremendous, really, as you say, the blend. We could be very gracious and give up the truth in order to be gracious, but he didn't. Yet he was full of grace, but it always had to be linked with the truth.

My father said, there's some things my father said I remember, but he said that grace without truth tends toward license. And truth without grace results in legality. And it's only in the Lord Jesus you see a perfect expression of absolute obedience to the Father and unswerving expression of the reality of truth.

But there's also the grace of his person and the expression of that which reached out to men and expressed the kindness and love of God to men. And so with him, it's not like the law, the law had a standard. The law was given by Moses.

I believe there was grace under the law. I see it in the sacrifices that made provision for the failure. But the prominent thing was truth.

But he says, under the person of Christ, there's not only the truth being upheld and maintained and displayed, but there's also the expression of grace. God coming out to man in a manner far beyond, well, in contrast to what he really deserves. Because grace is not just simply giving us what we don't deserve.

It's giving us the opposite of what we really deserve. And he's showing the kindness and the love of God. And even in his incarnation, his expression of the grace of God, they would come down to the level to move amongst men.

So the fact that he tabernacled among us would really bring us into the wilderness, wouldn't it? Right. And as you say, it's how God, times that we come in and many of them perished. But yet he was so gracious.

He never gave them up and he brought them to bring them right through. We only have about 20 something minutes left, so we're only at one verse. You're doing good.

But we link with all this 2 Corinthians 9 and 8 and 9. He knows the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor. That we through his poverty might be rich. So we come into the blessing.

Center saved by grace. Well, let's look briefly at verse 15. John, bear witness of him.

John has already been brought into the picture. Very witness. He was sent for witness for seven.

He was sent from beside God and he was designated that purpose to bear witness as a forerunner for the Lord Jesus. He bear witness of him and was crying. This is the voice.

This is he that of whom I speak. So we've been speaking about him before he ever saw him. And he had been bringing before them the message of repentance.

The repair of the way. Going from the Old Testament prophets. A question, Joe.

In Matthew, Mark and Luke. You always read John the Baptist. John the Baptist.

Thirteen times in John's Gospel. You read about John the Baptist. But he's never called the Baptist.

It's always John, John, John. You never read about the Baptist in John's Gospel. Now why is that? I'll venture one little answer.

Probably not good enough. You tell us and I'll tell you if you're right or wrong. I think that in the Syntoptic Gospels, John wasn't writing them.

So that they're designating John the Baptist to differentiate it from the apostle. But in this Gospel, John was writing. And he never wrote about himself.

So every mention is about John. Yeah, I had the image of God in one verse. Luke, not every man on his own things.

But every man also on the things of others. And what he said. He says, John the writer realized.

There was only one John. Worthwhile speaking about. So he didn't need to write John the Baptist.

Everybody knows that John is John the Baptist. Brother, could you relate the last expression in verse 15. He was before me with the word only begotten.

He existed before me. My successor is my superior because he was my predecessor. So there is an illustration in the Old Testament in Melchizedek.

Without beginning or end of days. So that would present the one that we're considering here. No beginning, no end of days.

And that runs right through the Gospel, right? He's before John the Baptist, chapter 1. He's before Abraham, chapter 8. He's before Isaiah, chapter 12. And he's before the world wars, chapter 17. Would you agree, Joel, that in that verse, the one who was before me.

That's his deity. And the one that cometh after me is his humanity. There's also a nice, we don't see it in our English Bible.

But after me is preferred before. For he was before. They are two different words in the Greek language.

The first one before is the idea of someone that stands out front. But then the second one before me at the end is the idea of chief. First in time.

First in rank. So it's amazing how he looks at it from two different perspectives. The greatness of this one.

First word could be the idea he has precedence before me or precedence over me. Existed before me is the last one. So John is simply corroborating what has already been written in the first part.

John the writer is bringing in the witness of John the Baptist to substantiate what is written in the first four verses. So that they blend together. There was no disharmony between John's witness and what John wrote.

They all pointed to the same person and the same qualities. So, Brother Joel, is there something to for he was the grammar of that? It sounds to us like it's in the past. He was before me.

But it's an imperfect tense, is it not? It would be the same as verse one, wouldn't it? Exactly. Interesting the amount the imperfect could use through this. Something that existed in the past and it's still running concurrent in the present.

Without any definition of time whatsoever. Right. Very good.

Number 16 of his fullness of all we received and grace for grace. The idea of fullness is uniquely connected with the Lord Jesus. For instance, in Colossians, we have the idea that in that which is expressed by the word.

There is the unlimited capacity and the unlimited ability in every way. Perhaps that expression could be explained even more clearly than that. But out of that fullness, grace for grace.

In other words, there's never any depletion of the resources that are found. Always more. Always an abundant supply still remaining.

Amen. Is that correct, Brother? That's correct. And it doesn't say truth upon truth.

No. Because there's no change with truth. Truth is absolute.

The idea of what he received is going back to what he's already said. The one that came into being. Now he has received.

And this grace is upon grace. There's no end to it. So what does this expression mean, grace for grace? Well, one grace flows out.

Another one will ebb. Grace given in place of grace. That's right.

Of his fullness of all we receive and grace for grace. In Christ dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. And we are complete in him.

So there's an infinite supply as has been suggested. It's what man needs. And, Brother, we not only were saved by grace, but we're maintained by grace.

We're brought along the way by grace. And everything we receive is on the grounds of grace. And it'll only be grace and eternity for us.

Well, there's also suggestion made that it's grace in Christ in place of Old Testament grace. Yeah. In other words, as a substitute.

There was an expression of grace in some degree in the Old Testament. Think of God's graciousness in dealing with his people. Think of God's provision for their failures and the sacrifices that were offered.

Because God knew they would fail. But now he says there's a different kind of grace. There's a grace that supplants and it surpasses the grace that was ever seen before.

John Heading suggests that as one explanation. In verse 17, Joel, when he speaks about grace and truth came. That's something entirely different again.

It came into being. It never had been before. But.

The law was given by Moses because he was the instrument. By which God transmitted his mind and will to the people. Well, that relationship.

It was not the originator of it. But grace and truth came, as you've said, but it subsists also as a thought. It subsists through Jesus Christ.

In other words, the manifestation of it was not like Moses just bringing the law down from the mount. Having to be used as a transmitter of that truth. But it actually came in the person of Jesus Christ.

Not just what he said, not just the word he gave, but what he was. Was a demonstration of grace and truth. And more than that, he acted himself.

He himself. Was the one that restored this grace and truth. So then would you say, just to help me understand what you said there.

Would you say that verse 14 full of grace and truth is what came from him? Whereas in verse 17, the grace and the truth is what he is. Is that how we're looking at that? Because I noticed that verse 14 full of grace and truth lacks the definite article in both there. But you have it with verse 17.

I would take it more than in verse 14. It's what eternally existed in him. Full of grace and truth.

Now it's being expressed through him. And in him it is coming. He says, as grace and truth came.

Came into man's existence. Came into human experience by Jesus Christ. And a perfect blending together, as my brother said, 100% of each.

Okay. Will you have comments on that? No, I was just thinking, you know, the whole gospel is all based on the Lord revealing a father. These are things that subsisted eternally in the Father and in the Godhead, really.

And now he's brought into manhood. We haven't given a chance for anybody else to have any comment or ask any question. But we need to make sure about that.

Not just a preacher of Bible reading. There's a verse back in the Old Testament. Mercy and truth are met together.

Righteousness and peace have kissed each other. And the redemptive work here is what the law could not do. Grace and truth are blended together, brother.

We apply that to Calvary in Psalm 85. But I think it's looking forward to the future. What will be fully displayed worldwide.

And restoration of Israel. That would be the full display of God's mercy and truth. But that's good.

We have a few minutes. Let's look at verse 18. Because that's very important.

No man. Jehovah's Witnesses, of course, use this to say that the Lord Jesus wasn't God. But that's far from the truth.

No man has seen God at any time. But that's not God in the person of Christ. That's not God in the singular person of the Godhead.

It's God in his essence. It's like the Lord Jehovah said to Moses, No man can see my face and live. And so he dwells in the expression of light that is eternal.

Light that is unfathomable. Light that is far greater than man can comprehend. No man has seen God in his fullness.

But Moses did see him. He saw his back. It's true in some way.

However it was manifested, you can explain that to us. I don't know. In Matthew 18 it talks about the children in heaven beholding the face of my father.

But I think God's always displayed in his son. So I think even seeing the back of God would be the son really. So are you saying that even in the Old Testament every divine revelation was in the son? Yes.

I believe so. Well that's Colossians 1, right? Who is the image of the invisible God. So I would learn from that that even the angelic hosts, whatever they know of God, they see it through the son.

And would you not agree that when we get to heaven, we're not going to see God in his essence. We will see Christ and in seeing him we will see God. If you can understand that.

Sounds like a contradiction but it's not. Well I might have to wait to find out for sure. We might be surprised.

Would you agree, Joel, in that verse you're talking about, this one who was eternally. His sphere of dwelling was in the bosom of the father. But God brought him into visibility.

The one who was invisible. It says he hath told him out. He hath declared him.

So we see God in Christ. No man has seen God at any time. That's right.

But Christ was God. We see God in Christ. I would take it even as we think about theophanies, the occurrences of God in a form in the Old Testament.

I personally believe, and I may be wrong, but I believe there are Christophanies. I believe that there were the person of Christ instrumentally revealing God to man. I think the angel of Jehovah was the Lord Jesus.

It is preexistence. But no man has seen God at any time. But the only begotten.

Now the revised version says the only begotten God. But we hold to the authorized version, I think, because that's the way that John uses the expression. The only begotten son.

And that's a very precious expression because the only begotten, first of all, gives us a thought of his distinction. He's the one who was in the bosom of the father. And it doesn't say he was.

He is in the bosom of the father. That's his affection, the place of relationship. He hath revealed him.

That's his function in revelation. Unique in the person, in other words. Only one of his kind.

He's the unique son. The only one of his kind. He said things that no man ever had said.

And he did things that no man ever did. Interesting to trace the progressive revelations of God to man from the beginning. He has revealed himself, first of all, in creation.

Heavens declare the glory of God and so on. So he made known his power and Godhead, his divinity, in creation. But then he revealed himself in personal communication to Abraham and others down through the Old Testament.

He revealed himself at the Mount even more to the nation of Israel. We find progressive aspects of the revelation of God. But the full revelation of God in a person had to wait for the coming of the Lord Jesus.

Had to wait. I take it that 2 Corinthians 3, we go back, as he speaks about the contrast between the glory of the new covenant and of the old, that the veiling of Moses' face indicates not only the fading of the glory under the law, but it also indicates that man in the Old Testament was not capable of seeing the glory of God in the face of a man. We beheld it, 1st chapter 4. We behold the glory of God in the person of Christ.

So you pointed out that it is in the bosom of the Father that does what he never left. A place of relationship to the Father. So further on in John's Gospel, with the shadows of the cross before him, he said, I am not alone.

The Father is with me. So eternally the Father was with him. The word says it.

That's what it says. That's what it says. So there was no orphan cry of the Lord Jesus from the cross.

So we have to make a distinction here then, when he said, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? He didn't say my Father. That's right. So it's God and man forsaken.

So the last cry on the cross was, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit. The work was done. That's it.

I emailed with a brother once about the fact that the Father never forsook the Son. It was God forsaking the sin bearer. And he didn't understand the distinction between those relationships indicated.

One was God and his righteousness, and he had to judge sin in the person of the one that was bearing sin. But it's the Father and the Son that existed, was never broken. Relationship was never broken.

Verse 1, Joel, where you started, tells us this one who was by the side of God. He was with God. But more than that, he acted with God.

The word was God. That's it. So is there not a lovely truth, too, that John is writing roughly about 1890, we would assume, 60 years after the Lord was here, and we're told which is in the bosom of the Father.

So that's quite significant, too. Well, it might be that there was error, wasn't there? There was some springing out, and it counteracts the error. There are a number of errors in those days, as well as what exists today, that are counteracted in these verses.

But another thing to remember about the bosom of the Father is that only one who came from the bosom of the Father could fully tell him forth. That's it. It was an indication of the heart of God, and the one who came was always and is in the bosom of the Father.

He is the one that has fully revealed him. It's as if God could say, I can't reveal any more to you at the present time, or maybe eternally, than what is revealed in my Son. That's it.

I read once an account of an African believer who, in considering the spear that was thrust to the side of the Lord Jesus at Calvary, he said that it opened up the way to the heart of God. Nice expression. To think that that was a display of God's heart and his infinite capacity to display grace and love toward men.

Very good. Now, maybe some would think the word begotten would refer to the Lord's birth all the time, and so on. You know, only begotten.

Could you say a few words about it? Well, really the emphasis is on the idea of only. Like the first begotten from the dead. First begotten, and so on.

It indicates a distinction of his person, of a position, of a rank that is far different than others. John never uses the word son, as you know, to speak of a believer. Just once, maybe.

Just once. I'm sorry, I missed that one. Just once in Revelation.

In Revelation, all right. But in his gospel, in the epistles, it's always children. He reserves this word to indicate the uniqueness of the person that he's writing about.

There's none that stands in the same relationship to God as he does. John, Paul could speak about we're now sons of God, and so on, and we've been made sons. That's a position of dignity that we've been accepted into.

But only the Lord Jesus stands in this unique relationship as son to the Father. Only begotten. So the chapter spent how many verses emphasizing the eternality of the Son? Now let's not throw reason out the window and say, oh, must have been a point when he began.

He's now the only begotten. I think the problem is God is now using words that we can relate to. He's using this word to teach us that he is a real son.

He has a real father. But that relationship had no beginning. So the limitation is in our words, trying to understand eternal truth, which we are limited.

Begotten usually refers to birth. That's right. But it also is a thought of bringing forth.

That's right. So I think that's the thought. God brings him forth at certain times and declares who he is.

It's not that he had a beginning. I think the only other reference using this expression is in Hebrews chapter 11. It's speaking about Isaac.

Well, Isaac was not the only son that Abraham had, but he was the only begotten son. He was the only son of promise. He was the only son that really was given by miracle.

That's right. So it points him out as distinct from Ishmael. That's it.

He was the only begotten son. That's right. And that's what's indicated.

The French version of Mr. Darby's Bible renders it unique. Unique son. Unique son.

By every clock that I see, our time is gone. And thank you very much for listening so well and for the help of our brethren.