John 1:2-18 Explanatory Notes

Finishing up my Explanatory Notes on the Birth Stories of Jesus. John 1 isn't really a birth story, but as the Scriptural reference for the Incarnation, it seemed appropriate to include in the book.

______________________ 

2. This [one] was in the beginning with God. 3. All [things] through him came to be and apart from him not even one thing came to be.

We know that, when we get to verse 14, we will find out that John is referring to Jesus. For the moment, however, let us suspend this knowledge and follow the train of thought. John is talking about the Logos, the Word. John 1:1 tells us that the Word was in the beginning and that "it" was with God. Verse 2 puts these two data points together. In the beginning, the Logos was with God.

The statement that the Logos was the means of creation would have come as no surprise to anyone from the synagogue of Alexandria in Egypt. For example, it is hard to imagine that Apollos had not heard such things in the Great Synagogue growing up there. Philo, the most prominent Jewish thinker of the day, considered the Logos, the Word of God, to be the instrument "through which" this world was constructed (Cher. 127). The Word of God is both the image of God and the "instrument" God used to make the world (Leg. 3.96). And this is understandable since God repeatedly speaks the world into order in Genesis 1.

John 1:3 adds that the Logos was not just the instrument God the Father used to create some things but the means by which God created all things. Not even one thing created came to order apart from the Logos. Again, Philo would have agreed. For him, the Logos stood at the intersection of God and the creation.

I have chosen to translate the pronoun in 1:3 as "him" rather than "it." We know that ultimately John is thinking of Jesus. Later in the Gospel, we will get a clear sense that Jesus was conscious prior to his descent into the world. That is to say, John is not merely speaking metaphorically here, as if the Logos was not a person prior to the incarnation, when Jesus took on human flesh. Jesus pre-existed as a conscious person. "Glorify me with the glory we shared before the foundation of the world," Jesus says in John 17:5.

We might say that Jesus is here said to be the agent of creation. We can take such language literally--Jesus was actually the person of the Trinity who directed creation. Or we can take such language figuratively--Jesus is the very meaning and purpose of all creation. I do not think there is a dogmatic answer to this question. The second is certainly true. The first may also be the case.

4. That which has come to be in him was life, and the life was the light of human beings. 5. And the light shines in darkness, and the darkness has not extinguished it.

Jesus is "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6). Jesus is the light of the world (John 8:12). This "prolog" in John is the introduction to John's Gospel. [1] We are not surprised to find that John anticipates themes we will see later in the Gospel. In John 1:14 we will see that Jesus is this Word from God who brings life again to the world. Jesus is the one who has brought light again into the world.

In Stoic thinking, the Logos was the Mind directing the cosmos. We all had this "implanted word" (cf. Jas. 1:21) inside us. Since resistance is futile, the "logical" thing to do is to submit to it and be content no matter our circumstances (cf. Phil. 4:11). "Everything happens for a reason," you might say. We should therefore submit ourselves to God.

What was God's will for this world, God's plan? God's plan was life. God's will for this world was the restoration of light from darkness. God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son so that whoever has faith in him will not perish, will not die, but have everlasting life (John 3:16).

Clearly, God creates life by means of his Word in Genesis 1. God speaks plants and animals into existence. God speaks humanity into existence. God is on the side of life. God created light on the very first day of creation. And God saw that it was good.

God's Word for the world is life and light. Here we depart a little from the language and thinking of Stoicism and Middle Platonism. [2] The world is not currently as God wants it to be. The world that God once created alive has undergone death. The light that God created has gone dark to a large extent.

The world thus needs a Word from God again. The world needs a new creation. The same Word that God spoke in the beginning needs to be spoken again in re-creation.

We are not prone to think of darkness as a thing. Like the Neoplatonists that would rise in Greek thought in the third century, we rightly think of darkness as the absence of light. However, John is not thinking of that kind of darkness in the last part of this verse.

In terms of good and evil, darkness is a force in the world. In this context, darkness is always trying to extinguish and put out the light. Darkness tried to put out the light of Christ. It failed. Jesus--God's Word for the world--came to restore life to the world. He came to restore light in the world. The darkness did not success in extinguishing it.

6. A man did come, having been sent from God, his name John. 7. This [man] came as a witness, to witness concerning the light in order that all might believe through him. 8. That [man] was not the light but [came] in order that he might witness concerning the light.

As in the Gospel of Luke, there is another origin story intertwined with that of Jesus. John the Baptist was also sent by God. The tone of the Gospel toward John the Bapist is a little different in John than in the other Gospels. The tone is entirely positive, to be sure, but the Gospel of John puts John the Bapist's role into clear perspective. John comes second.

In Acts 19, we find out that there were followers of John the Baptist's teaching at Ephesus some twenty-five years after he was beheaded (Acts 19:1-7). The apostle Paul is curious that they have not received the Holy Spirit, even though they have been baptized. In Acts, this means they are in a limbo, not yet fully in the people of God. [3] Paul is puzzled.

We can hypothesize that not every follower of John the Baptist's teaching went on to believe on Jesus. We can also hypothesize that, at least at one time, a significant group of such individuals were situated in Ephesus. Although it was because of his ignorance, Apollos started out as one such individual (cf. Acts 18:25).

The Gospel of John seems to be written in such a way as to make it clear that John the Baptist was only the forerunner to Jesus. John "was not the light" coming into the world. Jesus was the light that came into the world. John's role was only to "give witness" to the light of Jesus. As soon as Jesus arrives, as we will see, John makes it clear that "it is necessary for that one to increase, but for me to decrease" (John 3:30). In fact, the Gospel of John never even records Jesus being baptized by John.

John thus came as a witness to the one who could come afterward, Jesus. The purpose? So that people would believe or have faith through Jesus. Although we cannot see it in English, the verb "to believe" is pisteuo in Greek. The noun, "faith," is pistis. In the original Greek you can clearly see that this is the same verb root. In the right context, the verb "to believe" can thus also be translated as "to have faith." [4] 

The theme of needing faith in order to have eternal life is one of the key themes of the Gospel of John, and we see it here for the first time. Notice in this instance that Jesus is not the object of faith but rather the means by which the world might come to faith in God (the Father). John the Baptist gave witness concerning Jesus, the light through which the world might come to faith.

It is easy to miss the fact that the New Testament focally sees Jesus as the way to God the Father. Jesus is the one in whose name we have access to the Father. Jesus' sacrifice is the means by which we can approach God. Jesus is the way, and the earliest followers of Jesus were called "followers of the Way" (cf. Acts 9:2). John the Baptist prepared "the way" of the Lord (John 1:23).

9. [The other] was the true light coming into the world, which lightens every human. 10. In the world he was, and the world came into existence through him, and the world did not know him. 11. To his own he came, and his own did not receive him.

There are two ways to translate John 1:9, depending on where you put "coming into the world." If you go with the word order, Jesus is the true light that brings light "to everyone who comes into the world." This wording would emphasize that the light is for everyone in the world.

Perhaps John only meant to say that the light of Christ is available to everyone. That is certainly what my tradition believes, the Wesleyan tradition. We do not believe in "limited atonement," that Jesus only came for some in the world and not everyone. 

Theologically, we might explore an even more universal sense to the verse. We might suggest that, even to those who have never heard of him, Jesus brings light to every human in the world in some way. Wesleyan theology calls such light "prevenient grace," the grace of God that reaches out to us before we are even aware of it.

The sense that "God judges us according to the light we have" is an old concept that I grew up with as a Wesleyan. In that sense, God evaluates our hearts not so much according to what we know but according to how we respond to what we know. In this regard, the Wesleyan (and Quaker) traditions are more heart-oriented than head-oriented, which I would argue is in fact the biblical priority.

However, grammatically, the expression, "coming into the world" could also modify "the true light." As I have translated the sentence here, it states that Jesus, the Logos, was the true light coming into the world. And, yes, he lightens every human. Although this primary sense is not the word order, the overall context seems to emphasize the arrival of Jesus into the world, the incarnation. We do not necessarily have to choose between the two interpretations. John could have meant a double entendre.

These verses already recognize the rejection that Jesus faced from his fellow Jews. At the time of John's writing in the late first century, this dynamic had become overwhelmingly clear. Even as early as the late 50s, Paul wrestles with the fact that Jesus seemed to be welcomed more by non-Jews than by Jews. Romans 9-11 wrestles with this puzzle. By the time Acts was written perhaps in the 80s and John perhaps finished in the 90s, this reality must have been deafening.

How ironic and tragic. Here is the very meaning and purpose of the universe, the very wisdom of God for the creation, the "Logos" of God. And God's own people reject him. They reject God's wisdom and purpose for them. They reject the creator of the universe.

12. But as many as received him, he gave to them authority to become children of God, to those who believed in his name, 13. who not from bloods nor from the will of flesh nor from the will of a husband, but they were born from God.

However, many did receive him. They were not primarily Jews. They were not primarily of the same blood as Jesus. They were not of the same flesh as Jesus. They were not the "biological children" of God, as it were. They were spiritual children.

To become the true children of God, all that is necessary is faith. If we believe in the authorizing name of Jesus, the way to God the Father, we can become the children of God. It is our act of faith in Christ that makes us children. As human beings, we have no choice in whether we are born. Parents may actively seek for a woman to get pregnant, or it may happen coincidentally. 

But one does not become a true child of God by accident. We must "receive" Christ. We have faith that he is the Christ. Such individuals are born of God the Father and are the true children of God.

There is obviously a sensitive dynamic in play here in relation to Israel. Paul does this dance as well. He makes it clear that God has not rejected his people (Rom. 11:1). All Israel can still be saved and Paul believes they will eventually turn back (Rom. 11:12, 26). Still, true Israelites and the true children of God--whether Jewish or Gentile--are those who embrace Jesus as the Christ (Rom. 2:29; John 8:39). 

14. And the Logos became flesh and tabernacled among us, and we beheld his glory, a glory as of the only begotten [Son] from the Father, full of grace and truth.

This is the key verse in the Bible proclaiming the "incarnation." Incarnation means "in flesh." The Logos came to earth "in the flesh." A carnivore is an animal that eats meat. Jesus came to earth, "in the meat," so to speak.

A Stoic or Middle Platonist might have no problem agreeing with the statements about the Logos earlier in the chapter. This is the verse where they would say, "Huh?" "What?" The Gospel of John boldly proclaims that the very meaning and purpose of the universe became embodied in a person, Jesus Christ. 

Theologically, this is when the second person of the Trinity took on our humanity. Gregory of Nazianzus put it this way in the late 300s, "that which is not assumed cannot be healed." Jesus fully became human so that he might "heal" and save humanity. Hebrews 2:14 put it in this way: "Because the children partook of blood and flesh, he similarly partook of them so that through death he might destroy the one having the power of death, the Devil." 

God became man. Some versions say, "and dwelt among us," but this is a weak translation. The verse implies something much more powerful. The Word of God "tabernacled" among us. The image is that of the wilderness tabernacle in Exodus.

In Exodus, Israel wanders around the desert for forty years. However, during that time, the portable tabernacle travels around with them. Moses meets with God in that tabernacle, and the glory of God is so striking on his face that he wears a veil not to terrify the people.

Jesus was God tabernacling with his people on earth again. Everywhere that Jesus went, there was "God with us," Immanuel. Everywhere that Jesus went, there was the presence of God among us.

Jesus himself is thus a kind of counter-temple. The temple arguably had been destroyed for a couple decades by the time John was finished. The audience of John would recognize that they need not be concerned by its absence because Jesus was the temple to end all temples.

It is thus no surprise that John goes on to speak of how God's glory was present in Jesus, just as it had been present in the temple in the desert. The beloved disciple confirms that he was an eyewitness of the Jesus on earth. "We beheld his glory." They may not have fully realized it at the time, but it was indeed the "glory of God's only Son. 

Those of us who believe are all the sons of God. And we are brothers and sisters with Christ. However, there is also a unique relationship between God the Father and Jesus the Son. Theologically, they have existed in eternal relationship since eternity past. Christ is the "only-begotten" of the Father in this way. He is "begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father."

I have frequently heard individuals pit grace against truth. Grace is when God lets you off the hook for something you deserve. Truth is when God sticks it to you. 

I get it. There are times when the truth is uncomfortable (like when you fall off a tall building). There are times when we need to experience the consequences of our actions because reality just doesn't seem to be getting through to us and we need to snap out of it and come to our senses. There are other times when we sorely could use forgiveness and "a lighter sentence."

However, despite these important truths, John did not likely mean for us to hear grace and truth as opposites. For John grace and truth are on the same team. Jesus is the truth, as well as the way and the life (John 14:6). Jesus is the true pathway to God the Father.

But Jesus as the truth is fully God's grace and love. The truth is the way of salvation. Jesus came because God so loved the world, and that love has provided the way, the truth, and the life.

15. John witnesses concerning him and has cried out saying, "This [one] was the one whom I said, 'The one coming after me has come to existence before me because he was first from me.'"

Again, John the Baptist was not the Messiah. His job was to point to the Messiah, to prepare the "Way" for the coming king. Here John himself testifies to Jesus' pre-existence, even though on earth he was born first. The Word was in the beginning. John was not. The Word came first. He is the elder, and the one with priority.

16. Because from his fullness we ourselves have all received even grace upon grace, 17. for the Law was given through Moses. Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

The Gospel of John is giving these words of John the Baptist to its audience, to the Christians of Ephesus almost a century after the birth of John the Baptist, but also to us today. From the "fullness" of Jesus, the Word of God become flesh, from the Jesus whose body is the bread of life, from the one who gives us living water to drink, is not just one unmerited gift from God but grace upon grace. Through Christ, we receive gift after gift.  

The Law came through Moses. It brought condemnation. It brought only anticipation of salvation. It brought out our need for God's grace but did not mediate the grace itself. Grace, God's unmerited favor and forgiveness, came from Jesus. The truth, the way to life, came through Jesus, the Messiah, the Christ.

18. God no one has seen at any time. The only-begotten God who was in the bosom of the Father, that [one] has explained [him]. 

How do we know what God is like? Look at Jesus. We cannot visibly see God the Father. Even in the Old Testament, the appearances of God seem to have come through his messengers. [5] Some also speculate whether the pre-incarnate Christ made some appearances during the old covenant. Certainly, many later Christians have thought so, although the Bible itself does not clearly say so.

What then is the clearest way to know God the Father? It is through the person of Jesus Christ. Jesus is the "only-begotten God" who has "exegeted" him. [6] After all, he is "the image of the invisible God" (Col. 1:15). He is a "reflection of his glory and an impression of his substance" (Heb. 1:3). He was with God before he came to earth, in the "bosom" of the Father. [7]

Again, how do we know what God is like? Look at Jesus. "God is love," 1 John 4:8 says. Jesus certainly displayed that identity in his earthly mission. And the sending of Jesus itself was a reflection of this core characteristic of God (cf. John 3:16).

[1] Like many introductions, it is quite possible that John 1 was one of the last parts of the Gospel to be written. There are of course those in the past who have suggested that the Gospel may have had a "composition history." For example, it is sometimes suggested that John 21 was also added in the later stages of John's composition. It refers to the beloved disciple in the third person--"he is the one giving witness to these things" (21:24). It is at least possible that the core source for John was the beloved disciple but that God also inspired some of those in John's circle to help edit the Gospel into its final form. These musings may or may not be particularly useful to most readers of John.

[2] In revelation, God meets us where we are, but he does not leave us there. Even if there could be overtones of the language of Middle Platonism and/or Stoicism here, the most fundamental framework of John's theology is the narrative of the Jewish Scriptures. 

[3] Receiving the Holy Spirit is the indicator that one has been saved and become part of God's people in the thinking of Acts and Paul. Without the Spirit, one does not belong to Christ (Rom. 8:9). The Spirit is God's "seal" of ownership on us (e.g., Eph. 1:13). The Spirit is the security deposit on our eternal inheritance (e.g., 2 Cor. 1:22).

[4] Any given word can have multiple meanings. A word does not have all these meanings at the same time (overload fallacy). In some sentences, pisteuo has more of a connotation of believing. In others, it has more of a sense of having faith. Similarly, the noun pistis sometimes has more the sense of faith. In others, it has more a sense of belief.

[5] It is hard to say what Moses saw when he looked at the "back of God" in Exodus 33:23. It was surely God meeting Moses within his understanding of God. God has no body in this world other than the body of Jesus.

[6] Interestingly, the article "the" is again missing from both mentions of God in this verse.

[7] Apparently, the beloved disciple was not troubled by the apparent metaphor of God being pregnant.