John 1:1-18

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

John 1:1-18

Post by darinhouston » Sun Nov 21, 2010 10:35 pm

The more I read and reflect on this the more I'm confused.

Has anyone seen a good detailed outline, linguistic breakdown, exegesis of this passage, tracking who the light and word , etc. are and the extent to which they are distinguished and/or conflated?

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: John 1:1-18

Post by darinhouston » Mon Nov 22, 2010 11:45 am

For example, it is the "light" that John came as a witness to testify so that everyone might believe through him. The passage doesn't equate the light with the logos, but says the light was "in" the logos. Also does "through him" refer to the "word"? or the "light?" or John?

Also, it is unclear when it says "all things were created by "him," whether the referrent (for "him") is "The Word" or God" (who the word was with in the beginning). "The Word was with God in the beginning. All things were created y him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created." So, who's "him"?

I know what tradition says, but why?

User avatar
backwoodsman
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:32 am
Location: Not quite at the ends of the earth, but you can see it from here.

Re: John 1:1-18

Post by backwoodsman » Mon Nov 22, 2010 4:37 pm

I find some of the old commentaries often have insight that's hard to find elsewhere. In particular, for these questions I'd suggest Albert Barnes' Notes, and Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament. The latter might be especially helpful here, as Robertson was a Greek scholar, and Word Pictures is sort of a cross between a Greek reference and a commentary. Both of these can be found online on most of the online Bible sites, downloaded free, or bought in hard copy for much less than one might expect.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: John 1:1-18

Post by Paidion » Tue Nov 23, 2010 4:26 pm

Okay, I'll make an attempt. You may find this "traditional" in some respects (depending upon what you mean by the word). If you mean "early Christian tradition", then I suppose it is very traditional. The translation is my own.

Verse 1:
In the Beginning [of time] was the Expression [of GOD]

The Greek word “λογος” (logos) refers to an expression of oneself. It is usually translated as “word”. I do not say that this is a poor translation. In English “word” is used in this way. Someone may say, “Joe is going to give us a word.” However, this translation can be confusing since “word” in English also refers to “A single unit of meaning formed by a sound or sounds” [American Heritage Dictionary].

Some suppose that, because “logos” means “expression” and that it expresses the thought of the one who gives the word, that in this context, it denotes the mind or thought or reasoning of God --- that it is impersonal, but is personified in the context as a figure of speech. My belief is that the word is used of Jesus, and that He is called “the logos” because He expressed God the Father to mankind when He lived on earth. That’s why He could say, “He who has seen me has seen the Father” [John 14:9].

and the Expression was pro-GOD

This is usually translated that the logos or “word” was with God. But this also is confusing, for our first thought is that the logos was physically close to God. But there are other Greek prepositions for “with” in that sense. The Greek word “προς” (pros) usually means “toward” but can mean “with” in the sense of sharing the thoughts, beliefs, attitudes, etc. of another person. We use “with” in this sense when Jack expresses himself and Sam says, “I’m with you, Jack.” In Greek, the word for God is “θεος” (theos). If the word is preceded by the article as in “‘ο θεος” (the God), then the Father is meant. This seems to be so in every case in which “θεος” stands alone (is not modified by an adjective or an adjectival phrase).

and the Expression was Deity.

This phrase is usually translated, “and the word was God”. Some people read it emphasizing the word “was”. In doing so, they imply that the “word” and “God” are identical. But this is not the case since “θεος” is not preceded by the article. In addition, the word order is changed: “θεος ‘ην ‘ο λογος” (God was the word). This word order is used elsewhere in the New Testament. For example:

God is love [ I John 4:16] “ ‘o θεος 'αγαπη 'εστιν” (God love is). Love is the kind of thing God is, the kind of “stuff” of which He consists ---- His essence.

Your word is reality.[John 17:17] . “‘o λογος ‘ο σος ‘αληθεια ‘εστιν” (The word of you reality is) Reality is the kind of thing God’s word is. It’s the stuff of which His word consists --- the essence of His word.

Thus: The Expression was Deity [John 1:1] “θεος ‘ην ‘ο λογος” (Deity was the Expression). Deity is the kind of thing that the Expression was. It is the stuff of which He consists ---- His very essence.

Martin Luther concurred with this understanding. Whatever else he might have been, Luther was a good Greek scholar. He put it quite succinctly, saying that the lack of an article is against Sabellianism and the word order is against Arianism.

Sabellianism was a form of modalism or “oneness”, the idea that God is a single divine Individual who reveals Himself in three modes, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. An article before
"theos" would be necessary if John had been identifying the logos with God.

Arianism may have originated from the early Christian teaching that the Son of God was begotten by God before all ages, and being God’s only begotten Son, he was therefore fully deity. Arius himself, when writing in 321 A.D. to Eusebius bishop of Nicodemia, referred to the Son as “fully God”:

“But what we say and think we both have taught and continue to teach, that the Son is not unbegotten, nor part of the unbegotten in any way, nor is he derived from any substance; but that by his own will and counsel he existed before times and ages, fully God, only-begotten, unchangeable.”

However, Arius was perceived by Martin Luther and many others, as having taught that Christ was “a lesser god”. This thought may have arisen from Arius’s error in teaching that since the Son was begotten before all ages as an act of God, there must have been a time at which He did not exist.

In any case, the reversed word order makes it incorrect to translate the sentence as "The logos was a god" as in the New World Translation of Jehovah's Witnesses.

So the Logos of God was Deity. He was not God Himself. Nor was He part of a Trinity. He Himself in His prayer declared His Father to be the only true God:

John 17:3 "This is lasting life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.”

By the addition of “and Jesus Christ whom You have sent”, Jesus indicates that He is other than “the only true God”.

Verses 2-5
This one was pro-GOD in the Beginning. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. That which came to be in him, was life, and the life was the light of human beings, and the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not overtake it.

Life came to be in Jesus, and this life was the light of people. Nevertheless, this life or light was Jesus Himself. He said that He was the life. He also declared Himself to be the Light of the World (John 8:12 and 9:5) What is in a person can be the essence of that person. Our own thoughts and emotions are we ourselves!

Verses 6-8
There came to be, a man who had been sent from GOD, his name -- John. This one came for a witness so that he might bear witness concerning the light, so that all should believe through him. He was not that light, but [he came] in order that he should witness concerning the light.

Clearly John the Baptizer bore witness to Christ the light of the world, so that all should believe through Him (Christ). The gospels unmistakably indicate that John announced the coming of the Messiah prior to His coming..

Verses 9-10
He [the Expression] was the real light which illuminates every person who comes into the world system. He was in the world system and the world system came to be, though him, and the world system does not know him.

Through Christ, the world system came to be. But in its creation, it was not a twisted, evil, corrupt world system such as it came to be after sin entered it. Yet Christ continue to illuminate every person who comes into it. This may explain how some non-disciples can be so loving and caring of others. Notwithstanding, the world system in general does not know Christ.

Verses 11-13
He came to his own things, and his own people did not receive him. But as many as received him, to them he gave the authority to become children of GOD -- to those trusting into his name, the ones who are begotten out of God, not out of bloods, nor out of the will of the flesh, nor out of the will of a man but of God.

Jesus came to His own things. Which things were they? Doubtless the things which came into being through Him. He came to them by way of His human birth. But generally, His own people did not receive Him. But He gave to them who did receive Him the authority to become the children of God. Today we hear, “Just receive Jesus as your personal Saviour, and you will immediately become a child of God.” But that is not what John taught He taught that receiving Christ is merely the first step, a step whereby Christ gives you the authority to become a child of God. For one must not only receive Him, but submit to Him. As one begins to entrust themselves to Christ, they become begotten of God, and as they continue in Him, they will eventually be born into the resurrection.

Verse 14
And the expression [of God] became flesh and dwelt among us, and we gazed at his glory, the glory of the only-generated from a Father, full of grace and reality.

Christ, the Expression of God, became flesh by being born as a human being. He was a real human being, not “God clothed in human flesh” as some would have it. As a baby he cried (in spite of the Xmas carol to the contrary) and wet his diapers (or the equivalent in those days). He grew up increasing in wisdom and stature. His mind had to mature just as any normal kid. He had no intrinsic miraculous powers. Every miracle which the Father performed through Him was a consequence of His complete relationship with His Father.

Verses 15-17
John witnessed about him and cried out saying, “This was he whom I said, ‘The one coming after me has come to be, before me, because he was prior to me.” Because out of the filling of him, we all received, grace in place of grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and reality came to be through Jesus Christ.

John announced Christ, and because of God’s filling Him with every grace, we have received grace, only to have it replaced by an even deeper grace. God gave the law through Moses. The law was unable to produce consistently righteous people. But the enabling grace of God which was made available to us through Jesus opens the possibility and even the actuality of righteousness in God’s children. Thus righteousness become a reality in one’s life

Verse 18
No one has ever seen God. The only-begotten God, the one who is in the Father’s bosom, he has revealed him.

The Son of God was the only God who was begotten. God our Father, the only true God, was not begotten but was simply there at the beginning of time. No one has ever seen God. Moses didn’t see God; the prophets didn’t see God. They may have seen Him in visions, but they didn’t really see Him in actuality. If they had seen Him, they would have known Him. But the only-begotten God saw Him, and therefore was able to reveal Him to us, both by His teaching and by His example.
Last edited by Paidion on Tue Nov 23, 2010 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: John 1:1-18

Post by darinhouston » Tue Nov 23, 2010 8:43 pm

Thanks, Paidion -- this (and the commentaries recommended earlier) are very helpful. I do still have some questions but need to ponder it a bit more.

Apollos
Posts: 164
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:52 pm

Re: John 1:1-18

Post by Apollos » Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:52 pm

edit
Last edited by Apollos on Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: John 1:1-18

Post by darinhouston » Mon Jan 07, 2013 2:17 pm

Paidion, have you considered this further from a translation perspective?

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: John 1:1-18

Post by Paidion » Mon Jan 07, 2013 9:24 pm

Darin, could you reword that question? I'm not sure what you are asking.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
jriccitelli
Posts: 1317
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:14 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: John 1:1-18

Post by jriccitelli » Tue Jan 08, 2013 11:39 am

Hi Darin, I saw one of my favorite passages and favorite words ‘logos’, so I cant stop myself from commenting (that is a common trait around here).
I have forever appreciated the word ‘logos’ because I loved reading the philosophers and the Bible, see God anticipating the Greek philosophy and thus answering the question of the great ‘first mover’ or the ‘eternal principle of order’ of philosophy by providing the answer in a ‘person’.
More amazing is the linking of the Greek (gentile) ultimate question of beginnings with the Hebrew God of beginnings, namely the The word of the Hebrews “a meaningful link for both”. God knew this, I think John (the disciple) knew this, as Paul also discreetly addresses philosophy in his letters.

Q ‘Has anyone seen a good detailed outline, linguistic breakdown, exegesis of this passage, tracking who the light and word, etc. are and the extent to which they are distinguished and/or conflated?

I was surprised not to see a reference to the best explanation for this passage, like everything else in the New Testament the foundation is laid for us in the First Testament;

'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness' (Genesis 1:1-3)

I don’t know if God (or Moses) anticipated the moral allegory written here in Genesis with God separating the between light from the darkness and such, but John sure did. I don’t think a good Hebrew would associate any ‘person’ with the person of God in Genesis 1 without knowing that it would be the height of blasphemy to put any other person into the context of Genesis 1:1 – an area reserved for God alone, you can’t put anyone in the context of Genesis without them being God, John did it, in fact John did it twice;

1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life— 2and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. (1John 1:1-3)

If we read John chapter 1, and 1John chapter 1, with Genesis 1 at our side we see the parallels John is making, for instance;

Darin asked; “For example, it is the "light" that John came as a witness to testify so that everyone might believe through him. The passage doesn't equate the light with the logos, but says the light was "in" the logos. Also does "through him" refer to the "word"? or the "light?" or John?”

‘This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. 6If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; 7but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another’ (1John 1:5-7)

Johns use of light and darkness must have been inspired by Genesis 1 (it is interesting to see John 1 in the light of Genesis 1), and Johns references to having – that which was from the beginning - heard – seen – looked upon – and handled – seem to all allow either Jesus or the Old Testament (the Word) to be the subject but John puts ‘both’ of them right into the setting of Genesis 1.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: John 1:1-18

Post by darinhouston » Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:08 pm

Paidion wrote:Darin, could you reword that question? I'm not sure what you are asking.
I was curious if you found value in Apollos' comments and whether it would influence your prior explanation/translation.

Post Reply

Return to “The Trinity”