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 through him. Without him, nothing was made that has been made.
Show the surrounding paragraph
John 1:1-3 sits inside this longer paragraph.
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 through him. Without him, nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness hasn’t overcome it. There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John. The same came as a witness, that he might testify about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but was sent that he might testify about the light. The true light that enlightens everyone was coming into the world.
Parallel Translations
-
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 through him. Without him, nothing was made that has been made.
-
In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God.
The same was in the beginnynge with God.
All thinges were made by it and with out it was made nothinge that was made.
Show all 3 translations
-
In the beginning was that Word, and that Word was with God, and that Word was God.
This same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made.
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Contradictions (2)
Questions where the Bible appears to say two different things, with the passages on each side set together.
Cross-references (51)
- Genesis 1:1 (vv1, 3) In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
- John 17:5 (v1) Now, Father, glorify me with your own self with the glory which I had with you before the world existed.
- Revelation 19:13 (v1) He is clothed in a garment sprinkled with blood. His name is called “The Word of God.”
- Colossians 1:17 (v1) He is before all things, and in him all things are held together.
- John 1:14 (v1) The Word became flesh, and lived among us. We saw his glory, such glory as of the one and only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.
Show all 49 cross-references
- 1 John 1:1-2 (v1) That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we saw, and our hands…
- Revelation 22:13 (v1) I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
- John 1:2 (v1) The same was in the beginning with God.
- Revelation 1:8 (v1) “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
- John 10:30-33 (v1) I and the Father are one.” Therefore Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from my…
- Proverbs 8:22-31 (v1) “Yahweh possessed me in the beginning of his work, before his deeds of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, before the…
- Colossians 1:16-17 (v3) For by him all things were created in the heavens and on the earth, visible things and invisible things, whether thrones or dominions or…
- Matthew 1:23 (v1) “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall give birth to a son. They shall call his name Immanuel;” which is, being interpreted,…
- Philippians 2:6 (v1) who, existing in the form of God, didn’t consider equality with God a thing to be grasped,
- Isaiah 9:6 (v1) For a child is born to us. A son is given to us; and the government will be on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor,…
- Revelation 21:6 (v1) He said to me, “I have become the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give freely to him who is thirsty from the spring…
- Hebrews 13:8 (v1) Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
- Isaiah 7:14 (v1) Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin will conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
- 1 John 5:20 (v1) We know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding, that we know him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in…
- 1 Timothy 3:16 (v1) Without controversy, the mystery of godliness is great: God was revealed in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen by angels, preached…
- Hebrews 1:8-13 (v1) But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your Kingdom. You have loved…
- 1 Corinthians 8:6 (v3) yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things,…
- John 16:28 (v1) I came from the Father, and have come into the world. Again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.”
- Revelation 1:17 (v1) When I saw him, I fell at his feet like a dead man. He laid his right hand on me, saying, “Don’t be afraid. I am the first and the last,
- John 20:28 (v1) Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!”
- Titus 2:13 (v1) looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,
- Revelation 4:11 (v3) “Worthy are you, our Lord and God, the Holy One, to receive the glory, the honor, and the power, for you created all things, and because of…
- Revelation 1:2 (v1) who testified to God’s word and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, about everything that he saw.
- John 1:18 (v1) No one has seen God at any time. The one and only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, has declared him.
- Hebrews 7:3 (v1) without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God), remains…
- Ephesians 3:9 (vv1, 3) and to make all men see what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God, who created all things through…
- Revelation 3:14 (v1) “To the angel of the assembly in Laodicea write: “The Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of God’s creation, says these…
- Psalms 33:6 (v3) By Yahweh’s word, the heavens were made: all their army by the breath of his mouth.
- Romans 9:5 (v1) of whom are the fathers, and from whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God, blessed forever. Amen.
- 1 John 5:7 (v1) For there are three who testify:
- Genesis 1:26 (v3) God said, “Let’s make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the sky,…
- Revelation 2:8 (v1) “To the angel of the assembly in Smyrna write: “The first and the last, who was dead, and has come to life says these things:
- 2 Peter 1:1 (v1) Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have obtained a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our…
- Psalms 45:6 (v1) Your throne, God, is forever and ever. A scepter of equity is the scepter of your kingdom.
- John 1:10 (v3) He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world didn’t recognize him.
- Hebrews 1:2-3 (v3) has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds. His Son…
- Isaiah 40:9-11 (v1) You who tell good news to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who tell good news to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with strength! Lift it…
- Isaiah 45:18 (v3) For Yahweh who created the heavens, the God who formed the earth and made it, who established it and didn’t create it a waste, who formed…
- Isaiah 45:12 (v3) I have made the earth, and created man on it. I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens. I have commanded all their army.
- Psalms 102:25 (v3) Of old, you laid the foundation of the earth. The heavens are the work of your hands.
- Hebrews 3:3-4 (v3) For he has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, because he who built the house has more honor than the house. For every house is…
- Hebrews 1:10-12 (v3) And, “You, Lord, in the beginning, laid the foundation of the earth. The heavens are the works of your hands. They will perish, but you…
- John 5:17-19 (v3) But Jesus answered them, “My Father is still working, so I am working, too.” For this cause therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill…
- Revelation 1:11 (v1) saying, “What you see, write in a book and send to the seven assemblies: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and…
49 distinct cross-references across this passage (51 total citations).
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this passage (34 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv1–3 The meaning of the Greek word, εὐαγγέλιον (Gospel) is…
The meaning of the Greek word, εὐαγγέλιον (Gospel) is well known. In Scripture it denotes, by way of eminence, (κατ ᾿ ἐξοχὴν,) the glad and delightful message of the grace exhibited to us in Christ, in order to instruct us, by despising the world and its fading riches and pleasures, to desire with our whole heart, and to embrace when offered to us, this invaluable blessing. The conduct which we perceive in irreligious men, who take an extravagant delight in the empty enjoyments of the world, while they are little if at all, affected by a relish for spiritual blessings, is natural to us all. For the purpose of correcting this fault, God expressly bestows the name Gospel on the message which he orders to be proclaimed concerning Christ; for thus he reminds us that nowhere else can true and solid happiness be obtained, and that in him we have all that is necessary for the perfection of a happy life.
Some consider the word Gospel as extending to all the gracious promises of God which are found scattered even in the Law and the Prophets. Nor can it be denied that, whenever God declares that he will be reconciled to men, and forgives their sins, he at the same time exhibits Christ, whose peculiar office it is, wherever he shines, to spread abroad the rays of joy. I acknowledge, therefore, that the Fathers were partakers of the same Gospel with ourselves, so far as relates to the faith of a gratuitous salvation. But as it is the ordinary declaration made by the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures, that the Gospel was first proclaimed when Christ came, let us also adhere to this mode of expression; and let us keep by that definition of the Gospel which I have given, that it is a solemn publication of the grace revealed in Christ. On this account the Gospel is called
Read full note →
the power of God to salvation to every one who believeth, (Romans 1:16)
because in it God displays his righteousness. It is called also an
embassy, by which he reconciles men to himself, (2 Corinthians 5:20)
and as Christ is the pledge of the mercy of God, and of his fatherly love towards us, so he is, in a peculiar manner, the subject of the Gospel.
Hence it came that the histories which relate that Christ appeared in the flesh and died, and was raised from the dead, and at length was taken up into heaven, have peculiarly obtained the name Gospel. For although, for the reason already stated:, this word means the New Testament, yet the name which denote, the whole has come, by general practice, to stand for that part of it which declares that Christ was manifested to us in the flesh, and died, and rose from the dead. But as the bare history would not be enough, and, indeed, would be of no advantage for salvation, the Evangelists do not merely relate that Christ was born, and that he died and vanquished death, but also explain for what purpose he was born, and died, and rose again, and what benefit we derive from those events.
Yet there is also this difference between them, that the other three are more copious in their narrative of the life and death of Christ, but John dwells more largely on the doctrine by which the office of Christ, together with the power of his death and resurrection, is unfolded. They do not, indeed, omit to mention that Christ came to bring salvation to the world, to atone for the sins of the world by the sacrifice of his death, and, in short, to perform every thing that was required from the Mediator, (as John also devotes a portion of his work to historical details;) but the doctrine, which points out to us the power and benefit of the coming of Christ, is far more clearly exhibited by him than by the rest. And as all of them had the same object in view, to point out Christ, the three former exhibit his body, if we may be permitted to use the expression, but John exhibits his soul. On this account, I am accustomed to say that this Gospel is a key to open the door for understanding the rest; for whoever shall understand the power of Christ, as it is here strikingly portrayed, will afterwards read with advantage what the others relate about the Redeemer who was manifested.
John is believed to have written chiefly with the intention of maintaining the Divinity of Christ, in opposition to the wicked blasphemies of Ebion and Cerinthus; and this is asserted by Eusebius and Jerome, in accordance with the general opinion of the ancients. But whatever might be his motive for writing at that time, there can be no doubt whatever that God intended a far higher benefit for his Church. He therefore dictated to the Four Evangelists what they should write, in such a manner that, while each had his own part assigned him, the whole might be collected into one body; and it is our duty now to blend the Four by a mutual relation, so that we may permit ourselves to be taught by all of them, as by one mouth. As to John being placed the fourth in order, it was done on account of the time when he wrote, but in reading them, a different order would be more advantageous, which is, that when we wish to read in Matthew and the others, that Christ was given to us by the Father, we should first learn from John the purpose for which he was manifested.
1. In the beginning was the Speech. In this introduction he asserts the eternal Divinity of Christ, in order to inform us that he is the eternal God, who was manifested in the flesh, (1 Timothy 3:16.) The design is, to show it to have been necessary that the restoration of mankind should be accomplished by the Son of God, since by his power all things were created, since he alone breathes into all the creatures life and energy, so that they remain in their condition; and since in man himself he has given a remarkable display both of his power and of his grace, and even subsequently to the fall of man has not ceased to show liberality and kindness towards his posterity. And this doctrine is highly necessary to be known; for since apart from God we ought not at all to seek life and salvation, how could our faith rest on Christ, if we did not know with certainty what is here taught? By these words, therefore, the Evangelist assures us that we do not withdraw from the only and eternal God, when we believe in Christ, and likewise that life is now restored to the dead through the kindness of him who was the source and cause of life, when the nature of man was still uncorrupted.
As to the Evangelist calling the Son of God the Speech, the simple reason appears to me to be, first, because he is the eternal Wisdom and Will of God; and, secondly, because he is the lively image of His purpose; for, as Speech is said to be among men the image of the mind, so it is not inappropriate to apply this to God, and to say that He reveals himself to us by his Speech. The other significations of the Greek word λόγος (Logos) do not apply so well. It means, no doubt, definition, and reasoning, and calculation; but I am unwilling to carry the abstruseness of philosophy beyond the measure of my faith. And we perceive that the Spirit of God is so far from approving of such subtleties that, in prattling with us, by his very silence he cries aloud with what sobriety we ought to handle such lofty mysteries.
Now as God, in creating the world, revealed himself by that Speech, so he formerly had him concealed with himself, so that there is a twofold relation; the former to God, and the latter to men. Servetus, a haughty scoundrel belonging to the Spanish nation, invents the statement, that this eternal Speech began to exist at that time when he was displayed in the creation of the world, as if he did not exist before his power was made known by external operation. Very differently does the Evangelist teach in this passage; for he does not ascribe to the Speech a beginning of time, but says that he was from the beginning, and thus rises beyond all ages. I am fully aware how this dog barks against us, and what cavils were formerly raised by the Arians, namely, that
in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, (Genesis 1:1)
which nevertheless are not eternal, because the word beginning refers to order, instead of denoting eternity. But the Evangelist meets this calumny when he says,
And the Speech was with God. If the Speech began to be at some time, they must find out some succession of time in God; and undoubtedly by this clause John intended to distinguish him from all created things. For many questions might arise, Where was this Speech? How did he exert his power? What was his nature? How might he be known? The Evangelist, therefore, declares that we must not confine our views to the world and to created things; for he was always united to God, before the world existed. Now when men date the beginning from the origin of heaven and earth, do they not reduce Christ to the common order of the world, from which he is excluded in express terms by this passage? By this proceeding they offer an egregious insult not only to the Son of God, but to his eternal Father, whom they deprive of his wisdom. If we are not at liberty to conceive of God without his wisdom, it must be acknowledged that we ought not to seek the origin of the Speech any where else than in the Eternal Wisdom of God.
Servetus objects that the Speech cannot be admitted to have existed any earlier than when Moses introduces God as speaking. As if he did not subsist in God, because he was not publicly made known: that is, as if he did not exist within, until he began to appear without. But every pretense for outrageously absurd fancies of this description is cut off by the Evangelist, when he affirms without reservation, that the Speech was with God; for he expressly withdraws us from every moment of time.
Those who infer from the imperfect tense of the verb which is here used, that it denotes continued existence, have little strength of argument to support them. Was, they say, is a word more fitted to express the idea of uninterrupted succession, than if John had said, Has been. But on matters so weighty we ought to employ more solid arguments; and, indeed, the argument which I have brought forward ought to be reckoned by us sufficient; namely, that the Evangelist sends us to the eternal secrets of God, that we may there learn that the Speech was, as it were hidden, before he revealed himself in the external structure of the world. Justly, therefore, does Augustine remark, that this beginning, which is now mentioned, has no beginning; for though, in the order of nature, the Father came before his Wisdom, yet those who conceive of any point of time when he went before his Wisdom, deprive Him of his glory. And this is the eternal generation, which, during a period of infinite extent before the foundation of the world, lay hid in God, so to speak — which, for a long succession of years, was obscurely shadowed out to the Fathers under the Law, and at length was more fully manifested in flesh.
I wonder what induced the Latins to render ὁ λόγος by Verbum, (the Word;) for that would rather have been the translation of τὸ ῥη̑μα. But granting that they had some plausible reason, still it cannot be denied that Sermo (the Speech) would have been far more appropriate. Hence it is evident, what barbarous tyranny was exercised by the theologians of the Sorbonne, who teased and stormed at Erasmus in such a manner, because he had changed a single word for the better.
And the Speech was with God. We have already said that the Son of God is thus placed above the world and above all the creatures, and is declared to have existed before all ages. But at the same time this mode of expression attributes to him a distinct personality from the Father; for it would have been absurd in the Evangelist to say that the Speech was always with God, if he had not some kind of subsistence peculiar to himself in God. This passage serves, therefore, to refute the error of Sabellius; for it shows that the Son is distinct from the Father. I have already remarked that we ought to be sober in thinking, and modest in speaking, about such high mysteries. And yet the ancient writers of the Church were excusable, when, finding that they could not in any other way maintain sound and pure doctrine in opposition to the perplexed and ambiguous phraseology of the heretics, they were compelled to invent some words, which after all had no other meaning than what is taught in the Scriptures. They said that there are three Hypostases, or Subsistences, or Persons, in the one and simple essence of God. The word; ὑπόστασις (Hypostasis) occurs in this sense in Hebrews 1:3, to which corresponds the Latin word Substaatia, (substance) as it is employed by Hilary. The Persons (τὰ πρόσωπα) were called by them distinct properties in God, which present themselves to the view of our minds; as Gregory Nazianzen says, “I cannot think of the One (God) without having the Three (Persons) shining around me.
And the Speech was God. That there may be no remaining doubt as to Christ’s divine essence, the Evangelist distinctly asserts that he is God. Now since there is but one God, it follows that Christ is of the same essence with the Father, and yet that, in some respect, he is distinct from the Father. But of the second clause we have already spoken. As to the unity of the divine essence, Arius showed prodigious wickedness, when, to avoid being compelled to acknowledge the eternal Divinity of Christ, he prattled about I know not what imaginary Deity; but for our part, when we are informed that the Speech was God, what right have we any longer to call in question his eternal essence?
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv1, 3 Had his being.
Had his being.
This word (With) putteth out the distinction of persons to us.
Read full note →
This word (Word) is the first in order in the sentence, and is that which the learned call (Subjectum:) and this word (God) is the latter in order, and the same which the learned call (Predicatum.)
The Son of God is of one, and the selfsame eternity or everlastingness, and of one and the selfsame essence or nature, with the Father.
From his beginning, as the Evangelist saith, 1 John 1:1, as though he said, that the world began not then to have his being, when God began to make all that was made: for the word was even then when all things that were made, began to be made, and therefore he was before the beginning of all things.
This word, That, pointeth out unto us a peculiar and choice thing above all other, and putteth a difference between this Word, which is the Son of God, and the Laws of God, which otherwise also are called the word of God.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv1–3 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the…
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Ver. 1. In the beginning] Here this heavenly eagle, John the Divine, soars at first out of sight (ο θεολογος κατ εξοχην). Here doth God detonate ab alto, thunder from on high, saith Calvin. St Austin stands amazed at the mystical divinity here delivered. This barbarian (said the philosopher, concerning our evangelist) hath comprised more stupendous stuff in three lines than we have done in all our voluminous discourses. {a} Happy had it been for him if he had been made, by this first chapter, of an atheist, a true Christian, as learned Junius was. {b} But he only admired it, and so left it where he found it; as too many do the Word at this day.
Read full note →
Was the Word] Personal, and enunciative. Isaiah, Isa 6:1, saw him on the throne, and heard him speaking; Daniel, Dan 8:13, calleth him Palmoni hammedabber, " that excellent speaker," and asketh him of the vision; the Syriac interpreter here calleth him Meltha, " the Word uttered;" and the Chaldee, Pithgam Adonai, "the Lord, the Word."
And the Word was with God] Which sweetly sets forth his co-eternity and co-existency with the Father (το συναιδιον και ενυποστατον), saith Chrysostom. Moscopulus renders it, secundum Deum according to God, as being the express image of the Father. Others, ad Deum; to God, as importing a deliberation and conference of the Father and the Son.
And the Word was God] θεος, without an article: hence the Arians cavil that the Son is not God co-equal, but a secondary God, inferior to the Father. See Gal 1:3. The Father is also called θεος, without an article: therefore this follows not. This whole Gospel is a continuate demonstration of Christ’s Deity, which began to be denied, while this evangelist lived, by Ebion, Cerinthus, and other odious antichrists.
{a} Amel. Platonic. ap. Clem. Alex.
{b} Funccius ia Vita Sua, Operib. praefix.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv1–3 In the beginning; in that beginning which Moses mentions,…
In the beginning; in that beginning which Moses mentions, Gen 1:1, the beginning of all things, when the foundations of the world were laid, Pro 8:27,28; the beginning of time; for before that was no measure of time, all was eternity.
Was the Word, that is, the eternal Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, of whom more is spoken afterward. Nor is Christ in this text alone called the Word, but 1Jo 1:1, the Word of life; so Rev 19:13; and there are some who think he is so called, Luk 1:2, comparing that text with 2Pe 1:16, as also Psa 33:6. Nor is it an improper term by which to express the Son of God; for it both expresses something of his ineffable generation, as the word is begotten in our thoughts, and is the express image of them; and also his office in the revelation of his Father's will unto the sons of men, and revealing his Father to us, Mat 11:27; and there are some (if they be not too curious in their notion) who think by that phrase of David, 2Sa 7:21, For thy word's sake, ( expounded for thy servant's sake, 1Ch 17:19, which is the title of Christ, Isa 42:1), that Christ is meant. Besides, it is observed, that this term was more acceptable both to the Jews and the heathens, than the term of Christ, or the Son of God, would have been; for there was nothing more abhorred by the Jews than the latter; and the heathen writers made (as is noted by divers) a great use of this term, to express the name and the power of God. Nor is any thing more ordinary with the Chaldee paraphrast than this expression: Isa 45:12, I have made the earth; Chald. I in my word have made the earth. So Isa 48:13, Mine hand hath laid the foundation of the earth; Chald. By my word I have laid the foundations of the earth: this is taken from Moses's describing the creation by God's word of command, Let there be light, and there was light; the manner of expressing it by the word command, is significative that all things were made by his eternal Word; for would any Jew deny, that God by his word created the world? The evangelist therefore calleth Christ, to whom he was about to attribute the creation, the Word; not the word of God (so the Scriptures are called); to distinguish Christ in this notion from the revelation of the Divine will to the prophets, he is only called the Word, though he was the Son of God. Nor is it said, that in the beginning was the Word created, (as is said of the heavens and the earth, Gen 1:1), but was the Word: this proveth the eternal existence of the Second Person in the Trinity; for what was in the beginning did not then begin to be: the term the Word, without the addition of God, speaketh him a subsistence; and it being said, that in the beginning he was, speaks his eternal existence; for what had a being in the beginning of time must needs be eternal, nothing being when time began but what was eternal. To this purpose are those texts, Psa 90:2 Pro 8:22-31; Joh 17:5 Eph 1:4; 2Th 2:13, which two texts compared show, In the beginning, here used, to be the same with before the foundation of the world: so 2Ti 1:9.
Read full note →
The Word was with God: lest any should say, Where was this Word before the foundations of the earth were laid? The evangelist saith, with God, which agreeth with Pro 8:27,30. This both distinguishes Christ from all creatures, (none of which were with God in the beginning), and also showeth the vanity of Sabellius, and those we call quakers, who will not allow Christ to be a distinct subsistence, or person, from his Father: it also denotes the Son's co-existence and his equality with his Father; and yet his filial relation; for God is not said to have been with the Word, but the Word was with God, which also speaks a perfect unity and consent between them.
And the Word was God: lest any should say, What but God can be eternal, or be said to have been and had an existence in the beginning of the world? The evangelist addeth, that the Word was God: that is, the person or subsistence spoken of and intended by him was the Divine Being, which is but one; though in it there be three distinct subsistences, all make but one and the same Divine Being. The first thing spoken here of Christ attributes to him eternity; the second speaks his relation to the Father; this speaks the oneness and sameness of his essence with that of the Father. The term God, which in the foregoing words is to be taken personally for God the Father, is here to be taken essentially, as it signifieth the Divine Being.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
William Burkitt 1703 · Public Domain On vv1, 3 Observe here, 1. The person spoken of, Jesus Christ,…
Observe here, 1. The person spoken of, Jesus Christ, under the name of the Word. In the beginning was the Word. Because God spake to us by him, and makes known his will to us by Christ, as we make known our minds to one another by our words.
Again; As our words are the conception and image of our minds, so Christ is the express Image of his Father’s person, and was begotten of the Father, even as our words are begotten of our minds: for these reasons he is often styled the Word.
Read full note →
Observe, 2. What the evangelist here asserts concerning the Word, Christ Jesus, even three particulars; namely, his eternal existence, his personal co-existence, and his divine essence.
1. His eternal existence; In the beginning was the Word; in the beginning, when all things received their being, then the Word was, and did actually subsist, even from all eternity. Not in the beginning of the gospel-state, but in the beginning of creation, as appears from the following words, All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. Which plainly shows that the evangelist is here speaking of the creation, rise, or beginning of all things created.
Learn hence, That Jesus Christ, not only antecedent to his incarnation, but even before all time, and the beginning of all things, had an actual being and existence.
2. His personal co-existence with the Father, The word was with God: that is, eternally and inseparably with him, in the same essence and nature, being in the Father, as well as with him, so that the Father never was without him, I was by him as one brought up with him. Pro 8:22 I was by his side, says the Chaldee interpreter.
Learn hence, That the Son is a Person distinct from the Father, but of the same essence and nature with the Father; he is God of God, very God of very God; being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made: The Word was with God.
3. His divine essence. The Word was God. Here St. John declares the divinity, as he did before the eternity, of our blessed Saviour. He was with God, and existed in him; therefore he must be God, and a Person distinct from the Father. The Word was God, say the Socinians, that is, a god by office, not by nature, as being God’s ambassador. But the word God is used eleven times in this chapter in its proper sense; and it is not reasonable to conceive that it should be here used in an improper sense, in which this word in the singular number is never used throughout the whole New Testament: Dr. Whitby.
Learn hence, That eternity, the personality, and the divinty of Christ, are of necessity to be believed, if we will worship him aright. Christ tells us, that we must worship the Son even as we worship the Father. Joh 5:23
Now unless we acknowledge the eternity and divinity of Christ, the second Person, as well as of God the Father, the first Person, we honour neither the Father nor the Son. There is a difference between natural things and supernatural: Natural things are first understood, and then believed; but supernatural mysteries must be first believed, and then will be better understood. If we will first set reason on work, and believe no more than we can comprehend, this will hinder faith: but if after we have assented to gospel mysteries, we set reason on work, this will help faith.
William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v1 Austin says (de Civitate Dei, lib. 10, cap. 29)…
Austin says (de Civitate Dei, lib. 10, cap. 29) that his friend Simplicius told him he had heard a Platonic philosopher say that these first verses of St. John's gospel were worthy to be written in letters of gold. The learned Francis Junius, in the account he gives of his own life, tells how he was in his youth infected with loose notions in religion, and by the grace of God was wonderfully recovered by reading accidentally these verses in a bible which his father had designedly laid in his way. He says that he observed such a divinity in the argument, such an authority and majesty in the style, that his flesh trembled, and he was struck with such amazement that for a whole day he scarcely knew where he was or what he did; and thence he dates the beginning of his being religious. Let us enquire what there is in those strong lines. The evangelist here lays down the great truth he is to prove, that Jesus Christ is God, one with the Father. Observe,
I. Of whom he speaks - The Word - ho logos. This is an idiom peculiar to John's writings. See Jo1 1:1; Jo1 5:7; Rev 19:13. Yet some think that Christ is meant by the Word in Act 20:32; Heb 4:12; Luk 1:2. The Chaldee paraphrase very frequently calls the Messiah Memra - the Word of Jehovah, and speaks of many things in the Old Testament, said to be done by the Lord, as done by that Word of the Lord. Even the vulgar Jews were taught that the Word of God was the same with God. The evangelist, in the close of his discourse (Joh 1:18), plainly tells us why he calls Christ the Word - because he is the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, and has declared him. Word is two-fold: logos endiathetos - word conceived; and logos prophorikos - word uttered. The logos ho esō and ho exō, ratio and oratio - intelligence and utterance. 1. There is the word conceived, that is, thought, which is the first and only immediate product and conception of the soul (all the operations of which are performed by thought), and it is one with the soul. And thus the second person in the Trinity is fitly called the Word; for he is the first-begotten of the Father, that eternal essential Wisdom which the Lord possessed, as the soul does its thought, in the beginning of his way, Pro 8:22. There is nothing we are more sure of than that we think, yet nothing we are more in the dark about than how we think; who can declare the generation of thought in the soul? Surely then the generations and births of the eternal mind may well be allowed to be great mysteries of godliness, the bottom of which we cannot fathom, while yet we adore the depth. 2. There is the word uttered, and this is speech, the chief and most natural indication of the mind. And thus Christ is the Word, for by him God has in these last days spoken to us (Heb 1:2), and has directed us to hear him, Mat 17:5. He has made known God's mind to us, as a man's word or speech makes known his thoughts, as far as he pleases, and no further. Christ is called that wonderful speaker (see notes on Dan 8:13), the speaker of things hidden and strange. He is the Word speaking from God to us, and to God for us. John Baptist was the voice, but Christ the Word: being the Word, he is the Truth, the Amen, the faithful Witness of the mind of God.
Read full note →
II. What he saith of him, enough to prove beyond contradiction that he is God. He asserts,
1. His existence in the beginning: In the beginning was the Word. This bespeaks his existence, not only before his incarnation, but before all time. The beginning of time, in which all creatures were produced and brought into being, found this eternal Word in being. The world was from the beginning, but the Word was in the beginning. Eternity is usually expressed by being before the foundation of the world. The eternity of God is so described (Psa 90:2), Before the mountains were brought forth. So Pro 8:23. The Word had a being before the world had a beginning. He that was in the beginning never began, and therefore was ever, achronos - without beginning of time. So Nonnus.
2. His co-existence with the Father: The Word was with God, and the Word was God. Let none say that when we invite them to Christ we would draw them from God, for Christ is with God and is God; it is repeated in Joh 1:2 : the same, the very same that we believe in and preach, was in the beginning with God, that is, he was so from eternity. In the beginning the world was from God, as it was created by him; but the Word was with God, as ever with him. The Word was with God, (1.) In respect of essence and substance; for the Word was God: a distinct person or substance, for he was with God; and yet the same in substance, for he was God, Heb 1:3. (2.) In respect of complacency and felicity. There was a glory and happiness which Christ had with God before the world was (Joh 17:5), the Son infinitely happy in the enjoyment of his Father's bosom, and no less the Father's delight, the Son of his love, Pro 8:30. (3.) In respect of counsel and design. The mystery of man's redemption by this Word incarnate was hid in God before all worlds, Eph 3:9. He that undertook to bring us to God (Pe1 3:18) was himself from eternity with God; so that this grand affair of man's reconciliation to God was concerted between the Father and Son from eternity, and they understand one another perfectly well in it, Zac 6:13; Mat 11:27. He was by him as one brought up with him for this service, Pro 8:30. He was with God, and therefore is said to come forth from the Father.
3. His agency in making the world, Joh 1:3. This is here, (1.) Expressly asserted: All things were made by him. He was with God, not only so as to be acquainted with the divine counsels from eternity, but to be active in the divine operations in the beginning of time. Then was I by him, Pro 8:30. God made the world by a word (Psa 33:6) and Christ was the Word. By him, not as a subordinate instrument, but as a co-ordinate agent, God made the world (Heb 1:2), not as the workman cuts by his axe, but as the body sees by the eye. (2.) The contrary is denied: Without him was not any thing made that was made, from the highest angel to the meanest worm. God the Father did nothing without him in that work. Now, [1.] This proves that he is God; for he that built all things is God, Heb 3:4. The God of Israel often proved himself to be God with this, that he made all things: Isa 40:12, Isa 40:28; Isa 41:4; and see Jer 10:11, Jer 10:12. [2.] This proves the excellency of the Christian religion, that the author and founder of it is the same that was the author and founder of the world. How excellent must that constitution needs be which derives its institution from him who is the fountain of all excellency! When we worship Christ, we worship him to whom the patriarchs gave honour as the Creator of the world, and on whom all creatures depend. [3.] This shows how well qualified he was for the work of our redemption and salvation. Help was laid upon one that was mighty indeed; for it was laid upon him that made all things; and he is appointed the author of our bliss who was the author of our being.
4. The original of life and light that is in him: In him was life, Joh 1:4. This further proves that he is God, and every way qualified for his undertaking; for, (1.) He has life in himself; not only the true God, but the living God. God is life; he swears by himself when he saith, As I live. (2.) All living creatures have their life in him; not only all the matter of the creation was made by him, but all the life too that is in the creation is derived from him and supported by him. It was the Word of God that produced the moving creatures that had life, Gen 1:20; Act 17:25. He is that Word by which man lives more than by bread, Mat 4:4. (3.) Reasonable creatures have their light from him; that life which is the light of men comes from him. Life in man is something greater and nobler than it is in other creatures; it is rational, and not merely animal. When man became a living soul, his life was light, his capacities such as distinguished him fRom. and dignified him above, the beasts that perish. The spirit of a man is the candle of the Lord, and it was the eternal Word that lighted this candle. The light of reason, as well as the life of sense, is derived from him, and depends upon him. This proves him fit to undertake our salvation; for life and light, spiritual and eternal life and light, are the two great things that fallen man, who lies so much under the power of death and darkness, has need of. From whom may we better expect the light of divine revelation than from him who gave us the light of human reason? And if, when God gave us natural life, that life was in his Son, how readily should we receive the gospel-record, that he hath given us eternal life, and that life too is in his Son!
5. The manifestation of him to the children of men. It might be objected, If this eternal Word was all in all thus in the creation of the world, whence is it that he has been so little taken notice of and regarded? To this he answers (Joh 1:5), The light shines, but the darkness comprehends it not. Observe,
(1.) The discovery of the eternal Word to the lapsed world, even before he was manifested in the flesh: The light shineth in darkness. Light is self-evidencing, and will make itself known; this light, whence the light of men comes, hath shone, and doth shine. [1.] The eternal Word, as God, shines in the darkness of natural conscience. Though men by the fall are become darkness, yet that which may be known of God is manifested in them; see Rom 1:19, Rom 1:20. The light of nature is this light shining in darkness. Something of the power of the divine Word, both as creating and as commanding, all mankind have an innate sense of; were it not for this, earth would be a hell, a place of utter darkness; blessed be God, it is not so yet. [2.] The eternal Word, as Mediator, shone in the darkness of the Old Testament types and figures, and the prophecies and promises which were of the Messiah from the beginning. He that had commanded the light of this world to shine out of darkness was himself long a light shining in darkness; there was a veil upon this light, Co2 3:13.
(2.) The disability of the degenerate world to receive this discovery: The darkness comprehended it not; the most of men received the grace of God in these discoveries in vain. [1.] The world of mankind comprehended not the natural light that was in their understandings, but became vain in their imaginations concerning the eternal God and the eternal Word, Rom 1:21, Rom 1:28. The darkness of error and sin overpowered and quite eclipsed this light. God spoke once, yea twice, but man perceived it not, Job 33:14. [2.] The Jews, who had the light of the Old Testament, yet comprehended not Christ in it. As there was a veil upon Moses's face, so there was upon the people's hearts. In the darkness of the types and shadows the light shone; but such as the darkness of their understandings that they could not see it. It was therefore requisite that Christ should come, both to rectify the errors of the Gentile world and to improve the truths of the Jewish church.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On v2 The same was in the beginning with God. This…
The same was in the beginning with God. This is a repetition of what is before said, and is made to show the importance of the truths before delivered; namely, the eternity of Christ, his distinct personality, and proper deity; and that the phrase, in the beginning, is to be joined to each of the above sentences; and so proves, not only his eternal existence, but his eternal existence with the Father, and also his eternal deity; and is also made to carry on the thread of the discourse, concerning the word, and not God the Father; and to express, not only his co-existence in nature, but his co-operation in the works of creation next mentioned.
The same was in the beginning with God. This is a repetition of what is before said, and is made to show the importance of the truths before delivered; namely, the eternity of Christ, his distinct personality, and proper deity; and that the phrase, in the beginning, is to be joined to each of the above sentences; and so proves, not only his eternal existence, but his eternal existence with the Father, and also his eternal deity; and is also made to carry on the thread of the discourse, concerning the word, and not God the Father; and to express, not only his co-existence in nature, but his co-operation in the works of creation next mentioned.
Read full note →
John 1:3
joh 1:3
joh 1:3
joh 1:3All things were made by him,.... Which is a proof at once of all that is said before; as that he was in the beginning; and that he was with God the Father in the beginning; and that he was God; otherwise all things could not have been made by him, had either of these been untrue: which is to be understood, not of the new creation; for this would be a restraining "all" things to a "few" persons only; nor is it any where said, that all things are new made, but made; and it is false, that all were converted, that have been converted, by the ministry of Christ, as man: all men are not renewed, regenerated, nor reformed; and the greater part of those that were renewed, were renewed before Christ existed, as man; and therefore could not be renewed by him, as such: though indeed, could this sense be established, it would not answer the end for which it is coined; namely, to destroy the proof of Christ's deity, and of his existence before his incarnation; for in all ages, from the beginning of the world, some have been renewed; and the new creation is a work of God, and of almighty power, equally with the old; for who can create spiritual light, infuse a principle of spiritual life, take away the heart of stone, and give an heart of flesh, or produce faith, but God? Regeneration is denied to be of man, and is always ascribed to God; nor would Christ's being the author of the new creation, be any contradiction to his being the author of the old creation, which is intended here: by "all things", are meant the heaven, and all its created inhabitants, the airy, starry, and third heavens, and the earth, and all therein, the sea, and every thing that is in that; and the word, or Son of God, is the efficient cause of all these, not a bare instrument of the formation of them; for the preposition by does not always denote an instrument, but sometimes an efficient, as in Co1 1:9 and so here, though not to the exclusion of the Father, and of the Spirit:
and without him was not any thing made that was made: in which may be observed the conjunct operation of the word, or Son, with the Father, and Spirit, in creation; and the extent of his concern in it to every thing that is made; for without him there was not one single thing in the whole compass of the creation made; and the limitation of it to things that are made; and so excludes the uncreated being, Father, Son, and Spirit; and sin also, which is not a principle made by God, and which has no efficient, but a deficient cause. So the Jews ascribe the creation of all things to the word. The Targumists attribute the creation of man, in particular, to the word of God: it is said in Gen 1:27. "God created man in his own image": the Jerusalem Targum of it is,
"and the word of the Lord created man in his likeness.
And Gen 3:22 "and the Lord God said, behold the man is become as one of us", the same Targum paraphrases thus,
"and the word of the Lord God said, behold the man whom I have created, is the only one in the world.
Also in the same writings, the creation of all things in general is ascribed to the word: the passage in Deu 33:27 "the eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms", is paraphrased by Onkelos,
"the eternal God is an habitation, by whose word the world was made.
In Isa 48:13 it is said, "mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth". The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziah on it is,
"yea, by my word I have founded the earth:
which agrees with what is said in Heb 11:3, and the same says Philo the Jew, who not only calls him the archetype, and exemplar of the world, but the power that made it: he often ascribes the creation of the heavens, and the earth unto him, and likewise the creation of man after whose image, he says, he was made (t). The Ethiopic version adds, at the end of this verse, "and also that which is made is for himself",
(t) De Mundi Opificio, p. 4, 5, 31, 32. De Alleg. l. 1. p. 44. De Sacrificiis Abel & Cain, p. 131. De Profugis, p. 464. & de Monarch. p. 823.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv1–3 In the beginning - (Referring to Gen. i, 1,…
In the beginning - (Referring to Gen. i, 1, and Prov. viii, 23.) When all things began to be made by the Word: in the beginning of heaven and earth, and this whole frame of created beings, the Word existed, without any beginning. He was when all things began to be, whatsoever had a beginning. The Word - So termed Psalm xxxiii, 6, and frequently by the seventy, and in the Chaldee paraphrase. So that St. John did not borrow this expression from Philo, or any heathen writer. He was not yet named Jesus, or Christ. He is the Word whom the Father begat or spoke from eternity; by whom the Father speaking, maketh all things; who speaketh the Father to us. We have, in the 18th verse, both a real description of the Word, and the reason why he is so called. He is the only begotten Son of the Father, who is in the bosom of the Father, and hath declared him. And the Word was with God - Therefore distinct from God the Father. The word rendered with, denotes a perpetual tendency as it were of the Son to the Father, in unity of essence. He was with God alone; because nothing beside God had then any being. And the Word was God - Supreme, eternal, independent. There was no creature, in respect of which he could be styled God in a relative sense. Therefore he is styled so in the absolute sense. The Godhead of the Messiah being clearly revealed in the Old Testament, (Jer. xxiii, 7; Hosea i, 6; Psalm xxiii, 1, ) the other evangelists aim at this, to prove that Jesus, a true man, was the Messiah. But when, at length, some from hence began to doubt of his Godhead, then St. John expressly asserted it, and wrote in this book as it were a supplement to the Gospels, as in the Revelation to the prophets.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv1, 3 -Usherian years of the World, 3999-4033.
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN.
-Usherian years of the World, 3999-4033.
Read full note →
-Alexandrian years of the World, 5497-5531.
-Antiochian years of the World, 5487-5621.
-Constantinopolitan AEra of the World, 5503-5537.
-Rabbinical years of the World, 3754-3788.
-Years of the Julian Period, 4708-4742.
-AEra of the Seleucide, 307-341.
-From B.C. 5, to A.D. 29.
-From An. Olymp. CXCIII. 3, to CCII. 1.
-Years of the building of Rome, 748-782.
-Years of the Julian AEra, 41-75.
-Years of the Caesarean AEra of Antioch, 44-78.
-Years of the Spanish AEra, 34-68.
-Years of the Paschal Cycle, or Dionysian Period, 529-31.
-Years of the Christian Lunar Cycle, or Golden Number, 15-11.
-Years of the Rabbinical Lunar Cycle, 12-8.
-Years of the Solar Cycle, 4-10.
-From the 25th year of the reign of the Emperor Augustus to the 18th of that of Tiberius.
N. B. As it was impossible to ascertain the precise dates of several transactions recorded in this Gospel, I have constructed the above Chronology in all the AEras which it includes, so as to comprehend the whole of our Lord's life on earth, from his conception to his ascension, which is generally allowed to comprise the space of 34 years, Therefore, 34, added to the first date in any of the above AEras, gives the second date; e.g. Usherian year of the world, 3099+34=4033, and so of the rest.
CHAPTER I.
The eternity of the Divine Logos, or Word of God, the dispenser
of light and life, 1-5.
The mission of John the Baptist, 6-13.
The incarnation of the Logos or Word of God, 14.
John's testimony concerning the Logos, 15-18.
The priests and Levites question him concerning his mission and
his baptism, 19-22.
His answer, 23-28.
His farther testimony on seeing Christ, 29-34.
He points him out to two of his disciples, who thereupon follow
Jesus, 35-37.
Christ's address to them, 38, 39.
Andrew invites his brother, Simon Peter; Christ's address to
him, 40-42.
Christ calls Philip, and Philip invites Nathanael, 43-46.
Christ's character of Nathanael, 47.
A remarkable conversation between him and this disciple, 48-61.
NOTES ON CHAP. I.
John's introduction is from Joh 1:1-18. Some harmonists suppose it to end with Joh 1:14. but, from the connection of the whole, Joh 1:18 appears to be its natural close, at it contains a reason why the Logos or Word was made flesh. Joh 1:15 refers to Joh 1:6-8, and in these passages John's testimony is anticipated in order of time, and is very fitly mentioned to illustrate Christ's pre-eminence. John 1:16; John 1:17 have a plain reference to Joh 1:14. See Bp. Newcome.
Verse 1. In the beginning] That is, before any thing was formed - ere God began the great work of creation. This is the meaning of the word in Ge 1:1, to which the evangelist evidently alludes. This phrase fully proves, in the mouth of an inspired writer, that Jesus Christ was no part of the creation, as he existed when no part of that existed; and that consequently he is no creature, as all created nature was formed by him: for without him was nothing made that is made, Joh 1:3. Now, as what was before creation must be eternal, and as what gave being to all things, could not have borrowed or derived its being from any thing, therefore Jesus, who was before all things and who made all things, must necessarily be the ETERNAL God.
Was the Word] Or, existed the Logos. This term should be left untranslated, for the very same reason why the names Jesus and Christ are left untranslated. The first I consider as proper an apellative of the Saviour of the world as I do either of the two last. And as it would be highly improper to say, the Deliverer, the Anointed, instead of Jesus Christ, so I deem it improper to say, the Word, instead of the Logos. But as every appellative of the Saviour of the world was descriptive of some excellence in his person, nature, or work, so the epithet Λογος, Logos, which signifies a word spoken, speech, eloquence, doctrine, reason, or the faculty of reasoning, is very properly applied to him, who is the true light which lighteth every man who cometh into the world, Joh 1:9; who is the fountain of all wisdom; who giveth being, life, light, knowledge, and reason, to all men; who is the grand Source of revelation, who has declared God unto mankind; who spake by the prophets, for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy, Re 19:10; who has illustrated life and immortality by his Gospel, 2Ti 1:10; and who has fully made manifest the deep mysteries which lay hidden in the bosom of the invisible God from all eternity, Joh 1:18.
The apostle does not borrow this mode of speech from the writings of Plato, as some have imagined: he took it from the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and from the subsequent style of the ancient Jews. It is true the Platonists make mention of the Logos in this way: - καθ' ὁν, αει οντα, τα γενομενα εγενετο - by whom, eternally existing, all things were made. But as Plato, Pythagoras, Zeno, and others, travelled among the Jews, and conversed with them, it is reasonable to suppose that they borrowed this, with many others of their most important notions and doctrines, from them.
And the Word was God.] Or, God was the Logos: therefore no subordinate being, no second to the Most High, but the supreme eternal Jehovah.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv1, 3 Joh 1:1-2. In the beginning — Namely, of the…
Joh 1:1-2. In the beginning — Namely, of the creation, (for the evangelist evidently refers to the first word of the book of Genesis, בראשׁית, bereshith, rendered by the LXX. εν αρχη, the expression here used,) was the Word — That is, The Word existed at the beginning of the creation, and consequently from eternity. He was when all things began to be; whatsoever had a beginning. And the Word was with God — Namely, before any created being had existed. This is probably spoken in allusion to the well-known passage in Proverbs, (Joh 8:30, &c.,) where divine wisdom is introduced, saying, The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old: I was set up from everlasting, or ever the earth was, &c. And the Word was God — Was strictly and properly divine. It is observable, “that John’s discourse rises by degrees. He tells us first, that the Word, in the beginning of the world, existed. Next, that he existed with God: and last of all, that he was God, and made all things.” “I know,” says Dr. Doddridge, “how eagerly many have contended, that the word God is used here in an inferior sense; the necessary consequence of which is, as indeed some have expressly avowed, that this clause should be rendered, The Word was a god; that is, a kind of inferior deity, as governors are called gods. See Joh 10:34; 1Co 8:5. But it is impossible he should here be so called, merely as a governor, because he is spoken of as existing before the production of any creatures whom he could govern: and it is to me most incredible, that when the Jews were so exceedingly averse to idolatry, and the Gentiles so unhappily prone to it, such a plain writer as this apostle should lay so dangerous a stumbling- block on the very threshold of his work, and represent it as the Christian doctrine, that, in the beginning of all things, there were two Gods, one supreme and the other subordinate: a difficulty which, if possible, would be yet further increased by recollecting what so many ancient writers assert, that this gospel was written with a particular view of opposing the Cerinthians and Ebionites; on which account a greater accuracy of expression must have been necessary.” As to the article ο being wanting before θεος, God, which some have urged as a proof that the word is here to be used in a subordinate sense, it must be observed, that there are so many instances in the writings of this apostle, and even in this chapter, (see Joh 1:6; Joh 1:12-13; Joh 1:18,) where the same word, without the article, is used to signify God, in the highest sense of the word, that it is surprising any stress should be laid on that circumstance. “On the other hand, to conceive of Christ as a distinct and co-ordinate God, would be equally inconsistent with the most express declarations of Scripture, and far more irreconcilable with reason.” The order of the words in the original, θεος ην ο λογος, has induced some to translate the clause, God was the Word. So it was read in the old English translation, authorized by Henry VIII., and thus Luther rendered it in his German translation, Gott war das wort. But there are almost every where, in several of the purest Greek writers, instances of such a construction as our present version supposes; and one of exactly the same kind occurs Joh 4:24 of this gospel, namely, πνευμα ο θεος, which we properly render, God is a spirit: so that there appears to be no sufficient reason for varying from our translation in this important passage. It may be proper to add here, in the words of Bishop Burnet, (On the Articles, p. 40,) “That had not John, and the other apostles, thought it [Christ’s proper deity] a doctrine of great importance in the gospel scheme, they would rather have waived than asserted and insisted upon it, considering the critical circumstances in which they wrote.” The same was in the beginning with God — The apostle repeats what he had before asserted, because of its great importance; and to signify more fully the personality of the Word, or only-begotten Son, (Joh 1:14,) as distinct from that of the Father.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv1–3 In the beginning - This expression is used also…
In the beginning - This expression is used also in Gen 1:1. John evidently has allusion here to that place, and he means to apply to “the Word” an expression which is there applied “to God.” In both places it clearly means before creation, before the world was made, when as yet there was nothing. The meaning is: that the “Word” had an existence before the world was created. This is not spoken of the man Jesus, but of that which “became” a man, or was incarnate, Joh 1:14. The Hebrews, by expressions like this, commonly denoted eternity. Thus. the eternity of God is described Psa 90:2; “Before the mountains were brought forth, etc.;” and eternity is commonly expressed by the phrase, before the foundation of the world.” Whatever is meant by the term “Word,” it is clear that it had an existence before “creation.” It is not, then, a “creature” or created being, and must be, therefore, uncreated and eternal. There is only one Being that is uncreated, and Jesus must be therefore divine. Compare the Saviour’s own declarations respecting himself in the following places: Joh 8:58; Joh 17:5; Joh 6:62; Joh 3:13; Joh 6:46; Joh 8:14; Joh 16:28.
Was the Word - Greek, “was the λόγος Logos.” This name is given to him who afterward became “flesh,” or was incarnate (Joh 1:14 - that is, to the Messiah. Whatever is meant by it, therefore, is applicable to the Lord Jesus Christ. There have been many opinions about the reason why this name was given to the Son of God. It is unnecessary to repeat those opinions. The opinion which seems most plausible may be expressed as follows:
Read full note →
1. A “word” is that by which we communicate our will; by which we convey our thoughts; or by which we issue commands the medium of communication with others.
2. The Son of God may be called “the Word,” because he is the medium by which God promulgates His will and issues His commandments. See Heb 1:1-3.
3. This term was in use before the time of John.
It was used in the Aramaic translation of the Old Testament, as, “e. g.,” Isa 45:12; “I have made the earth, and created man upon it.” In the Aramaic it is, “I, ‘by my word,’ have made,” etc. Isa 48:13; “mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth.” In the Aramaic, “‘By my word’ I have founded the earth.” And so in many other places. This term was used by the Jews as applicable to the Messiah. In their writings he was commonly known by the term “Mimra” - that is, “Word;” and no small part of the interpositions of God in defense of the Jewish nation were declared to be by “the Word of God.” Thus, in their Targum on Deu 26:17-18, it is said, “Ye have appointed the word of God a king over you this day, that he may be your God.” The term was used by the Jews who were scattered among the Gentiles, and especially those who were conversant with the Greek philosophy. The term was used by the followers of Plato among the Greeks, to denote the Second Person of the Trinity. The Greek term νοῦς nous or “mind,” was commonly given to this second person, but it was said that this nous was “the word” or “reason” of the First Person of the Trinity. The term was therefore extensively in use among the Jews and Gentiles before John wrote his Gospel, and it was certain that it would be applied to the Second Person of the Trinity by Christians. whether converted from Judaism or Paganism. It was important, therefore, that the meaning of the term should be settled by an inspired man, and accordingly John, in the commencement of his Gospel, is at much pains to state clearly what is the true doctrine respecting the λόγος Logos, or Word. It is possible, also, that the doctrines of the Gnostics had begun to spread in the time of John. They were an Oriental sect, and held that the λόγος Logos or “Word” was one of the “Aeones” that had been created, and that this one had been united to the man Jesus. If that doctrine had begun then to prevail, it was of the more importance for John to settle the truth in regard to the rank of the Logos or Word. This he has done in such a way that there need be no doubt about its meaning.
Was with God - This expression denotes friendship or intimacy. Compare Mar 9:19. John affirms that he was “with God” in the beginning - that is, before the world was made. It implies, therefore, that he was partaker of the divine glory; that he was blessed and happy with God. It proves that he was intimately united with the Father, so as to partake of his glory and to be appropriately called by the name God. He has himself explained it. See Joh 17:5; “And now, O Father, glorify thou we with thine own self, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” See also Joh 1:18; “No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” See also Joh 3:13; “The Son of man, which is in heaven.” Compare Phi 2:6-7.
Was God - In the previous phrase John had said that the Word was “with God.” Lest it should be supposed that he was a different and inferior being, here John states that “he was God.” There is no more unequivocal declaration in the Bible than this, and there could be no stronger proof that the sacred writer meant to affirm that the Son of God was equal with the Father; because:
There is no doubt that by the λόγος Logos is meant Jesus Christ. This is not an “attribute” or quality of God, but is a real subsistence, for it is said that the λόγος Logos was made flesh σάρξ sarx - that is, became a human being. There is no variation here in the manuscripts, and critics have observed that the Greek will bear no other construction than what is expressed in our translation - that the Word “was God.” There is no evidence that John intended to use the word “God” in an inferior sense. It is not “the Word was a god,” or “the Word was ‘like God,’” but the Word “was God.” He had just used the word “God” as evidently applicable to Yahweh, the true God; and it is absurd to suppose that he would in the same verse, and without any indication that he was using the word in an inferior sense, employ it to denote a being altogether inferior to the true God. The name “God” is elsewhere given to him, showing that he is the supreme God. See Rom 9:5; Heb 1:8, Heb 1:10, Heb 1:12; 1Jo 5:20; Joh 20:28.
The meaning of this important verse may then be thus summed up:
The name λόγος Logos, or Word, is given to Christ in reference to his becoming the Teacher or Instructor of mankind; the medium of communication between God and man. The name was in use at the time of John, and it was his design to state the correct doctrine respecting the λόγος Logos. The “Word,” or λόγος Logos, existed “before creation” - of course was not a “creature,” and must have been, therefore, from eternity. He was “with God” - that is, he was united to him in a most intimate and close union before the creation; and, as it could not be said that God was “with himself,” it follows that the λόγος Logos was in some sense distinct from God, or that there was a distinction between the Father and the Son. When we say that one is “with another,” we imply that there is some sort of distinction between them. Yet, lest it should be supposed that he was a “different” and “inferior” being - a creature - he affirms that he was God - that is, was equal with the Father.
This is the foundation of the doctrine of the Trinity:
1.That the second person is in some sense “distinct” from the first.
2.That he is intimately united with the first person in essence, so that there are not two or more Gods.
3.That the second person may be called by the same name; has the same attributes; performs the same works; and is entitled to the same honors with the first, and that therefore he is “the same in substance, and equal in power and glory,” with God.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv1–3 In the beginning was the word:[1] or rather, the…
In the beginning was the word:[1] or rather, the word was in the beginning. The eternal word, the increated wisdom, the second Person of the blessed Trinity, the only begotten Son of the Father, as he is here called (ver. 14.) of the same nature and substance, and the same God, with the Father and Holy Ghost. This word was always; so that it was never true to say, he was not, as the Arians blasphemed. This word was in the beginning. Some, by the beginning, expound the Father himself, in whom he was always. Others give this plain and obvious sense, that the word, or the Son of God, was, when all other things began to have a being; he never began, but was from all eternity. --- And the word was with God; i.e. was with the Father; and as it is said, (ver. 18) in the bosom of the Father; which implies, that he is indeed a distinct person, but the same in nature and substance with the Father and the Holy Ghost. This is repeated again in the second verse, as repetitions are very frequent in St. John. --- And the word was God. This without question is the construction; where, according to the letter we read, and God was the word. (Witham) --- The Greek for the word is Greek: Logos, which signifies not only the exterior word, but also the interior word, or thought; and in this latter sense it is taken here. (Bible de Vence) --- Philo Judæus, in the apostolic age, uses the word Greek: Logos, p. 823, to personify the wisdom and the power of God. Greek: Logos estin eikon Theou di ou sumpas o Kosmos edemiourgeito. By a similar metonymy, Jesus Christ is called the way, the truth, the life, the resurrection. --- And the word was God. Here the eternity and the divinity of the second Person are incontrovertibly established; or, we must say that language has no longer a fixed meaning, and that it is impossible to establish any point whatever from the words of Scripture. (Haydock)
===============================
Read full note →
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
Et Deus erat Verbum, Greek: kai theos en o logos. Greek: Logos was a word very proper to give all that should believe a right notion of the Messias, and of the true Son of God. Greek: Logos, according to St. Jerome, (Ep. ad Paulinum. tom. iv. part 2, p. 570. Ed. Ben.) signifies divers things; as, the wisdom of the Father, his internal word or conception; and, as it were, the express image of the invisible God. Here it is not taken for any absolute divine attribute or perfection; but for the divine Son, or the second Person, as really distinct from the other two divine Persons. And that by Greek: Logos, was to be understood him that was truly God, the Maker and Creator of all things; the Jews might easily understand, by what they read adn frequently heard in the Chaldaic Paraphrase, or Targum of Jonathan, which was read to them in the time of our Saviour, Christ, and at the time when St. John wrote his gospel. In this Paraphrase they were accustomed to hear that the Hebrew word Memreth, to which corresponded in Greek, Logos, was put for him that was God: as Isaias xlv. 12, I made the earth; in this Targum, I, by my word, made the earth: Isaias xlviii. 13, My hand also hath founded the earth; in this Paraphrase, in my word I founded the earth: Genesis iii. 8, They heard the voice of the Lord God; in the Paraphrase, the voice of the word of God. See Walton, prolog. xii, num. 18, p. 86.; Maldonatus on this place; Petavius, lib. vi. de Trin. chap. 1.; Dr. Pearson on the Creed, p. 11.; Dr. Hammond’s note on St. Luke, chap. i, p. 203, &c. However, St. John shews us that he meant him who was the true God, by telling us that the world, and every thing that was made, was made by this word, or Greek: Logos; that in this word was life; that he was in the world, and was the light of the world; that he had glory, as the glory of the only begotten of the Father, &c.
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
John Nelson Darby 1862 · Public Domain On v1 John Chapter 1
John Chapter 1
The first chapter asserts what He was before all things, and the different characters in which He is a blessing to man, being made flesh. He is, and He is the expression of, the whole mind that subsists in God, the Logos. In the beginning He was. If we go back as far as is possible to the mind of men, how far soever beyond all that has had a beginning, He is. This is the most perfect idea we can form historically, if I may use such an expression, of the existence of God or of eternity. “In the beginning was the Word.” Was there nothing beside Him? Impossible! Of what would He have been the Word? “The Word was with God.” That is to say, a personal existence is ascribed to Him. But, lest it may be thought that He was something which eternity implies but which the Holy Ghost comes to reveal, it is said that He “was God.” In His existence eternal-in His nature divine-in His Person distinct, He might have been spoken of as an emanation in time, as though His personality were of time, although eternal in His nature: the Spirit therefore adds, “In the beginning he was with God.” It is the revelation of the eternal Logos before all creation. This Gospel therefore really begins before Genesis. The Book of Genesis gives us the history of the world in time: John gives us that of the Word, who existed in eternity before the world was; who-when man can speak of beginning-was; and, consequently, did not begin to exist. The language of the Gospel is as plain as possible, and, like the sword of paradise, turns every way, in opposition to the thoughts and reasonings of man, to defend the divinity and personality of the Son of God.
Read full note →
By Him also were all things created. There are things which had a beginning; they all had their origin from Him: “All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” Precise, positive, and absolute distinction between all that has been made and Jesus. If anything has been made, it is not the Word; for all that has been made was made by that Word.
But there is another thing, besides the supreme act of creating all things (an act that characterises the Word)-there is that which was in Him. All creation was made by Him; but it does not exist in Him. But in Him was life. In this He was in relation with an especial part of creation-a part which was the object of the thoughts and intentions of God. This “life was the light of men,” revealed itself as a testimony to the divine nature, in immediate connection with them, as it did not with respect to any others at all. [1] But, in fact, this light shone in the midst of that which was in its own nature [2] contrary to it, and evil beyond any natural image, for where light comes, darkness is no longer: but here the light came, and the darkness had no perception of it-remained darkness, which therefore neither comprehended nor received it. These are the relations of the Word with creation and with man, seen abstractedly in His nature. The Spirit pursues this subject, giving us details, historically, of the latter part.
We may remark here-and the point is of importance-how the Spirit passes from the divine and eternal nature of the Word who was before all things, to the manifestation, in this world, of the Word made flesh in the Person of Jesus. All the ways of God, the dispensations, His government of the world, are passed over in silence. In beholding Jesus on the earth we are in immediate connection with Him as existing before the world was. Only He is introduced by John, and that which is found in the world is recognised as created. John is come to bear witness of the Light. The true Light was that which, coming into the world, shone for all men, and not for the Jews only. He is come into the world; and the world, in darkness and blind, has not known Him. He is come unto His own, and His own (the Jews) have not received Him. But there were some who received Him. Of them two things are said: they have received authority to become the children [3] of God, to take their place as such; and, secondly, they are, in fact, born of God. Natural descent, and the will of man, went for nothing here.
Thus we have seen the Word, in His nature, abstractedly (Joh 1:1-3); and, as life, the manifestation of divine light in man, with the consequences of that manifestation (Joh 1:4-5); and how He was received where it was so (Joh 1:10-13). This general part, in regard to His nature, ends here. The Spirit carries on the history of what the Lord is, manifested as man on earth. So that, as it were, we begin again here (Joh 1:14) with Jesus on the earth-what the Word became, not what He was. As light in the world, there was the unanswered claim of what He was on man. Not knowing Him, or rejecting Him where He was dispensationally in relationship was the only difference. Grace in life-giving power then comes in to lead men to receive Him. The world did not know its Creator come into it as light, His own rejected their Lord. Those who were born not of man’s will but of God received Him. Thus we have not what the Word was (en), but what He became (egeneto).
The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us in the fulness of grace and truth. This is the great fact, the source of all blessing to us; [4] that which is the full expression of God, adapted, by taking man’s own nature, to all that is in man, to meet every human need, and all the capacity of the new nature in man to enjoy the expression of all in which God is suited to him. It is more than light, which is pure and shews all things; it is the expression of what God is, and God in grace, and as a source of blessing. And note, God could not be to angels what He is to man-grace, patience, mercy, love, as shewn to sinners. And all this He is, as well as the blessedness of God, to the new man. The glory in which Christ was seen, thus manifested (by those who had eyes to see), was that of an only Son with His Father, the one concentrating object of His delight as Father.
These are the two parts of this great truth. The Word, who was with God and who was God, was made flesh; and He who was beheld on the earth had the glory of an only Son with the Father.
Two things are the result. Grace (what greater grace? It is love itself that is revealed, and towards sinners) and truth, that are not declared, but come, in Jesus Christ The true relation of all things with God is shewn, and their departure from it. This is the groundwork of truth. Everything takes its true place, its true character, in every respect; and the centre to which all refers is God. What God is, what perfect man, what sinful man, what the world, what its prince, Christ’s presence brings all out. Grace then and truth are come. The second thing is, that the only Son in the bosom of the Father reveals God, and reveals Him consequently as known by Himself in that position. And this is largely connected with the character and revelation of grace in John: first, fulness, with which we are in communication, and from which we have all received; then relationship.
But there are yet other important instructions in these verses. The Person of Jesus, the Word made flesh, dwelling among us, was full of grace and truth. Of this fulness we have all received: not truth upon truth (truth is simple, and puts everything exactly in its place, morally and in its nature); but we have received that which we needed-grace upon grace, the favour of God abundantly, divine blessings (the fruit of His love) heaped one upon another. Truth shines-everything is perfectly manifested; grace is given.
The connection of this manifestation of the grace of God in the Word made flesh (in which perfect truth also displays itself) with other testimonies of God is then taught us. John bore witness to Him; the service of Moses had quite another character. John preceded Him in his service on earth; but Jesus must be preferred before him; for (humble as He might be) God above all, blessed for ever, He was before John, although coming after him. Moses gave the law, perfect in its place-requiring from man, on God’s part, that which man ought to be. Then God was hidden, and God sent out a law shewing what man ought to be; but now God has revealed Himself by Christ, and the truth (as to everything) and grace are come. The law was neither the truth, full and entire, [5] in every respect, as in Jesus, nor grace; it was no transcript of God, but a perfect rule for man. Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, not by Moses. Nothing can be more essentially important than this statement. Law requires from man what he ought to be before God, and, if he fulfils it, it is his righteousness. Truth in Christ shews what man is (not ought to be), and what God is, and, as inseparable from grace, does not require but brings to man what he needs. If thou knewest the gift of God, says the Saviour to the Samaritan woman. So at the end of the wilderness journey Balaam has to say: “according to this time it shall be said of Jacob and of Israel, What hath God wrought?” The verb “came” is in the singular after grace and truth. Christ is both at once; indeed, if grace were not there He would not be the truth as to God. To require from man what he ought to be was righteous requirement. But to give grace and glory, to give His Son was another thing in every respect; only sanctioning the law as perfect in its place.
We have thus the character and the position of the Word made flesh-that which Jesus was here below, the Word made flesh; His glory as seen by faith, that of an only Son with His Father. He was full of grace and truth. He revealed God as He knew Him, as the only-begotten Son in the bosom of the Father. It was not only the character of His glory here below; it is what He was (what He had been, what He ever is) in the Father’s own bosom in the Godhead: and it is thus that He declared Him. He was before John the Baptist, although coming after him; and He brought, in His own Person, that which was in its nature entirely different from the law given by Moses.
Here then is the Lord manifested on earth. His relations with men follow, the positions He took, the characters He assumed, according to the purposes of God, and the testimony of His word among men. First of all, John the Baptist gives place to Him. It will be remarked that he bears testimony in each of the parts [6] into which this chapter is divided-Joh 1:6, [7] in the effect of the abstract revelation of the nature of the Word; as light Joh 1:15, with regard to His manifestation in the flesh; Joh 1:19, the glory of His Person, although coming after John; Joh 1:29, respecting His work and the result; and Joh 1:36, the testimony for the time being, in order that He might be followed, as having come to seek the Jewish remnant.
After the abstract revelation of the nature of the Word, and that of His manifestation in the flesh, the testimony actually borne in the world is given. Joh 1:19-28 form a kind of introduction, in which, on the inquiry of the scribes and Pharisees, John gives account of himself, and takes occasion to speak of the difference between himself and the Lord. So that, whatever the characters may be that Christ takes in connection with His work, the glory of His Person is ever first in view. The witness is occupied naturally, so to speak, with this, before bearing his formal testimony to the office which he fulfilled. John is neither Elias nor that prophet (that is, the one of whom Moses spoke) nor the Christ. He is the voice mentioned by Isaiah, who was to prepare the way of the Lord before Him. It is not precisely before the Messiah, although He was that; neither is it Elias before the day of Jehovah, but the voice in the wilderness before the Lord (Jehovah) Himself. Jehovah was coming. It is this consequently of which he speaks. John baptised indeed unto repentance; but there was already One, unknown, among them, who, coming after him, was yet his superior, whose shoe’s latchet he was not worthy to unloose.
We have next the direct testimony of John, when he sees Jesus coming to him. He points Him out, not as the Messiah, but according to the whole extent of His work as enjoyed by us in the everlasting salvation He has accomplished, and the full result of the glorious work by which it was accomplished. He is the Lamb of God, one whom God alone could furnish, and was for God, and according to His mind, who takes away the sin (not the sins) of the world. That is to say, He restores (not all the wicked, but) the foundations of the world’s relations with God. Since the fall, it is indeed sin-whatever may be His dealings [8] -that God had to consider in His relations with the world. The result of Christ’s work shall be, that this will no longer be the case; His work shall be the eternal basis of these relations in the new heavens and the new earth, sin being entirely put aside as such. We know this by faith before the public result in the world.
Although a Lamb for the sacrifice, He is preferred before John the Baptist, for He was before him. The Lamb to be slain was Jehovah Himself.
In the administration of the ways of God, this testimony was to be borne in Israel, although its subject was the Lamb whose sacrifice reached to the sin of the world, and the Lord, Jehovah. John had not known Him personally; but He was the one and only object of his mission.
But this was not all. He had made Himself man, and as man had received the fulness of the Holy Ghost, who had descended upon Him and abode upon Him; and the man thus pointed out, and sealed on the part of the Father, was Himself to baptise with the Holy Ghost. At the same time He was pointed out by the descent of the Holy Ghost in another character, to which John therefore bears testimony. Thus subsisting and seen and sealed on the earth, He was the Son of God. John recognises Him and proclaims Him as such.
Then comes what may be called the direct exercise and effect of his ministry at that time. But it is always the Lamb of whom he speaks; for that was the object, the design of God, and it is that which we have in this Gospel, although Israel is recognised in its place; for the nation held that place from God.
Upon this the disciples of John [9] follow Christ to His abode. The effect of John’s testimony is to attach the remnant to Jesus, the centre of their gathering. Jesus does not refuse it, and they accompany Him. Nevertheless this remnant-how far soever the testimony of John might extend-do not, in fact, go beyond the recognition of Jesus as the Messiah. This was the case, historically; [10] it but Jesus knew them thoroughly, and declares the character of Simon as soon as he comes to Him, and gives him his appropriate name. This was an act of authority which proclaimed Him the head and centre of the whole system. God can bestow names; He knows all things. He gave this right to Adam, who exercised it according to God with regard to all that was put under him as well as in the case of his wife. Great kings, who claim this power, have done the same. Eve sought to do it, but she was mistaken; although God can give an understanding heart which, under His influence, speaks aright in this respect. Now Christ does so here, with authority and with all knowledge, the moment the case presents itself.
Joh 1:43. [11] We have next the immediate testimony of Christ Himself and of His followers. In the first place, on repairing to the scene of His earthly pilgrimage, according to the prophets, He calls others to follow Him. Nathanael, who begins by rejecting one who came from Nazareth, sets before us, I doubt not, the remnant of the last days (the testimony to which the gospel of grace belongs came first, Joh 1:29-34). We see him at first rejecting the despised of the people, and under the fig-tree, which represents the nation of Israel; as the fig-tree which was to bear no more fruit, represents Israel under the old covenant. But Nathanael is the figure of a remnant, seen and known by the Lord, in connection with Israel. The Lord who thus manifested Himself to his heart and conscience is confessed as Son of God and King of Israel. This is formally the faith of the spared remnant of Israel in the last days according to Psa 2:1-12. But those who thus received Jesus when He was on earth should see yet greater things than those which had convinced them. Moreover thenceforth [12] they should see the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man. He who by His birth had taken His place among the children of men would, by that title, be the object of service to the most excellent of God’s creatures. The expression is emphatic. The angels of God Himself should be in the service of the Son of man. So that the remnant of Israel without guile acknowledges Him to be the Son of God and King of Israel; and the Lord declares Himself also to be the Son of man-in humiliation indeed, but the object of service to the angels of God. Thus we have the Person and the titles of Jesus, from His eternal and divine existence as the Word, to His millennial place as King of Israel and Son of man; [13] which He already was as born into this world, but which will be realised when He returns in His glory.
Before going farther, let us review some points in this chapter. The Lord is revealed as the Word-as God and with God-as light-as life: secondly, as the Word made flesh, having the glory of an only Son with His Father-as such He is full of grace and truth come by Him, of His fulness we have all received, and He has declared the Father (compare chap. 14)-the Lamb of God-the One on whom the Holy Ghost could descend, and who baptised with the Holy Ghost-the Son of God: [14] thirdly, His work what He does, Lamb of God taking away sin, and Son of God and King of Israel. This closes the revelation of His Person and work. Then Joh 1:35-42 John’s ministry, but where Jesus, as He alone could, becomes the gathering centre. Joh 1:43, Christ’s ministry, in which He calls to follow Him, which, with Joh 1:38-39, give His double character as the one attractive point in the world; with this His entire humiliation, but owned through a divine testimony reaching the remnant as according to Psa 2:1-12, but the taking His title of Son of man according to Psa 8:1-9 -the Son of man: we may say, all His personal titles. His relationship to the assembly is not here, nor His function as Priest; but that which belongs to His Person, and the connection of man with God in this world. Thus, besides His divine nature, it is all that He was and will be in this world: His heavenly place and its consequences to faith are taught elsewhere, and barely alluded to, when necessary, in this Gospel.
Observe that, in preaching Christ, in a way to a certain degree complete, the heart of the hearer may truly believe and attach itself to Him, though investing Him with a character which the condition of soul cannot yet go beyond, and while ignorant of the fulness in which He has been revealed. Indeed where it is real, the testimony, however exalted in character, meets the heart where it is. John says, “Behold the Lamb of God!” “We have found the Messiah,” say the disciples who followed Jesus on John’s testimony.
Note also, that the expression of what was in John’s heart had greater effect than a more formal, more doctrinal testimony. He beheld Jesus, and exclaims, “Behold the Lamb of God!” The disciples heard him, and followed Jesus. It was, no doubt, his proper testimony on God’s part, Jesus being there; but it was not a doctrinal explanation like that of the preceding verses.
The two testimonies to Christ that were to be borne in this world, both gathering to Him as centre, had been borne; that of John, and that of Jesus taking His place in Galilee with the remnant-the two days of God’s dealings with Israel here below. [15]
Footnotes for John Chapter 1
1: The form of expression in Greek is very strong, as identifying completely the life with the light of men, as co-extensive propositions.
2: It is not here my object to develop the manner in which the word meets the errors of the human mind; but, in fact, as it reveals truth on God’s part, it also replies, in a remarkable way, to all the mistaken thoughts of man. With respect to the Lord’s Person, the first verses of the chapter bear witness to it. Here the error, which made of the principle of darkness a second god in equal conflict with the good Creator, is refuted by the simple testimony that the life was the light, and the darkness a moral condition, without power, and negative, in the midst of which this life was manifested in light. If we have the truth itself, we have no need to be acquainted with error. The voice of the Good Shepherd known, we are sure that none other is of Him. But, in fact, the possession of the truth, as revealed in the scripture, is an answer to all the errors into which man has fallen, innumerable as they are.
3: Sons in Paul’s writings is the place Christians have in connection with God into which Christ has brought them by redemption, that is, His own relative place with God according to His counsels. Children is that they are of the Father’s family. (Both are found in Rom 8:14-16, and the force of both may there be seen. We cry Father, so are children, but by the Spirit we take up the place of grown up sons with Christ before God.) Up to the end of Joh 1:13, we have abstractedly what Christ intrinsically was and from eternity, and what man was-darkness. This first to the end of Joh 1:5. Then God’s dealings John’s place and service; then the Light came, came into the world He had made, and it did not know Him, to His own, the Jews, and they would not have Him. But there were those, born of God, who had authority to take the place of children, a new race.
4: It is indeed the source of all blessing; but the condition of man was such, that without His death no one would have had any part in the blessing. Unless the corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
5: Indeed it told what man ought to be, not what man or anything actually was, and this is properly truth.
6: It will be observed that the chapter is thus divided:Joh 1:1-18 (this part is subdivided into Joh 1:1-5, Joh 1:6-13, Joh 1:14-18), Joh 1:19-28, Joh 1:29-34 (sub-divided into Joh 1:29-31, Joh 1:32-34),Joh 1:35 to the end. These last verses are subdivided into Joh 1:35-42, and Joh 1:42 to the end. That is, first, what Christ is abstractedly and intrinsically-John’s testimony to Him as light; when come, what He is personally in the world-John, only forerunner of Jehovah, witness of Christ’s excellency; the work of Christ (Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, He baptises with the Holy Ghost, and is Son of God); John gathers to Him; He gathers to Himself. This goes on till the upright remnant of Israel own Him Son of God, King of Israel; then He takes the larger character of Son of Man. All the personal characters of Christ, so to speak, are found here and His work, but not His relative characters, not Christ, not Priest, not Head of the assembly His body; but Word, Son of God, Lamb of God, Baptiser with the Holy Ghost; and, according to Psa 2:1-12, Son of God, King of Israel; and Son of man, according to Psa 8:1-9, whom the angels serve; God withal, life, and the light of men.
7: The strictly abstract statement ends in Joh 1:5, and goes by itself. The reception of Christ as come into the world as light introduces John. We are no longer in what is strictly abstract; though not developing the object-what the Word became-it is historical as to the reception of the light, and thus shews what man was, and what he is by grace as born of God, in respect of the object.
8: As the flood, law, grace. There was a paradise of innocence, then a world of sin, by-and-by a kingdom of righteousness, finally a world (new heavens and new earth) wherein dwelleth righteousness. But it is everlasting righteousness, and founded on that work of the Lamb of God which can never lose its value. It is an immutable state of things. The church or assembly is something above and apart from all this, though revealed in it.
9: Note, it is not on his public testimony, but on the expression of his heart addressed to no one, which they heard.
10: A principle of the deepest interest to us, as the effect of grace. In receiving Jesus we receive all that He is; notwithstanding that at the moment we may only perceive in Him that which is the least exalted part of His glory.
11: These verses Joh 1:38 and Joh 1:43 take in the two characters in which we have to do with Christ. He receives them and they abide with Him, and He calls upon them to follow Him. We have no world where we can abide, no centre in it which gathers round itself those rightly disposed by grace. No prophet, no servant of God could. Christ is the one centre of gathering in the world. Then following supposes that we are not in God’s rest. In Eden no following was called for. In heaven there will be none. It is perfect joy and rest where we are. In Christ we have a divine object, giving us a clear path through a world in which we cannot rest with God, for sin is there.
12: Not “hereafter. Many authorities leave the word out
13: Except what concerns the assembly and Israel. Here, He is not High Priest, He is not Head of the body, He is not revealed as the Christ. John does not give what shews man in heaven, but God in man on earth-not what is heavenly as gone up, but what is divine here. Israel is looked on all through as rejected. The disciples own Him as the Christ, but He is not so proclaimed.
14: Here He is seen as the Son of God in this world; in Joh 1:14, He is in the glory of an only Son with His Father; and Joh 1:18, He is so in the bosom of His Father.
15: Remark here, that Jesus accepts the place of that centre round which souls are to be gathered-a very important principle. None else could hold this place. It was a divine one. The world was all wrong, without God, and a new gathering out of it was to be made round Him. Next, He furnishes the path in which man was to walk-”Follow me.” Adam in paradise needed no path. Christ gives a divinely ordered one, in a world where of itself there could not be a right one, for its whole condition was the fruit of sin. Thirdly, He reveals man in His Person as the glorious Head over all, whom the highest creatures serve.
John Nelson Darby — Synopsis of the Books of the Bible: the New Testament (c. 1857–1862) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v1 Christ in His Eternal Essence and Existence, and His…
FIRST SECTION
Christ in His Eternal Essence and Existence, and His Position between God and the World
Read full note →
Joh_1:1-5
(1) The Word (christ) In His Eternal Essence And Existence In Relation To God, Joh_1:1-2; (2) In His Relation To The Creation, Joh_1:3; (3) In His Relation To The World And To Man, Particularly In Their Original Constitution, Joh_1:4; (4) In His Relation To The World In Darkness, Joh_1:5.
1In the beginning was [in existence] the [personal, substantial] Word4 [the Logos], and the Word [the Logos] was with God [the Deity, the Godhead], and the Word 2[the Logos] was God [Himself]. The same was [existed] in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by [through] him; and without [except through] him was not anything made [ἐγένετο],5 that as [hath been] made [γέγονεν]. 4In him was 5[is]6 life [pure life]; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in [the] darkness; and the darkness comprehended [apprehended; Lange: suppressed7] it8 not.9
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
[Joh_1:1-2 contain the ante-mundane or præ-temporal history of the Logos, the mystery of the eternal, immanent relation of the Father and the Son before any revelation ad extra. This was a blessed relation of infinite knowledge and infinite love. It supplies the only answer we can give to the idle question, what God was doing before the creation of the world Joh_1:1 sets forth, in three brief sentences, three grand truths or divine oracles: the eternity of the Logos (in the beginning was), the personality of the Logos (was God), and the divinity of the Logos (was God); Joh_1:2 sums up these three ideas in one. The subject here touched lies far beyond human experience and comprehension; hence the extreme brevity with which the fact is simply stated in its quiet majesty. Yet these two lines give us more light than the thousands of words wasted by Philo, and the ancient and modern Gnostics and philosophers, on the transcendent mysteries of præ-mundane existence. Bengel calls the first verse “a peal of thunder from the Son of Thunder, a voice from heaven.” Augustine (Tract. 36th in Joh. Evang. §. 1) beautifully says: “John, as if he found it oppressive to walk on earth, opened his treatise, so to speak, with a peal of thunder; he raised himself not merely above the earth and the whole compass of the air and heaven, but even above every host of angels and every order of invisible powers, and reached to Him by whom all things were made, saying: ‘In the beginning was the Word,’ etc. To the sublimity of this beginning all the rest corresponds, and he speaks of our Lord’s divinity as no other.”—P. S.]
Joh_1:1. In (the) beginning. Ἐν ἀρχῇ, בְּרֵשִׁית, Gen_1:1. Comp. the Introductory Observations, and Hölemann: De evangelii Joan. introitu. Different explanations:—1. Cyril of Alex.: the “beginning” is God the Father.10—2. The Valentinian Gnostics (according to Irenæus I. 8, 5): a distinct divine hypothesis between the Father and the Logos.—3. Origen: The divine Wisdom (σοφία).11—4. Theodore of Mopsuestia, and others: eternity.12—5. The Socinians [and some modern Unitarians]: the beginning of the gospel (in initio evangelii). [In Act_11:15 the expression has this meaning, but here it is entirely inconsistent with Joh_1:3.—P. S.].—6. Meyer: [John parallelizes the beginning of his Gospel with that of Genesis, but] he raises the historical notion of the beginning which in Gen_1:1 implies the beginning of time itself, to the absolute idea of præ-temporalness [or timelessness, Vorzeitlichkeit], as in Pro_8:23. [Here the Wisdom which is the fame with the Logos, says: πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐθεμελίωσέν με, ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸ τοῦ τὴν γῆν ποιῆσαι, κ. τ. λ., (‘from everlasting, in the beginning, before the earth was made’); comp. Joh_17:5,πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εῖναι; Eph_1:4, πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου. Comp. also 1Jn_1:1 and Rev_3:14.—P. S.] We find an advance of the notion of the beginning primarily only in was (ἦν), and in the relation subsequently stated of the Logos to the eternal God, which unquestionably still further elevates, indirectly, the idea of the ἀρχή The ἀρχή. itself must ever refer to the primal generation or rise of things.13 But if in this ἀρχή the Logos already was (ἦν), then He was from eternity. [The same is said of God, Psa_90:2, who was before the mountains were brought forth, etc., i.e. from everlasting]. The Logos was not merely existent, however, in the beginning, but was also the efficient principle, the ἀρχή of the ἀρχή (Col_1:18). The ἀρχή, in itself and in its operation, dark, chaotic, was, in its idea and its principle, comprised in one single luminous word, which was the Logos. And when it is said, the Logos was in this ἀρχή, His eternal existence is already expressed, and His eternal position in the Godhead already indicated, thereby. The Evangelist says not: In the beginning of the world, because he would make the beginning perfectly absolute; but he pre-supposes the reference to the genesis of the world.[14]
Was—Not became [ἐγέvετο, comp. Joh_1:6; Joh_1:14] the Son of God, a κτίσμα, as Arianism taught. (Comp. Pro_8:23; Sir_24:3.) It cannot be said, He might have become, or been made, before the beginning; for becoming and beginning are inseparable.15
[The words: in the beginning was the Logos, clearly assert, as the best commentators now admit, the eternity of the Logos, but they imply at the same time His divinity, which is afterwards formally stated in the third sentence: was God. Metaphysically we cannot separate eternity, ab ante, from divinity, or predicate eternity of any creature. Luther felt this when he said: “That which was before the world and before the creation of all creatures, must be God.” On the basis of monotheism on which John stood, there is no room for a middle being between God and the creature. Before creation there was no time, for time itself is part of the world and was created with it. (Mundus factus est cum tempore, not in tempore). Before the world there was only God, and God is timeless or eternal. Hence the Arian proposition concerning Christ: There was a time (before creation) when He was not (ἦν ποτε ὅτε οὐκ ἦν), involves the metaphysical absurdity of putting time before the world, a creature before creation.—P. S.]
The Word.—[ὁ Λόγος, with reference to Gen_1:3 : God said, etc. The living, speaking Word from whom the creative, spoken words emanate.—P. S.] The Word absolute, the one whole, all-embracing, personal manifestation of life; hence without the qualification: the Logos of God. It certainly includes also the divine reason or consciousness; though in the Scriptural usage λόγος never denotes the reason itself, but only the matured expression of the reason, word, speech, as a whole, the personal spiritual essence of God made, in its whole fulness, objective to itself,16 as its own perfect expression and image. And in this view the literal interpretation is entirely sufficient, but is supplied by the historical doctrine of the Logos (see above).
The exclusively verbal expositions, and the exclusively historical, are alike insufficient and incorrect: 1. the verbal, which explain ὁ λόγος as (a) ὁ λεγόμενος, the promised one (Valla, Beza, Ernesti, Tittmann, etc.); (b) ὁ λέγων, the speaking one (Mosheim, Storr, and others); (c) the gospel objectively considered, as the word of God: the subject of the gospel (alloiosis!), hence Christ; [so Hofmann, Schriftbew., I., p. 109ff. or, according to Luthardt: the word of God which in Christ (Heb_1:1) was spoken to the world, and the content of which is Christ (see, on the contrary, Meyer, p. 45, [pp. 58 and 59 in the fifth ed. of 1869.—P. S.]); 2. the historical, which would make either the Palestinian doctrine of the Wisdom [Σοφία, חָכְמָה] with the Word of God [מֵימְרָא or דִּבּוּרָא] of the Targums, or the Alexandrian Philonic doctrine of the Logos, or both, the proper root of the scriptural idea. This root is to be found in the manifestation of the consciousness of Christ, as it reflected itself in the intuition of John himself; the historical rise of the idea is due to the theological conceptions of the Old Testament (see above); and the expression itself was suggested by the Philonic doctrine of the Logos. Only this further discrimination must be observed: that the Philonic doctrine lays stress not on the word, but the reason, while John emphasizes the absolute, personal, perfect Word, the image of God, as the original of the world, the idea and life of the whole ἀρχή of things.
[Excursus on the Meaning and Origin of the Term Logos, and the Relation of John to Philo.—The Logos doctrine of John is the fruitful germ of all the speculations of the ancient Church on the divinity of Christ, which resulted in the Nicene dogma of the homoousion or the co-equality of the Son with the Father. The præ-existent Logos is the central idea of the Prologue, as the incarnate Logos or God-Man is the subject of the historical part of the Gospel. The Christ of idea and the Christ of history are one and the same. Logos signifies here not an abstraction nor a personification simply, but a person, the same as in Joh_1:14, namely, Christ before His incarnation, the divine nature of Christ, the eternal Son of God. God has never been ἄλογος, or without the Logos, the Son is as eternal as the Father. John is the only Writer of the New Testament who employs the term in this personal sense, as a designation of Christ, viz., four times in the Prologue (Joh_1:1; Joh_1:14, “the Word” simply and absolutely), once in his first epistle (Joh_1:1, “the Word of life”), and once in the Apocalypse (Joh_19:13, “the Word of God”), but in the last passage the whole divine-human person of Christ in His exalted state is so called.17 There is an inherent propriety in this application of the term, especially in the Greek language, where λόγος is masculine, and where it has the double meaning of reason and speech.18 Christ as to His divine nature bears the same relation to the hidden being of God, as the word does to thought. In the word of man his thought assumes shape and form and becomes clear to the mind, and through the same the thought is conveyed and made intelligent to others. So the Logos is the utterance, the reflection and counterpart of God, the organ of all revelation both with regard to Himself and to the world, ad intra and ad extra. God knows Himself in the Son, and through Him He makes Himself known to men. The Son has declared or revealed and interpreted God (ἐξηγήσατο θεόν, Joh_1:18; comp. Mat_11:27).
The idea of such a distinction in God is in various ways clearly taught in the Old Test. Even in the first verses of Genesis we have already an intimation of the Word and the Spirit as distinct from, and yet identical with, God. Personal intercourse with Christ in the flesh and the inspiration of the Holy Ghost convinced John that Jesus was indeed the Word and the Wisdom of God, the Angel of the Covenant, Jehovah revealed (Joh_12:41), the centre and organ of all revelations (comp. the Introductory Remarks of Dr. Lange). The same idea, but in different form, we meet in Mat_11:27; Heb_1:3; Col_1:15-19, etc. The term λόγος was suggested to John by Gen_1:3, according to which God created the world through the word of His power, and by such passages as Psa_33:6 : “By the word of the Lord were the heavens made,” where the LXX uses the very term λόγος for the Hebrew דבר, instead of the usual ῥῆμα. This seems to be sufficient to account for the form of expression, and hence many commentators (Hölemann, Weiss, Hengstenberg) deny all connection of John with the speculations of Philo of Alexandria. There is indeed no evidence that he read a line of the writings of this Jewish philosopher, who flourished about A. D. 40–50.
Yet, on the other hand, Philo was a profound representative thinker mediating between the O. T. religion and the Hellenic philosophy, and it is more than probable that some of his ideas had penetrated the intellectual atmosphere of the age before the composition of the fourth Gospel, especially in Asia Minor, where they stimulated the Gnostic speculations towards the close of the first and the beginning of the second centuries. Comp. the warnings of Paul, Act_20:29 ff.; 1 Timothy 4, the errorists of Colosse, and the heretical gnosis of Cerinthus, who came into conflict with John in Ephesus, and who, according to Theodoret, studied first in Egypt. Apollos also, the learned Jew, came from Alexandria to Ephesus (Act_18:24). It no more detracts from the apostolic dignity that John should have borrowed a word from, or at least chosen it with tacit reference to, Philo for expressing an original idea, than the general fact that the apostles appropriated the whole Greek language, which Providence had especially prepared to be the organ of the truths of the gospel. And inasmuch as John uses the term without any explanation, as if it were already familiar to his readers, the assumption of a connection with Philo, however indirect and remote, becomes more probable. Such a connection is asserted by Lücke, De Wette, Brückner, Meyer, Lange, Delitzsch,19 Alford, and others.
Philo’s doctrine of the Logos, in its relation to that of John, has been thoroughly ventilated by recent German scholars (see the literature in Lücke’s and in Meyer’s Com. p. 61). I shall briefly state the result in addition to the excellent remarks of Dr. Lange (p. 51). Philo, on the basis of the Solomonic and Apocryphal doctrine of the Wisdom and the Word of God, and combining with it Platonic ideas, represents the Logos (the Nous of Plato) as the embodiment of all divine powers and ideas (the ἄγγελοι of the O. T., the δυνάμεις and ἰδέαι of Plato). He distinguishes between the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος, or the Logos inherent in God corresponding to the reason in man, and the λόγος προφορικός, or the Logos emanating from God, like the spoken word of man which reveals the thought. The former contains the ideal world (the νοητδς κόσμος); the latter is the first begotten Son of God, the image of God, the Creator and Preserver, the Giver of life and light, the Mediator between God and the world, the second God,20 also the Messiah, yet only in the ideal sense of a theophany, not as a concrete historical person.21
But with all the striking similarity of expression, there is a wide and fundamental difference between Philo and John 1) Philo’s view is obscured by dualistic and docetic admixtures, from which John is entirely free. 2) He wavers between a personal and impersonal conception of the Logos (Keferstein, Zeller, Lange), or rather he resolves the Logos after all into an impersonal summary of divine attributes (so Dorner, Niedner, Hölemann, Brückner, Meyer); while in John He appears as a divine hypostasis, distinct from, and yet co-essential with, God. 3) Philo has no room in his system for an incarnation of the Logos, which is the central idea of the Gospel of John. His doctrine is like a shadow which preceded the substance. It was a prophetic dream of the coming reality. Lange compares it to the altar of the unknown God, whom St. Paul made known to the Athenians. It helped to prepare deeper minds for the reception of the truth, while it also misled others into Gnostic aberrations. “The grand simplicity and clearness of the Prologue” (says Meyer, p. 63, note) “shows with what truly apostolic certainty John experienced the influence of the speculations of his age, and yet remained master over them, modifying, correcting and making them available for his ideas.”
These ideas of Christ formed the basis of his belief long before he knew anything of these foreign speculations.22 But he seems to have chosen a form of expression already current in the higher regions of thought for the purpose of meeting a false gnosis of speculation with the true gnosis of faith. For the airy fancies about the Logos, as the centre of all theophanies, he substitutes at the threshold of his Gospel the substantial reality by setting forth Christ as the revealed God: thus satisfying the speculative wants of the mind and directing misguided speculation into the path of truth. A clear and strong statement of the truth is always the best refutation of error.—P. S.]
And the Word.—The clause: “In the beginning was the Word,” contains the whole theme. Now follows first the relation of the Logos to the eternal God, then, more at large, His relation to the temporal world.
Was with God.—[πρὸςτὸνθεόν, rather than παρὰ τῷ θεῷ, Joh_17:5.] Properly: with God, as distinct from and over against Him, in direction towards Him, for Him [in inseparable nearness and closest intercommunion, comp. Joh_1:18, “towards the bosom of the Father.”—P. S.].23 There is a similar phraseology in Mar_6:3, and elsewhere. On the antithesis in the eternal constitution of God, see above, and Pro_8:30; Wis_9:4. The doctrine of the Holy Ghost also is implied in this expression of the motion or posture of the Logos towards God, as well as in the further designation of the Logos: He was God. Starke: We must take good heed that we do not connect with the particle “with” the notion of place or space. The word denotes the most intimate and divine sort of relation to another.24
And the Word was [not the world, which did not yet exist, Joh_1:3, hence not man, nor angel, nor any creature, but] God.25—Θεός is the predicate, λόγος the subject;26 and in the Greek the predicate stands first, for the sake of emphasis. [Comp. Joh_4:24 : πνεῦμα ὁ Θεός.—P. S.] God [in the strict sense of the term], of divine nature and kind, was the Logos. Meyer shows how the omission of the article [before θεός] was necessary, to distinguish the persons or subjects, ὁ θεός and ὁ λόγος; and how, therefore, this expression is not to be taken in the sense of the θεός without the article [a God], the subordinate δεύτερος θεός, in Philo [p. 66].27 Likewise the translation in the adjective form: [= θεῖος], divine (Baumgarten-Crusius), would alter the idea. Tholuck cites Chemnitz: θεός sine artic. essentialiter, cum artic. personaliter. He refers also to Liebner: Christol. I, p. 165; the Letters of Lücke and Nitzsch, in the Studien u. Kritiken, 1840 and, ’41; Thomasius: Christi Person. II., §40.
[Θεός without the article signifies divine essence, or the generic idea of God in distinction from man and angel; as σάρξ, Joh_1:14, signifies the human essence or nature of the Logos. The article before θεός would here destroy the distinction of personality and confound the Son with the Father. The preceding sentence asserts the distinct hypothesis of the Logos, this His essential oneness with God. To conceive of an independent being existing from eternity, outside or external to the one God, and of a different substance (ἑτεροούσιος), would overthrow the fundamental truth of monotheism and the absoluteness of God. There can be but one divine being or substance.—P. S.]
Joh_1:2. The same was.—The first proposition characterizes the subject alone; the second declares the personal distinction of the Logos from God absolute; the third expresses the essential unity and identity of the divine nature. The clauses form a solemn climax: the Logos the eternal ground of the world; the Logos the image-like expression of God; the Logos God. The sentence now following combines those three propositions in one: This Logos, which was God, was in the beginning with God. [The emphasis lies on οὗτος this Logos who was Himself God, and no other Logos; and with οὗτος is contrasted πάντα, Joh_1:3, the whole creation without any exception was brought forth by this Logos. So Meyer.—P. S.] This completes the statement of the position of Christ within the Godhead; then follows His relation to the world.
Joh_1:3. All things were made through [δι’] him.—[From the immanent Word, the λόγος ενδιάθετος, John now proceeds to the revealed Word, the λόγος προφορικός. The first manifestation of the Logos ad extra is the creation.—P. S.] Genesis 1. Col_1:17; Heb_1:2; Philo, de Cherub. Ι. 162.28 [The Son is the instrumental cause, the Father the efficient cause, of the creation; comp. 1Co_8:6 and the difference between ἐκ and διά. The Son never works of Himself, but always as the revealer of the Father and the executor of His will.—P. S.] As the Evangelist means, that absolutely all that exists, not only in its form and totality, but also in its material and detail, was called into life by the Logos, πάντα, all, without the article, is more suitable [being more general and unlimited] than τὰ πάντα [which would mean a specific and definite totality, as in 2Co_5:18. The Socinian interpretation: ‘the ethical creation,’ or ‘all Christian graces and virtues,’ is grammatically impossible.—P. S.]29
And without him.—Not merely an “emphatic parallelismus antitheticus” [comp. Joh_5:20; Joh_10:28; 1Jn_2:4; 1Jn_2:27], though it is this primarily (see Meyer), but also a further direct statement of the negation contained in the previous clause. For Meyer [followed by Godet] in vain calls in question John’s intention to exclude by this negative sentence (as Lücke, De Wette, Olshausen and others have observed30) the Platonic and Philonic doctrine of the timeless matter (ὕλη). The argument that, since ἐγέντο and γέγονεν denote only a becoming which is subsequent to creation, therefore the ὕλη would not be included, seems itself to rest upon the unconscious notion of a præ-temporal ὕλη. The only question should be, whether ὅ γέγονεν could be said of the ὕλη; especially since the Evangelist does not distinctly enter upon the idea of the ὕλη in itself considered, and doubtless for very good reasons. A proposition so distinctly antithetic was undoubtedly expressed also with antithetic intent, and it would imply downright ignorance in the Evangelist to suppose him unacquainted with this antithesis so universally familiar to the ancient world. We should likewise remember, with Tholuck, that the sentence contains, on the other hand, the antignostic thought, that the orders of spirits also were made by the Logos. For Col_2:18 shows that the germ of the Gnostic doctrine of sæns was already known. Yet the strong οὗδὲ ἕν [not even one thing, prorsus nihil, stronger than οὐδέν, nothing] proves that the antihylic aim decidedly prevails. [There is great comfort in the idea that there is absolutely nothing in the wide world which is unknown to God, which does not owe its very existence to Him, and which must not ultimately obey His infinitely wise and holy will. Comp. Ewald in loc.—P. S.]
That hath been made.—Perfect: ὁγέγονεν. All created existence. The connection of this clause with the following: “That which was made, in Him it was life (had its life in Him),” has been advocated from Clement of Alexandria down, by eminent fathers like Origen and Augustine, and by some codices and versions. But, besides the mass of the codices, Chrysostom and Jerome are against this connection. It must be rejected for the following considerations: (1) that such connection would require ἐστί instead of ἦν after γέγονεν (Meyer); (2) that it would destroy the absolute idea of the ζωή which is expected here (see 1Jn_1:1); (3) that it would cause the derived life in the creatures to be designated as the light of men; (4) that it would confuse the idea of the essential life itself here, and make the word equivocal.* Clement of Alexandria may have been led by his philosophy to separate somewhat the sentence: οὐδὲ ἕν, ὂ γέγονεν; then many followed him for the sake of the apparent profundity of his combination. On Hilgenfeld’s introduction of the Gnostic ζωή here, see the note in Meyer [p. 63]31.
Joh_1:4. In him was life.—[ζωή, the true life, the divine, immortal life (comp. Joh_3:15-16; Joh_6:27; Joh_6:33; Joh_6:35; Joh_6:40; Joh_6:47; Mat_7:14; Mat_19:16; Rom_2:7; Rom_5:10; Rom_5:17-18; Rom_5:21, and a great many passages), as distinct from βίος, the natural, mortal life (comp. the Greek in 1Jn_2:16; 1Jn_3:17; Mar_12:44; Luk_8:14; Luk_8:43; Luk_15:12; Luk_15:21; 2Ti_2:4).—P. S.] The translation: “was life,” is based on the absence of the article (De Wette, Meyer), But in Greek the omission of the article makes less difference than in German [and English]. To say [in English]: In Him was life, may mean: some measure of life. In the Greek it means, at least in this connection: the fullness of life, all life (Philo: πηγή ζωῆς).32 Hence Luther’s translation: war das Leben: was the life, is best. Meyer justly rejects the restriction of the idea to the spiritual life [ζωὴ αἰώνιος] (Origen [Maldonatus, Lampe, Hengstenberg] and others), or to the physical (Baumgarten-Crusius), or to the ethical (felicitas, Kuinoel).33 Nor is the life here to be at all divided into physical, moral and eternal. It is the creative life, the ultimate principle of life, which manifests itself in the operations of life in every province. This, however, excludes the thought that God called things into existence by an act of abstract, pure will in the Logos. The Word was as much an animating breath as it was a logical, luminous and enlightening volition. The life refers chiefly to the creative power and the power of manifestation, to the substance and the principles of things, as the light to their laws and forms; though primarily life and light still form a unity. Gerlach: “From creation he passes to preservation and providence, and ascribes these also to the Word, in virtue of the creative vital force dwelling in Him. All beings, however, not only stand in Him, but have their true, perfect life, attain their end, and enjoy the happiness and perfection designed for them, only in Him. Comp. on this full sense of life, eternal life, Joh_3:16; Joh_3:36,” etc.
And the life [the article ἡ refers to the ζωή just mentioned] was the light of men.—John passes from the relation of the Logos to the world at large to His relation to men. Here life kindles up into light. As God the Father is in the absolute sense life (Joh_5:26 : ὁ πατὴρ ἔχει ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτῷ) and light (1Jn_1:5 : ὁ θεὸς φῶς ἐστι), so is the Son likewise. Light is a figurative expression for pure, divine truth, both intellectual and moral, in opposition to darkness (σκοτία), which includes error and sin. Christ is not φῶς simply, but τὸ φῶς the only true light; comp. Joh_5:9; Joh_8:12; Joh_9:5. All nations and languages use light, which is the vivifying and preserving principle of the world, as a fit image of the Deity. Christ is not simply doctor veræ religionis (Kuinoel), but is here represented as the general illuminator of the intellectual and moral universe even before His incarnation. He is the φωσφόρος, the original bringer and constant dispenser of light to all men.34 Light and salvation are closely related; comp. Psa_27:1 : “Jehovah is my light and my salvation;” comp. Isa_49:6—In the Logos was the life, and this life is the light. Observe, it is not said the Logos was the life. The personal God, the personal Logos, have not passed into the form of mere life, as Pantheism holds; branched out into extension and thought, as Spinoza has it; alienated Himself from Himself; emptied Himself of Himself, as idea, according to Hegel and the modern philosophy of nature. And as little has He, according to the abstract supernaturalistic notion, made a purely creature-life out of nothing. He has creatively revealed the life which was in Him, and has made it, as the vital spiritual ground of the creation, the light of men. We must, therefore, on the one hand, keep the continuity of His revelation: the Word, the life, the light; but on the other hand, observe the antithesis, which now appears between the life and the light, more exactly defined: nature and spirit. With the idea of the light, the Evangelist passes to mankind. It belongs therefore to the constitution of humanity to receive the life as light (see Rom_1:20; Joh_8:12), and in the light still ever to perceive the personal revelation of the personal Logos. The light is, unquestionably, the divine truth, ἀλήθεια (Meyer); not, however, primarily as theoretical and practical, but as ontological or essential, and formal, logical; then also, doubtless, as the truth of the origin of life (ideal, religious) and the end of it (ethical). Meyer most justly maintains that here is described the primal condition of mankind in paradise,35 not primarily the subsequent revelation of the Logos as λόγος σπερματικός in the heathen world, or as the principle of revelation in Judaism. And that the operations of that primal relation were not subsequently broken off, though certainly they were broken, is declared by the next verse itself, which thus forms a complete parallel to Rom_1:20.
Joh_1:5. And the light shineth.—[Comp. Isa_9:1; Mat_4:16].—i.e., it still shines, even now. The darkness which entered was not absolute. If the light here, as is certainly the case, becomes the subject (Meyer against Lücke), Lücke, in his interpretation: And as the light shines the Logos, is still right, in so far as the light, rightly known, must be known as the manifestation of the personal Logos. Since the darkness has not been able to destroy the life, it has also not been able to destroy the light in the life, and shining inalienably belongs to the light.—It shineth.—Present: denoting continuous activity from the beginning till now. But it does not follow that the enlightening agency of the incarnate Word (λόγος ἔνσαρκος) is meant as well as of the Word before the Incarnation (λόγος ἄσαρκος). For where the λόγος ἔνσαρκος is known, the σκοτία is taken away. The Logos, however, even for the heathen and unbelievers, is still constantly active in all the world as ἄσαρκος round about the revelations of the ἔνσαρκος. De Wette groundlessly takes the present as a historical present, referring to the activity of the light in the old covenant.36
In the darkness.—The entrance of the darkness as a hostile counterpart to the light, i.e., the fall, is here presupposed; and it must be inferred that the primitive condition just described was not disturbed by any such darkness.37—The darkness, however, is not simply “the state in which man has not the Divine truth” (Meyer). As the light is truth, so the darkness is falsehood (Joh_8:44), the positive perversion of the truth in delusion, and the σκοτία denotes the total manifestation of sin as a total manifestation of falsehood, in its hostile workings against the light, together with its substratum, the kingdom of darkness in mankind, i.e., primarily in human nature, yet only in so far as human nature is submissive to and pleased with falsehood. We very much doubt whether John would have called mankind itself, as sinful, darkness.
Suppressed [?] it not.—[The aor. κατέλαβεν is used because John speaks of it as a historical fact.] Common interpretation: Comprehend [begreifen], understand (Luther [Eng. Vers., Alford, Wordsworth; but in this sense the vox media only is used, Act_4:13; Act_10:34.—P. S.]). (2) Meyer: apprehend [ergreifen], grasp. [So καταλαμβάνειν is used Joh_12:35 : ἵνα μὴ σκοτία ὑμᾶς καταλάβῃ; Mar_9:18; Rom_9:30; Php_3:12 f.; 1Co_9:24. The reason why the darkness rejected the light is indicated in Joh_3:19 and Mat_23:37.—P. S.]38 (3) hinder, suppress; Origen, Chrysostom and others (Lange, Leben Jesu, III, p. 554), recently Hölemann. Meyer is obliged to concede that. this interpretation is grammatically correct39 (Herod. i. 46, 87, etc.); he calls it, however, false to the context. But an absolute negation of the penetrating activity of the light would be false to the context; for it would destroy the full meaning of both of the next verses and the whole Gospel. The Evangelist intends to declare the very advent of the Light in the history of the world, its breaking through all the obstructions of the ancient darkness, as it appeared continuously in the history of Abraham.
[This interpretation gives good sense, but disagrees with the connection and destroys the parallelism of Joh_1:5; Joh_1:10-11, which is quite obvious, although there is a difference in the choice of the verbs καταλαμβάνειν, γινώσκειν and παραλαμβάνειν as also in the object (Joh_1:5, αὐτό sc. τὸ φῶς, Joh_1:10-11, αὐτόν sc. τὸν λόγον.)
Joh_1:5. τὸ φῶς ἐν τῇ σκοτία φαίνει,
καὶ ἡ σκοτία αὐτὸ οὐκατέλαβεν.
Joh_1:10. ἐν τῶ κόσμῳ ἧν,
καὶ ὁ κόσμος αὐτὸς οὐκἔγνω.
Joh_1:11. εἰς τὰ ἴδια ἦλθεν,
καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι αὐτὸν οὐπαρέλαβεν.
The Gentiles, as well as the Jews (οἱ ἴδιοι), rejected the preparatory revelations of the Logos. Comp. Rom_1:20 ff. John speaks, of course, only of the mass, and himself makes exceptions (Joh_1:12). The meaning of καί here and Joh_1:10-11 is and yet, notwithstanding the light shining in the darkness. There is here a tone of sacred sadness, of holy grief, which must fill every serious Christian in view of the amazing ingratitude of the great majority of men to the boundless mercies of God.—P. S.]
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
[1. The Bible speaks of three creations—the first marks the beginning, (The second the central and turning point, the third the end, of the history of the world. The O. T. opens with the natural creation, the N. T. with the moral creation or incarnation, and the Revelation closes with a description of the new heavens and the new earth, where nature and grace, the first and second creation, shall be completely harmonized, and the perfect beauty of the spirit shall be reflected in a glorious and immortal body. The first words of the Gospel of Matthew: The book of generation, or genealogy, origin (βίβλος γενέσεως=מֵפֶר תּוֹלְדוֹת), reminds one of the heading of the second account of creation in Gen_2:4 (אֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדוֹת Sept.: Αὕτη ἡ βίβλος γενέσεως οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς. The first words of the Gospel of John, In the beginning (ἐν ἀρχῇ), contain an unmistakable allusion to the first words in Genesis (Joh_1:1, בְּרְאשִׁית, Sept.: ἐν ἀρχῇ); and the third verse of the former: “All things were made by Him” (the personal Word), may serve as a commentary on the third verse of the latter: “God said (וַיֹאתֶר), Let there be light! And there was light.” The world was created by God the Father through God the Son. Comp. Psa_33:6; Col_1:16; Heb_1:2; Rev_4:11.—P. S.]
2. [In Lange, No. 1.] The fundamental cardinal ideas of this section are: The personal God (ὁ θεός); the Word or the Logos absolute, the beginning, the rise of things, the life, the light, men, the darkness, the shining of the light in the darkness, the irrepressible breaking of the light through the darkness: all belonging to the exhibition of the eternal advent of Christ. God is designated as personal by virtue of His Logos: the Logos, on His God-ward side, is designated as the full expression of the being of God in objective, personal correlation; in the Epistle to the Hebrews, the χαρακτήρ, c. Joh_1:3; in Paul, the image, εἰκών, Col_1:15. As the human word is the expression of the human mind, so the Word of God is the expression of His being, in focus-like central clearness and perfect concentration. But if, with reference to God, the Logos is single, He is, on the side toward the world, inexhaustibly rich and manifold, comprising the whole ideal kingdom of divine love, Joh_17:5; Eph_1:4. The Logos, as the expressed life of God, is the eternal ground of the temporal world. The beginning gives the becoming, the becoming gives the world. The ultimate cause of the world’s coming into being and continuing is the creating and upholding life in the Logos, as He contains the principles of life. The whole revelation of this life in the world was light for man, who was himself of the light, i.e., it was a spiritual element for his spirit. Even the encroaching darkness could not extinguish this light. In the midst of the darkness it shines (the bright side of heathenism), and through the darkness it breaks (the Old Testament revelation).40
3. [2.] The passage before us contains the ultimate data of the New Testament doctrine of the ontological Trinity.41 The Evangelist states an antithesis in the Godhead which refers primarily not to the world, but to God. The Logos was in the beginning; this is His eternity, which at once implies His deity. He was God, i.e., not a subordinate kind of deity (Philo, and the subordinationists), which, in view of the Biblical monotheism, is simply a self-contradiction in terms; not to say that the absence of the article with θεός emphasizes just the “divine being” of the Logos. With the divinity of the Logos as distinct from God (the Father), the antithesis in the Godhead is established. And at the same time is signified the unity of the speaking God and the spoken, i.e., the existence of the Spirit, which Schleiermacher (in his Dogmatik), misses in the passage. Considered as the unity of God with the Logos, it is contained in the term Logos; considered as the unity of the Logos with God, it is contained in the phrase πρὸς τὸν θεόν. Of the Spirit distinctly John had here no occasion to speak.42 But if the whole essence of God was concentrated as an object to itself in the Word, the eternal perfection of the divine consciousness in luminous clearness, unity, and certitude, is thereby declared, against all notions of a creaturely development in an originally crude divine being. In the eternal Logos lies the idea of the eternal consciousness, as well as its eternal concentration and revelation to itself: the idea, therefore, of the eternal personality, which, in its power of self-revelation, is the Lord; in its distinction, love; in its unity, the Spirit.
It may now be asked, why there is nothing said of Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and whether the ancient and modern distinctions between the eternal Logos of God and the coming of the Logos to be Son first in the creation (Marcellus, and in some measure Urlsperger), are not well grounded. It is to be observed, however, that the distinction between eternity and temporalness in Scripture is not the same as with these theologians. According to Scripture, time is not excluded or cut off from eternity, but embraced and penetrated by it, so that Christ says: “Before Abraham was, I am.” In the Logos is from eternity the essence of the Son, as in God is the essence of the Father, as in the relation of the two is the essence of the Spirit. The distinction of the two in our Evangelist, however, proceeded from his making an antithesis between the eternity which is before the world, and the eternity which, with the beginning of the world, enters into the world and comes under temporal conditions. If the eternity of God beyond the world be conceived in contrast with the world, the Son is called Logos; if it be conceived absolutely, the Logos is called the Son. And the church doctrine treats of the Godhead absolutely, as it is from eternity to eternity; therefore of the Son. The Son, as Logos, is from eternity; the Logos, as Son, passes from eternity into development, i.e., into the unfolding of the glories of the divine nature. On the development of the church doctrine of the Logos, see Dorner’s Entwicklungs-geschichte, etc. (History of Christology).
4. [3]. After the relation of the Logos to God follows first His relation to the world, as antithetic to the former. And the world is here viewed not as a finished cosmos, but in concrete totality: all things (πάντα); because the cosmos is properly the result and manifestation of the development of the things; τὸ πᾶν is the finished appearance of the πάντα as the Logos is their original source; because it should be distinctly remembered that the Logos is not merely architect of the form of the world (the demiurge of Philo), but also the producer of the material of the world, or rather of the life of the world, which reduces its subordinate, elementary forma to the material of the world. The question whether the creation of the world is from eternity, or arose in time, proceeds from an obscurity respecting the relation between the ideas of eternity and time. To conceive the world as arising in eternity, before time, incurs the absurdity of supposing a world, consequently a development (ein Werden) without time (i.e., also without rhythm or established succession). To conceive the world as arising in time, presupposes an existence of time before the world, i.e., a time without world. Time is the world itself in its unfolding. The world, therefore, arose with time, and time with the world, but upon the basis of eternity, which but reveals itself in all time.
5. [4]. “And without him was not any thing made,” Psa_33:6. The absolutely dynamic view of the world; in opposition to materialism, which, in its anti-dynamic dealing, is the philosophy of the absolute impotence of the spirit, vexed with a remnant of spirit. In the statement that all things were made by the Logos (not out of Him, nor yet by Him as an instrument, but as principle), the creation is at the same time represented as a pure act of the eternal personality; in opposition to all theories of emanation. Both the doctrine of an eternal heterogeneous opposition between God or spirit and matter (pantheistic Dualism), and the doctrine of an eternal natural outflowing of all things from God (dualistic Pantheism), are here excluded (not to speak of the cabbalistic fancies concerning matter, as a shadow of God, a negation of God, which have emerged again even in our day). By the harmonious distinction in God, or His absolute personality, the discordant opposition in the world, the heathen view of the world, is denied. Gerlach: The by is not to be understood as if the Logos, the Word, were only the external architect; Paul expresses it; “In him43 were all things created,” and adds: “by him and for him,” Col_1:16.
6. [5]. But the next words: “In him was the life,” etc., with equal decision, contradict Deism, which sees in the world only an act and work of a God entirely outside and remote.44 The Logos is the life of the life, the operative, creative force, by which all things are. Yet the things have their life in Him, not He His life in the things. And the preservation of the world rests upon the same word as the creation, Heb_1:3; Joh_5:17.—The points of unity between the creation and the preservation of the world, in which the creation establishes the preservation, and the preservation reaches back to the basis of the creation, are vital principles, out of which the vital laws evolve themselves, Gen_1:11; Gen 12:21, 28. The life is, however, before the light, nature before spirit; though even the natural light, as the first step of the separating (and liberating) process of the life, is a prophecy of the spirit, which, being of the nature of light, finds its essential light in the manifestations of the Logos.
7. [6]. “And the life was the light.” An intimation of the antithesis between spirit and nature. In man the revelation life of the Logos has appeared in the world as light. Consciousness is the light of being. But the life was the light of men, not merely as the source of life, in that the human spirit has its origin in the Logos; but also as the element of life, in that the clearness of the spirit subsists only through the in-working of the Logos. Without Him the light in man becomes itself darkness (Mat_6:22),45 and the spirit, the πνεῦμα, itself becomes unspiritual flesh. But if the life itself was the light of men, the creation must have been, to the pure man, a transparent symbol, a perfectly intelligible likeness of divine things (Rom_1:20). And this thought is most gloriously carried out in the Gospel. Christ has made the light of men manifest in the life.
8. [7]. “In the darkness.” The Evangelist, writing as a Christian for Christians, can introduce the idea of darkness without further explanation, with no fear of being misunderstood. As he has not intended to give a cosmogony, so he considers it unnecessary here to treat of the beginning of sin. His subject is the Logos, who has appeared as the Christ. Accordingly he delineates first the eternal divine nature of the Logos and His congenial, friendly relations to the world and to mankind, and now comes to His hostile posture towards sin. And this he views in its deepest and most suggestive aspect, as an opposition of the light to the darkness. The sin which has come into the world is, above all things, darkness, self-darkening of the light of spiritual life in falsehood, Joh_8:44. And this darkness is not the sinful spirits, but sin, as the obscuration of the life, including the life itself, so far as it becomes one with sin. Hence: “shineth in the darkness;” not into the darkness. This darkness, as such, can be only broken through, destroyed, by the light, not transformed into light. But in this the power of the light has been made manifest, that it has not ceased to shine even in the darkness of the heathen world. Nay, the deeper the darkness, the more wonderfully does the light scintillate through it in obstructed, colored radiance, in the motley mythologies, usages and philosophemes of the heathen world, so far as they are symbolical and have an ideal substance: the λόγος σπερματικός [the word implanted, disseminated among men].46 John defines the relation between sin and the continual working of good in the world exactly as Paul does in Rom_2:13-14.
9. [8]. “Restrained it not.” The sense is: prevented it not from breaking through. Intimating the entrance of a historical advent in the active faith of Abraham. The historical beginning of the religion of active faith. [See my objections to this interpretation, p. 59. κατέλαβεν rather means here grasped, apprehended.—P. S.]
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
The life of Jesus Christ in time, the great disclosure respecting eternity: (1) Respecting His own eternal nature; (2) Respecting the personal being of God; (3) Respecting the origin of all things (particularly the antithesis of spirit and nature); (4) Respecting the nature and destiny of man; (5) Respecting the contest between the light and the darkness in the history of the world.—The word of Scripture concerning “the beginning:” (1) The Old Testament word in the New Testament light; (2) The New Testament word on the Old Testament basis.—The great beginning between eternity and time considered: (1) As the great distinction between eternity and time; (2) As the great union between eternity and time.—The three great words concerning Christ: In the beginning was the Word: (1) In the beginning was the Word; the divine nature of Christ; (2) In the beginning was the Word; the eternity of Christ; (3) In the beginning was the Word; the eternal operation and generation of Christ. Or, The Word was (1) Before the beginning (His relation to God); (2) For the beginning (His relation to the world); (3) In the beginning (His relation to things).—The Word which was in the beginning, a testimony (1) To the eternal Personality as the ground of all things; (2) To the eternal Spirit-Light as the law of all things; (3) To the eternal Love as the kernel of all things; (4) To the eternal life as the life of all things.—The Word in His exaltation overtime: He (1) In the beginning founded all things; (2) In the middle executed all things; that He may (3) In the end judge all things.—The import of the Word in God, illustrated by the word in man: (1) The expression and mirror of the personal nature (of the spirit, the reason); (2) The expression and signal of personal act.—The Word, as the bloom of the tree of life; or the gospel, a witness of its own spiritual nature: (1) Of the Word as the seed of the tree of life; (2) Of the Word as the heart of the tree of life; (3) Of the fruit of the tree of life, or life eternal—the Word in redemption, a transfiguration of the Word in creation.—The glory in the beginning: (1) The prototypal primal glory of God; (2) The archetypal glory of the Word; (3) The typical glory of the creation; (4) The antitypical glory of man.—The light in its rise; or: (1) The radiance of God and eternity; (2) The dawn of the world and time.—All things, etc., or the Christian doctrine of the creation: (1) The purification of the heathen doctrine (obviating the eternity of matter); (3) The deepening of the Jewish doctrine of the Shekmah (clearly pronouncing the personal life of love in God, as it enters into the world): (2) The glorification of the sound doctrine of scientific investigation (man the final cause of things, the God-Man the final cause of man); (4) The verdict of the Spirit respecting the derivation of the word from a non-spiritual source (materialism).—The Christian features in all things: (1) The creaturely instinct of dependence, as an impulse towards the upholding Word; (2) The natural self-unfolding instinct, as the impulse towards freedom (the liberty of the children of God, Romans 8.); (3) The cosmical, world-forming instinct, as art impulse towards unity; (4) The spiritual [æonic] instinct, as the impulse to rise into the service of the Spirit.—The unity and the difference between life and light: (1) In the Son of God; (2) In the world; (3) In man; (4) In the Christian life.—The life a light of men: (1) In man (consciousness); (2) For man; the works of God as the signs and words of God (symbolism); (3) Respecting man; Christ the life of the life.—The life and light, or truth and reality, inseparable: (1) Without reality truth becomes a shadow; (2) Without truth reality becomes a lie.—The great darkness which has spread over the bright world of God: The darkness (1) of falsehood; (2) of hatred; (3) of death.—The light in contest with the darkness, or the progress of revelation in the world of sinners: (1) The light shining in the darkness (the shaded, colored light); (2) The light breaking through the darkness.—The eternal foundations of the advent of Christ.—The divine Life of Christ, the mark of all life: (1) The mark of the original glory of the world; (2) The mark of the deep corruption of the world; (3) The mark of the great redemption and glorification of the world.—The wisdom of the Apostles and the wisdom of their time (or, of the ancient world).—Parallel passages: Genesis 1.: Psalms 8, 19, 104; Isaiah 40; John 17; Romans 8; 1 Corinthians 15; Ephesians 1; Colossians 1; 1 John 1; Revelation 1, 21, 22.
Starke:—God has revealed even His divine constitution and the inmost secret of His nature.—The Eternal Word is now become also ours. Through this Word God speaks with us, and we speak with God. The eternal Word speaks in us, through us, to us, with us.—Quesnel: The knowledge of the Son of God must be the first and the most excellent; without it all knowledge is nothing.—Nova Bibl. Tub.: See now many proofs of the divinity of our Jesus. He is God, the eternal Word, from eternity, in the beginning, before all creatures, the Creator of all things, the origin of all life, the source of all light.—If the Word of God was in the beginning, it is certain, that He also will be in future to the end (Lange). It is not said: the light was the life, but: the life was the light. The life is the source of the light, even in the kingdom of nature, etc. That no true illumination takes place, except the man is brought back by regeneration from spiritual death to spiritual life (Zeisius). Whose life Christ is, his light He is also.—No other darkness can withstand the light, but the darkness of man.
Mosheim: The person through whom God spoke to men, did not first arise when the world was made, but was already, that is, from eternity.—Rieger: This confessedly great mystery of the manifestation of God in the flesh continues as a standard at all times set up, under which all gather, that are born of God, and which all that are of the world pass by.—Lisco: From the Word, as the light, proceeds all that is true and good in mankind.—Gerlach, after Augustine: Sin, not indeed consists, but manifests itself, in coming of nothing, and bringing man to nothing (eternal death).—Braune: Thought is clear only in word: He came. This implies personality; the Personality, the Enlightener, came near to the Jewish people; in reference to men in general, it is said: He was.—Thus John, who lay on the bosom of the Lord, as the Lord is eternally with His Father, opens his view into the depths of the life of Jesus Christ from the beginning, till it rises into the heights of the same life in the bosom of the Father.
Heubner: The mystery of the incarnation of the Son of God: (1) The holiest, deepest of all mysteries, in virtue of the person; (2) The most beneficent of all; (3) The most certain of all.—Schleiermacher: What is it which meets us everywhere as truth, in all the utterances of the human mind, in all investigations, in all holy words of inspired men? Ever that which contains a hint of the redemption which was to come through Christ.
[Schaff: Joh_1:1-2. The transcendent glory of Christ, 1. His eternity (against Arianism): “In the beginning was the Word.” 2. His distinct personality (against Sabellianism): “The Word was with (in intimate personal intercommunion with) God.” 3. His essential divinity (against Socinianism and Rationalism): “And the Word was God.”—The fundamental importance of the doctrine of Christ’s divinity: it is the corner-stone of the Christian system, the anchor of hope. Without it His passion and death have no force against sin and Satan, and we are still lost.]
[Burkitt: “Until we acknowledge the eternity and divinity of Christ, as well as of God the Father, we honor neither the Father nor the Son. There is this difference between natural things and supernatural. Natural things are first understood, and then believed; but supernatural mysteries must be first believed, and then will be better understood.” (Pascal makes a similar remark.) “If we will first set reason on work, and believe no more than we can comprehend, this will hinder faith: but if after we have assented to gospel mysteries, we set reason on work, this will help faith.”—Hengstenberg: “The Logos was God;” this is the magic formula that drives away all doubt, anxiety and fear from the Christian. If God be for us, who can be against us?—Ryle: If Christ is so great, how sinful must sin be from which He came to save us?]
[Schaff: Joh_1:3. The creation is the work of the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit. This is intimated Gen_1:1-3 : God (the Father) created … And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said (the Word).—The Scripture doctrine of creation differs—1) from Pantheism, which teaches an eternal world and confounds God and the world; 2) from Dualism, or the eternity of matter antagonistic to God (Parseeism, Platonism, Gnosticism, Manichæism); 3) from the emanation theory; 4) from Deism, which asserts the creation, but separates it from the Creator; 5) from Materialism, which makes matter the mother of the spirit, and is alike degrading to God and man.—Sin was not made by God, but is a subsequent corruption or perversion of what was made good. Sin is no essence, no creature, but something negative, a false direction of the will.—Christ’s part in the creation the basis of His redemption. Having made man, He had the deepest interest in him from the start.]
[Schaff: Joh_1:4-5. Christ, the source of all true life and light.—Out of Christ there is but death and darkness.—The antagonism of life and death, and the antagonism of light and darkness is not, 1) a metaphysical conflict (as in the Gnostic and Dualistic systems), but, 2) a moral conflict involving personal freedom and responsibility. It began in time and will end in time; life and light will conquer the field and swallow up death and darkness. 3. The antagonism culminates in God and Satan, in Christ and Anti-Christ, but goes on in every man. 4. It should fill us with holy grief, manly courage, and intense earnestness.]
[On the whole section. Bengel: Joh_1:1-2 refer to eternity, Joh_1:3 to creation, Joh_1:4 to the state of innocence, Joh_1:5 to the fall.—Ryle: Not a single word could be altered in the first five verses of John without opening the door to some heresy.—There are hidden depths in this passage which nothing but the light of eternity will ever fully reveal.—P. S.]
Footnotes:
[4]Joh_1:1. [There is no doubt that Word (Vulg.: Verbum; Lath.: Wort) is the only proper translation here of Δόγος (from λέγω) for John never uses it in another sense, and here he plainly alludes to the account of Genesis that God in the beginning made the world through His word. But in the Prologue and in two other passages (1Jn_1:1, ὁ Αόγος τῆς ζωῆς, and Rev_19:13. ὁ Αόγος τον͂ θεον͂,—the passage 1Jn_5:7 is spurious) he employs it in an altogether peculiar, personal sense to designate the præ-existent Christ, as is evident from Joh_1:14. The Greek favored this application, λόγος being masculine; and Ewald, boldly breaking through all usage, retains the masculine article in his German translation: der (instead of das) Wort. In classic Greek λόγος; has the double signification: word and reason, oratio and ratio; the former being the primary meaning according to the etymology. Both are closely related; word or speech is the λόγος προφορικός, the outward reason or thought expressed; reason or thought is the λὁγος ἐνδιάθετος, the inward speech. We cannot speak without the faculty of reason nor think without words in our mind, whether uttered or not. Hence the Hebrew phrase: to speak in his heart=to think. When λόγος signifies word, it refers not to the formal part, the mere name or sound of a thing (like π̔ῆμα, ἔπος, ὄνομα, νοκ, vox vocabulum), but to the material part, the thing itself, the thought as uttered, sometimes a whole discourse, sermo, or treatise (as in Act_1:1). When it signifies reason, it may denote the subjective faculty, human or divine, which produces speech (so in Heraklitus), and hence the derivative terms, λογίζε αθαι, λογισμός, λογικός, which are applied to rational functions; but more frequently, and in the Bible almost exclusively, it refers to an objective reason to be given of, or for, any thing. Comp. such phrases as πρὸς λόγον, κατὰ λόγον, agreeable to reason, reasonable (in Plato, also Act_18:14—this comes nearest to the sense of reason as a faculty); παρὰ λόγον. contrary to reason, improbable; λόγον τινος ἔξειν, or ποιεῖσθαι, rationem habere alicujus, to make account of, and λόγον διδόναι (ἀπέχειν, παρἐχειν), τινόςto give a reason, an account of a thing (comp. Act_19:40; 1Pe_3:5); also λόγον αἰτεῖν περί τινος, λαμβάειν ν̓πέρ τινος, to ask, to receive an account of a thing. For the faculty of reason the N. T. always employs other terms, as πνεν͂μα, νον͂ς, καρδία, σοφἰα. Hence we must object, with Zezschwitz (Profangräcität und Biblischer Sprachgeist, 1859, p. 33), to the trias, νον͂ς, λόγος, πνεν͂μα, as set up by Delitzsch in his Biblische Psychologie, retained in the second ed., 1861, p. 176. For the theological meaning of Logos as here used, see the Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]
[5]Joh_1:3. Lachm. construes: ον̓δὲ ἕν, ὁ γέγονεν, etc., according to Codd. C.* D. L. etc. [Sin. D. al. read ον̓δὲν ὅ γέγ; but ον̓δὲ ἔν (ne unum quidem, not even the ν̔́λη), is more emphatic.—P. S.]
[6]Joh_1:4. D. et al. (Lachm.) read ζωή έστιν. An exegetical hypothesis, see Joh_5:11. [Sin. D. and Codd. ap. Orig. sustain ἦν, and are followed by Tischend. in his 8th ed., but ὁ γέγονε ἐν αν̓τῷ is supported by A. B. C. E. F. L. O. al. Some MSS. and Versions connect the first sentence of Joh_1:4 with the last words of Joh_1:3, and punctuate ὁ γέγονε ἐν ἀν αν̓τῷ (a phrase never used by John for to be made by), ζωὴ ἦν (the Valentinian Gnostics and Hilgenfeld); others put a comma after γέγονε (Clem. Alex., Orig., Lachm),—a forced and untenable construction. See Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]
[7]Joh_1:5. [On the different translations and interpretations of καταλαμβάνειν see Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]
[8]Joh_1:5. Some authorities read αν̓τόν [sc. λόγον, for αν̓τό,, sc. τὸ φῶς. See Tischend. ed. 8—P. S.].
[9] [The symmetrical, almost poetic, or rather superpoetic, beauty of the Prologue will appear more fully from the following arrangement of its simple, short, abrupt and pregnant sentences:
THE LOGOS AND GOD.
1. ̓Εν ἀρχῆ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ᾖν πρὸ τὸν Θεός, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος.
2. Ον̓͂τος ἦς ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν.
THE LOGOS AND THE WORLD.
3. ΙΙάντα δὶ̓ αν̓τον͂ έγένετο, καὶ χωπὶς αν̓τον͂ ἐγέντο ον̓δὲ ἕν ὁ γέγονεν.
THE LOGOS AND MANKIND.
4. ̓Εν ας̓τῶ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων.
THE LOGOS AND SIN.
5. Καὶ τὸ φῶς ἐν τῆ σκοτίᾳ φαίνει, καὶ ἡ σκοτία αν̓τὸ ον̓ κατὲλαβεν.—P. S.]
[10][So also Marheineke (Dogm. p. 134). The Son is indeed called ἡ ἀρχή, Rev_3:14, but not the Father. Philo and the Gnostics called the Logos ἀρχή, but the Father προαρχή, or abyss (comp. Jacob Böhm’s Urgrund, Abgrund). Besides, the corresponding term to προαρχή is Λόγος θεός, while “Father” requires “Son”.—P. S.]
[11][Origen (Com. in. Joan., in Delarue’s ed. Tom. IV. p. 19) makes τὸ εἶναι ἐν ἀρχῇ to be identical with τὸ εἶναι ἐν πατρί, which would lead to Cyril’s interpretation; but soon afterwards, p. 20, he explains that Christ was called the beginning because He is the Wisdom, and refers to Pro_8:22, where Wisdom says: “God made me the beginning of His ways—ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ,"—a passage which figured very prominently in the Arian controversy.—P. S.]
[12][So also Chrysostom (In Joannem Hom. II., ed. Montfaucon, Tom. VIII. p. 13): τὸ γὰρ, ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν, οὐδὲν ἕτερόν ἐστιν, ἀλλ̓ ἢ τὸ εἶναι ἀεὶ δηλωτικὸν, καὶ ἀπείρως εἶναι. Of modern commentators, Olshausen adopts this view: “Not in the beginning of creation, but in the primitive beginning, the Uranfang, i.e., from eternity.” This is a correct inference (see below), but not directly expressed. We can only speak of a beginning of finite or created existence—the existence of God has neither beginning nor end. Liddon (The Divinity of Christ, 4th ed., 1869, p. 28) somewhat modifies this interpretation after Meyer, in referring בְּרֵשִׁית, Gen_1:1, to the initial moment of time itself, ἐν ἀρχῇ to the absolute conception of that which is anterior to, or rather independent of, time. Ewald: the first conceivable beginning.—P. S.]
[13][Hengstenberg quotes for this view Mat_19:4; Joh_8:44, and other passages where ἀρχή likewise refers to the beginning of the world, or the creation. So also Brückner, Godet, etc.—P. S.]
[14][Comp. Bengel in loc.: “In eodem principio cœli et terræ et mundi (Joh_1:10; Gen_1:1) jam erat Verbum sine ullo principio initiore suo. Ipsum Verbum est mere æternum: nam eodem modo Verbi ac Patris æternitas describitur.” Alford: “These words, if they do not assert, at least imply, the eternal præ-existence of the divine Word. For ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν is not said of an act done ἐν ἀρχᾐ (as in Gen_1:1), but of a state existing ἀρχῇ, and therefore without beginning itself.” Brückner (in the fifth ed. of De Wette): “If the Logos was in the beginning of things, it follows that He had a being before all being.” Ewald: “The words, ‘In the beginning,’ etc., mean first of all that the Logos actually existed before the world or that there never could be conceived a time in which He was not already.” So also Godet.—P. S.]
[15]Bengel; “Erat Verbum, antequam mundus fieret.” Alford: “The existence of an enduring and unlimited state of being, implied in ἧν (the indefinite past), is contrasted with ἐγένετο in Joh_1:3, and especially in Joh_1:14.”—Meyer: “John reports historically, looking back from the later time of the incarnate Logos (Joh_1:14).” This is more correct than Olshausen’s exposition of ἧν as designating “the enduring, timeless existence of the eternal presence;” this would require ἐστί, as in Joh_8:58, πρὶν ̓Αβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί. (Chrysostom likewise takes ἦν here as denoting τὸ ἀίδιον, because it is used of God.) But all these commentators agree that the was of the divine Logos is clearly distinct from the became or began to be of the creature, Joh_1:3, of the man John, Joh_1:6, and of the human nature of Christ, Joh_1:14. John suggests the idea of an (eternal) generation of the Logos from the substance of the Father (comp. the term μονογενὴς υἱός, Joh_1:18, and πρωτότοκος, Col_1:15, which differs widely from πρωτόκτιστος or πρωτόπλαστος), but not of the Arian doctrine of a creation of the Logos out of nothing. The Son must be as eternal as the Father, being as indispensable to the Fatherhood of God, as the Father is to the Sonship of the Logos.—P. S.]
[16][“Das persönliche geistige Wesen Gottes in absoluter Selbst-objectivirung.”]
[17][1Jn_5:7 is spurious. Luk_1:20; Act_20:32; Heb_4:12, are no proper parallels.—P. S.]
[18][On the grammatical sense of λόγος see Textual Note 1.]
[19][Bibl. Psychologie, secd. ed., p. John 178: “Dass die Johanneische Logoslehre nicht ausser Beziehung zur philonischen steht, ist ein unläuqbares Factum. Die apostolische Verkündigung verschmähte die bereits vom Alexandrinismus ausgeprägten Ideenformen nicht sondern erfüllte sie mit dem durch die neutestamentliche Erfüllungsgeschichte dargereichten Inhalt.”—P. S.]
[20][ὁ πρεσβν́τερος νὶὸς τον͂ πατρὸς, ὁ πρωτόγονος αν̓τον͂, εἰκὼν θεον͂ ,ἄγγελος πρεσβν́τατος, ἀρχάγγελος, the λόγος τομεν̓ς, δημιονργὸς δἰ ον̔͂ ὁ κόσνος κατεσκευάσθη, ὁ ἀρχέτνπος καὶ παράδειγμα τον͂ φωτός, ἀρχιερεν́ς, ἱκέτης, δεν́τερος θεός, and similar terms which show how nearly Philo, in speaking of the Logos, approached the teaching of St. John, although in fact he was nearer the later Gnostic speculations about the æons. He also says of the Logos that he was neither unbegotten (ἀγέννητον), like God, nor begotten (ἀγέννητος), like ourselves.—P. S.]
[21][Lücke, Alford and others go too far when they say that Philo did not connect the Logos with Messianic ideas.—P. S.]
[22][Meyer likewise distinctly asserts the independence of the matter of John’s Logos-doctrine, which rests on the O. T. and the teaching of Christ and the Holy Spirit. He arrives, by a purely exegetical process, substantially at the orthodox view, and thus sums up the result of his exposition of Joh_1:1 (p. 64): “Mithin ist nach Joh. unter ὁ λόγος. nichts anderes zu verstehen als die vorzeitlich (vrgl. Paulus, Col. I.15 ff.) in Gott immanente, zur Vollziehung des Schöpfungsactes aber hypostatisch aus Gott hervorgegangene und seitdem als schöpferisches, belebendes und erleuchtendes persönliches Princip auch in der geisttigen Welt wirkende wesentliche Selbstoffenbarung Gottes, diesem selbst an Wesen und Herrlichkeit gleich (vrgl. Paulus Phil. II. 6), welche göttliche Selbsloffenbarung in dem Menschen Jesus leiblich erschienen ist und das Werk der Welter-lösung vollzogen hat.”—P. S.]
[23][This sentence excludes Sabellianism, while the following declaration: “The Word was God,” excludes Arianism.—Bengel: “Ergo distinctus a Deo Patre. πρός denotat perpetuam quasi tendentiam Filii ad Patrem in unitate essentiæ. Erat apud Deum unice quia nil extra Deum tum erat.” Meyer: “πρός bezeichnet das Befindlichsein des Logos bei Gott im Gesichtspunkte des Verkehrs.” Brückner: “παρά hebt mehr die Räumlichkeit, πρός mehr die Zugehörigkeit des Beisammenseins hervor.” Alford: “Both the inner substantial union, and the distinct personality of the λόγος are here asserted.” Liddon (l. c. p. 229): “He is not merely παρὰ Θεῷ (Joh_17:5), along with God, but πρὸς τὸν Θεόν. This last proposition expresses, beyond the fact of co-existence or immanence, the more significant fact of perpetuated intercommunion. The face of the everlasting Word was ever directed towards the everlasting Father.” Owen: “With signifies a continual cleaving or adherence to the object towards which the relation of union is expressed, the closest union, together with distinct and independent personality.” Godet: “πρός exprime la proximite, la présence, le rapprochement mutuel, la relation active, la communion personelle.” He translates it, “en relation avec Dieu.”—P. S.]
[24][“Ubi amor, ibi trinitas.” God being love, He must be triune, a loving Father, a beloved Son, and the union and communion of both, which is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of love and communion.—P. S.]
[25][Meyer observes here (p. 65): “There is something majestic in the growth of the record of the Logos in these three brief, grand sentences.”—P. S.]
[26][Luther reverses the order, following closely the Greek: Gott war das Wort. So also the old English translation authorized by Henry VIII.—P. S.]
[27][Philo calls the Logos θεος only by misapplication, ἐν καταχρήσει, as he says; and he calls Him ὁ δεν́τερος θεός in the sense of a middle being between God and man.—P. S.]
[28][Philo justly distinguishes the efficient from the instrumental cause of the creation, the former he signifies by ὑφ' ον̓͂ the latter by δἰ ον̔͂: … τὸν θεὸν, ν̔φ̓ ον̓͂ (ὁ κόσμος) γέγονενν̔́λην δὲ, τἁ τέσσαρα στοιχεῖα, ἑξ ὦν σνςεκράθη ὄργανον δέ, λόγον θεον͂ ,δἰ ον̓́ κατεσκενάσθη. The Bible excludes the Platonic and Philonic doctrine of the ν̔́λη which is dualistic. It teaches that the world was made by God the Father (in answer to the question ν̔φ̓ ον̓͂), through the Son (δἰ ον̓͂) out of nothing (έξ ον̓͂), for His glory (δἰ ὅ).—P. S.]
[29][Meyer: “John might have written τὰ πάντα (with the article) as 1Co_8:6; Col_1:16; but he must not; comp Col_1:17; Joh_3:35, for his idea is: ‘All,’ in the unlimited sense; τὰ πάντα would express the idea: the totality of things existing.” Comp. Godet. Bengel observes on πάντα: “Grande verbum, quo mundus, i.e. universitas rerum factarum denotatur, Joh_1:10.”—P. S.]
[30][Also Alford: “This addition is not merely a Hebrew parallelism, but a distinct denial of the eternity and uncreatedness of matter as held by the Gnostics. They set matter, as a separate existence, over against God, and made it the origin of evil:—but John excludes any such notion.”—P. S.]
[31][Godet justly remarks that ζωὴ ἐ͂ιναι is too strong an expression for creatures instead of ζωὴν ἔχειν.—P. S.]
[32][Comp. Psa_36:9 : “With Thee is the fountain of life; in Thy light we see light;” LXX: πηγὴ ζωῆς. Comp. also Joh_11:25 : “I am the resurrection and the life (ἡ ζωή);” and 1Jn_1:1, where Christ is called the (personal) Word of life, τῆς ζωῆς.—P. S.]
[33][Olshausen, Brückner and Alford likewise take life in this comprehensive sense, that the Logos is the source of all life to the creature, not indeed ultimately, but mediately, comp. Joh_1:26; 1Jn_5:11. So θάνατος, the opposite of ζωή, covers in John the physical and spiritual. Chrysostom (Hom. V, al. IV) refers ζωή mainly to the power of creation and preservation, but also to the resurrection. According to Olshausen ζωή designates the only real absolute being, the ὄντως εἶναι, of Deity, in contrast with the relative existence of the creature. Luthardt and Brückner: “Das in sich gesättigle, wahre Sein, welches zugleich die schöferische Lebenskraft schlechthin ist ohne Unterseheidung des Physischen und Ethischen.” Godet: “la santé vitale dans sa vigueur la plus intacte, le developement normal del’ existence” i.e. life in its normal and healthy condition, whether physical, or intellectual and moral, or supernatural and eternal.—P. S.]
[34][Chrysostom: ον̓κ εἶπεν, ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ̓Ιονδαίων, ἁλλὰκαθόλον τῶν ἀνθρώπων.—P. S.]
[35][Joh_1:4 relates to the condition before, Joh_1:5 to the condition after, the fall. So already Bengel. Godet goes further, and discovers in life and light an allusion to the trees of life and knowledge in paradise. Ingenious, but not properly warranted by the text.—P. S.]
[36][Brückner likewise dissents here from De Wette. Alford: “This φαίνελ is not merely the historical present, but describes the whole process of the light and life in the Eternal Word shining in this evil and dark world; both by the O. T. revelations, and by all the scattered fragments of light glittering among the thick darkness of heathendom.” Hengstenberg, on the contrary (p. 33), denies all illumination of the heathen world as foreign to the mind of John, and explains that the Logos before the incarnation was virtually life and light, but did not manifest Himself as such before the incarnation, so that those who lived before Christ were excluded from life and light. But this would cut off even the saints of the O. T. Comp. against Hengstenberg Joh_1:9; Rom_1:18-24; Rom_2:14-15; Act_14:16-17; Act_17:27-28.—P. S.]
[37]As the σ κ ο τ ί α is not introduced here in its historical origin, Hilgenfeld (with the Baur school generally) has sought here to make ultimate opposites out of the light and darkness. Thus is the Gnostic filth everywhere brought in, just where the evangelist would sweep it out, as here by the preceding ον̓δέ ἕν.
[38][Meyer: “ον̓ κατέλαβεν, ergriff es nicht; nahm nicht Besitz davon; es ward von der Finsterniss nicht angeeignet, so dass sie dadurch licht geworden wäre; sie blieb ihm fern und fremd. “Ewald (p. 121) takes the same view, and finds besides in ον̓ κατέλαβεν the idea of guilt: “und die Finsterniss dennoch ihrerseits ergriff es nicht, eignete es sich nicht an, wie sie doch hätte thun können und sollen.”—P. S.]
[39][According to classic usage, but in the N. T. this meaning has no parallel. John would probably have used κατέχειν in this case, as Paul did, Rom_1:18; 2Th_2:6-7.—P. S.]
[40] [Victor Strauss (Das Kirchenjahr im Hause, Heidelberg, 1845, p. 63) beautifully reproduces and expounds the Johanneau idea of the Logos in his relation to God and the world:
“Vor Anbeginn der Schöpfung und der Zeiten
Ist Gottes Eingeborner ewiglich,
Die Fülle selbst von Gottes Wesenheiten,
Das ew’ge Du, in dem des Vaters Ich
Des eignen Wesens Wesenheit besiegelt,
Den eignen Abgrund aufgedeckt in sich,
Die Hand die Gottes Tief’ ihm selbst entriegelt,
Sein Wille selbst in anfangloser That,
Sein Abglanz, der ihm selbst sich wiederspiegelt.
Das Wort, das er in sich geboren hat
Zum wahren Sein, drin Fülle der Naturen
In’s ungeschaffne Dasein ewig trat.
Da ist der Grund, aus dem die Weltewfluren
Hervorgesprosst zum Anbeginn der Zeit,
Als ew’ges Dasein ward zu Creaturen;
Und Lebensfüll’ in reinster Seligkeit
Ging aus von Ihm in die Erschaffnen alle;
Es war nur Licht, war Keine Dunkelheit”—P. S.]
[41][German divines properly distinguish since Urlsperger (who invented, not the distinction, but the terminology) between the ontological and the œconomical Trinity, or the Trinity of essence and the Trinity of revelation. The ontological Trinity is the Trinity of the Divine being before and independent of the world, the inherent threefold distinction in God, who both as absolute intelligence and as absolute will or love, is to Himself an object of knowledge and of love, and yet self-identical in this distinction. We have an analogy in our human self-consciousness which implies a union of the knowing subject and the known object; and in human love there is also a trinity—the loving subject, the beloved object, and the union of the two. The œconomical Trinity is the Trinity of God manifested in the world in the work of Creation and Preservation (as God the Father), Redemption (as God the Son), and Regeneration and Sanctification (as God the Holy Ghost). The Bible generally speaks of the Trinity as revealed, but this itself justifies by inference the assumption of the internal Trinity, since God reveals Himself as He actually is. There can be no contradiction between His being and His manifestation.—P. S.]
[42][The dispensation of the Spirit, His œconomical manifestation in the world with the whole fullness of His power, presupposed the atoning work and glorification of Christ, and did not appear before the day of Pentecost and the founding of the Christian Church. Comp. Joh_7:39.—P. S.]
[43][̓Εν αν̓τῶ; inaccurately translated by him in the English Version, and thus not rightly distinguished from δἰ αν̓τον͂ at the close of the same verse.—E. D. Y.]
[44] [Göthe thus refutes Deism:
“What were a God who only from without
Upon his finger whirled the universe about?
’Tis his within itself to move the creature;
Nature in him to warm, himself in nature;
So that what in him lives and moves and is,
Shall ever feel some living breath of his.”—P. S.]
[45][More properly, without Him there were no light at all in man. In Mat_6:22 the Lord speaks rather of a perversion, confusion, doubling of the vision by the carnal will, so that the light within becomes distorted and a source of positive error, than of an absence of the light itself. Such light-darkness, or dark-light, like the ignis fatuus, is a “greater” darkness than simple darkness itself.—E. D. Y.]
[46][Justin. Martyr applied the Platonic view of the relation of the νον͂ς to the νοερόν in man to the relation of the divine λόγος to the σπέρμα λογικόν, the human reason, and derived all the elements of truth which are scattered like seeds among the ancient heathen, from the influence of Christ before His incarnation. He recognized in the rational soul itself something closely related to the divine Logos, a germ or spark of the Reason of reasons, a λόγος σπερματικός, a σπέρμα τον͂ λόγον ἔμφντον. He regarded the heathen sages as unconscious disciples of the Logos, as Christians before Christ, and compared Socrates to Abraham. Apol. II. §13: “Each man spoke well in proportion to the share he had of the spermatic divine word (ἀπὸ μὲρονς τον͂ σπερματικον͂ θείον λόγον), seeing what was related to it. Whatever things were rightly said among all men are the property of us Christians …. All the [heathen] writers were able to see realities darkly through the seed of the implanted word that was in them (δια τῆς ἐνον́σης ἑμφν́τον τον͂ λόγον σπορᾶς).” Comp. 2. § 8, where, speaking of the Stoics and the poets, he says that their moral teaching in part was admirable on account of the seed of reason implanted in every race of men, δια τὸ ἔμφντον παντὶ γένει ἀνθρώπων σπέρμα τον͂ λόγον.—P. S.]
THE
GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN1
—————————
I
THE PROLOGUE OF THE GOSPEL. THE ETERNAL PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. HIS UNIVERSAL RELATION TO THE WORLD AND MANKIND, AND HIS THEOCRATIC ADVENT IN ISRAEL; OR, THE (OLD TESTAMENT AND NEW TESTAMENT) INCARNATION OF THE LOGOS.
Joh_1:1-18
INTRODUCTORY THEOLOGICAL AND HOMILETIC OBSERVATIONS
The Evangelists Matthew and Luke give us the history of the childhood of Jesus, and indicate His divine descent with few nerds in the miraculous story of His birth. But their eye in this is mainly upon the human or, in the narrower sense, historical antecedents of Jesus his pedigree: Matthew from a predominantly theocratic point of view, tracing the line to Abraham; Luke, from the more general human point of view, tracing it to Adam.2
As an offset to this exhibition of the human genealogy of Christ, John signalizes his eternal origin, as well as his eternal advent, in the eternal præ-existence of the divine personal Logos. In the two relations together [the human and the divine], we see how the word of Micah concerning the Ruler out of Bethlehem, whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting, is fulfilled (Mi. Joh_5:2).
John, therefore, has this in common with Mark, that he introduces Christ according to His human nature in His historical maturity and preparation, after John the Baptist, his forerunner. With Matthew he shares the theocratic point of view (Joh_1:11-12); with Luke, the universal (Joh_1:9-10); but lie rises above all in pointing out a Christological theocracy and universality of the incarnate Logos, which in its one manifestation embraces time and eternity, heaven and earth, and unites Deity and humanity.
The Johannean doctrine of the Logos has ever been regarded in the Christian church as one of the most mysterious and important points of doctrine. It ruled incipient theology in the doctrine of the Logos of God down to the beginning of the third century, down to Tertullian, and then exerted also the most decisive influence on the more definite doctrine of the Son of God. The mediæval theology knew better how to gaze at this great page of the Gospel, than to appreciate it, yet the mediæval mysticism was moved by the Johannean spirit (see Tholuck, p. 69). John Wessel, the greatest theologian of all the forerunners of the Reformation, restored the deeper apprehension of the Logos doctrine, and when our Reformers aimed at a more practical apprehension of Christology, this doctrine became thenceforth preeminently a treasure of the evangelical church, which the evangelical mystics in particular were at pains to unlock. The eighteenth century with its humanistic, critical tendency, lost the spirit of insight into the depths of the Johannean theology; yet at a time when the rationalists were disdaining it, speculative philosophers, like Schelling and Hegel, and great poets like Göthe, could not but recall its import, though without a clear apprehension.
The later evangelical theology has applied itself with, appreciative spirit to the Johannean theology, and therefore to the prologue of this Gospel. Testimony of this we have in the sermons of Schleiermacher on the Gospel of John, and Lücke’s Commentary on it, in which the treatise. on the prologue extends from p. 249 to p. 378, (vol. I). By the side of the modern depreciation of the Gospel of John on the part of some critics goes a mistaken realistic doctrine of the Logos in its great import in Hofmann (Weissagung und Erfüllung, p. 7), and Luthardt (pp. 280 sqq.) Exegesis can hardly make this Gospel more real, when it covers the depth by an abstractly realistic interpretation. What is said of the fourth evangelist, is true also of his doctrine of the Logos: It does not die.
The distinction between the divine essence in itself, and its manifestation in its word, is an attribute of the personality of God, and therefore this distinction continually comes out in the Holy Scriptures, which is the word of the personal God (Gen_1:1; Joh_1:26, etc.).
This distinction appears still more clearly defined, after the primal revelation, obscured by sin, comes again into historical operation as a revelation of redemption. From this time, however, it unfolds itself in a two-fold form: there being, first, in the theocratic theology of the Old Testament, the distinction of Jehovah and the Angel of the Lord; then, in the universal theology of the Old Testament, the distinction of Jehovah and His wisdom as the principle of the creation and of Providence, and of the divine administration in Israel.
The manifestation of Jehovah in His Angel, (מַלְאַךְ יְהוָֹה) develops itself through three stages: the Angel being designated first as the Angel of the Lord (Gen_16:7-9 sqq.); then as the Presence, or the Angel of the Presence (Exo_32:34; comp. Exo_33:14; Isa_63:9); finally as the Angel of the Covenant (Mal_3:1).
That this Angel is the theophanic præ-exhibition of the God-Man himself, is evident especially from the point of issue of this idea, where the Angel, as the Angel of the Covenant, plainly denotes the Messiah (Mal. l. c.); and the recent objections of Hofmann, Kurtz, and others, who make this person a created angel, are not sufficient to invalidate the church interpretation, and if they were, they would dissolve the central, inmost bond between the Old Testament and the New.
As the personal præ-manifestation of Christ in the theophanies of the Logos, the Angel of the Lord is also characterized by his standing in the closest connection with the honor or glory of God (Luk_2:9); in fact, being identified with it (Exo_16:10; Exo_24:16). With this it is well worthy of notice, that where in the Old Testament Jehovah, or even the Angel of Jehovah, Maleach-Jehovah, is spoken of, He is called instead by the Jewish Targumists מֵימְרַא or even the Shekinah of Jehovah, i.e., the manifestation of God letting itself down into his dwelling (see Tholuck, p. 62).
Now while in the Angel of the Lord we find predominantly the central direction of God, in His revelation, towards Israel and the incarnation expressed as the personal putting forth of the Word, we find in the notion of the Wisdom distinct from God, as the formative power of the divine word, chiefly the universal tendency of His revelation, or the connection of His historical revelation with its basis, His eternal, world-embracing, universal revelation. In this peculiar significance the divine Wisdom appears first in Job (John 28; comp. Schlottmann, Hiob, p. 129). According to Proverbs, John 8, it is the, mediator of the creation, and the personification of it comes nearest to a hypostasis in chap. 9 where it appears as the founder of the theocracy. Also in the apocryphal Book of Wisdom, it first, according to its universal field of revelation, forms the spirit of all life, and then, in a special attitude, as the spirit of the devout in Israel, comes into contrast with the folly of the heathen idolatry. It has here, under the influence of Alexandrian views, an idealistic form; in Sirach, on the contrary, from the universal sphere of the creation which belongs to it, it goes, in a restless search, over to the people of Israel, and fixes on Zion a permanent place, and its concentration is the Book of the Covenant, the Thorah (Sir_24:25). Thus its last embodiment is the Book according to Baruch (Bar_3:37; Bar_4:1). The normal development of the notion proceeds between these extremes of an idealistic and a legal theory of revelation. The sound apprehension of the distinction we find again only on the threshold of the New Testament in the religious contemplations of Zachariah and of Mary (Luke 1) and of John the Baptist. With these the N. T. revelations are most immediately connected.
We get, however, but a one-sided view of the development of the Old Testament idea of revelation, unless we bear in mind also its Messianic complement on the human side, i.e., the development of the idea of the Messiah in the stricter sense. This likewise passes through three stages.
(1) The chosen family; (a) mankind, the seed of the woman, Genesis 3; (b) the race, Semitic, Genesis 9; (c) the people, Israel, and particularly the tribe of Judah, Gen. 12:49.
(2) The chosen line: David and his son, collectively considered; the typical Messiah.
(3) The chosen individual, the ideal Messiah, Isaiah 9 sqq.
Now, as the idea of the revelation of God works towards incarnation, so the idea of the Messiah strives towards union with the divine nature; and at the passage where the ideal Messiah comes to view, the union is effected; the Messiah is become the Angel of the Lord (Isa_61:1-2), the Angel of the Lord is become the Messiah (Dan_7:13; Mal_3:1).
With this synthesis is given also the notion of the Son of God. This has likewise three stages in its development:
(1) The chosen family, Exo_4:22 sqq.
(2) The chosen royal line, 2Sa_7:14.
(3) The chosen individual, the ideal Messiah, Psalms 2; Isaiah 9.
But since the development of revelation is based on the development of redemption and the idea of the former unfolds itself with the idea of the latter, so the Messiah, as personal revelation, is also personal Redeemer. As such he has (1) to fight and conquer; (2) to work and struggle; (3) to suffer, and in sinking to overcome. From this point of view the Son of God is the servant of God, Isaiah 53.
The Solomonic and Apocryphal doctrine of the Wisdom became in Alexandria, in its contact with Platonism, the doctrine of the Logos, as Philo shaped it.
The Logos of Philo, however, is essentially different from that of John, though it agrees with that of John in its being the Mediator between God and the world. It is subordinate to Deity, it stands over the world merely as world-former, demiurge; it shades off pantheistically from the personal character to impersonality; it cannot become flesh; it is different from the Messiah, and the Messiah is only a divine appearance, which leads the devout Jews back to Palestine (see Dorner, Entwicklungsgeschichte der Christologie, Introduction, p. 49).
However doubtful it may be, that John was acquainted with the writings of Philo, the ideas of Philo were widely diffused in the second half of the first century among the Hellenistic Jews (for they were not a separate philosophy of Philo, but the religious philosophy of Hellenistic Judaism in general), as the angel-worshippers of Colosse prove; so with the system of Cerinthus; and undoubtedly the Evangelist came into intercourse and conflict with them. Nor must the position of the Evangelist towards the Alexandrian idea have been altogether hostile; for the current Logos-doctrine was not pure error; it was affiliative and abrasive, reformatory and evangelizing, to this fundamental idea of the Hellenistic Jews. And the Evangelist could be the more free to use the term Logos in its full emphasis, since he found it already recommended by the Old Testament, and still more distinctly by the Jewish theology. It was no doubt an ambiguity in Philo’s mode of expression, that he transferred the Solomonic and Apocryphal notion of the σοφία into the notion of the Logos, in which the Word of God in the Old Testament, the מֵימְרָא of the Jewish theology, seemed to coincide with the νοῦς; of Plato, which might easily be confounded with λόγος.
The Logos of John is related to that of Philo, as Paul’s sermon at Athens to the inscription of the unknown God. John declared the true Logos, who is distinguished from that mixed figment of Old Testament theology and Greek speculation, in that He is equal with God, as the full expression of His being; is the absolute ground of the world, even of its matter; embosoms the universe as its active force, not as an emanating fountain of new emanations from God; is as much life, as light, in the highest sense, and therefore could come in the flesh, as Messiah, to accomplish the absolute redemption.
The Logos-doctrine, even in terms, runs throughout the writings of John (see 1Jn_1:1; Rev_19:13); but in substance it pervades the New Testament, especially Paul (see Col_1:15-19; Heb_1:3; Mat_11:19; Luk_11:49).
On the doctrine of the Logos and on John’s Prologue comp. Lücke, I. p. 365 sqq. [translated by Dr. Noyes in the Christian Examiner for March and May, 1849.—P. S.]; Tholuck, I. p. 61; Meyer, p. 75 [pp. 58–67 in the 5th ed. of 1869.—P. S.]; Adalbert Maier, p. 115; Hölemann, De Evangelii Joannei introitu, introitus Geneseos augustiore effigie, Lips., 1855; Jordan Bucher, Des Apostels Johannes Lehre vom Logos, Schaffhausen, 1856.
[M. Stuart, Examination of John Joh_1:1-18, in the Andover Bibliotheca Sacra for 1850, pp. 281–327. Hengstenberg, Com. en John, 1866, vol. I. pp. 6 ff. (where the Old Test, roots of the Logos-doctrine are brought out in opposition to its derivation from Philo). F. Godet, Considérations générates sur le prologue, in his Com. on John, 1864, vol. I. pp. 220–265. T. A. Philippi, Der Eingang des Johannesevangeliums ausgelegt, Stuttgart, 1867. Röhricht, Zur Johanneischen Logoslehre, in the Theol. Studien und Kritiken for 1868, pp. 299–315. H. P. Liddon, Bampton Lectures on the Divinity of Christ, London, 1867, Lecture Vth, pp. 310–411. Among English commentators, Alford, on Joh_1:1, gives a condensed summary of the investigations of Lücke, De Wette, Olshausen and Dorner on the Logos-doctrine.—P. S.]
[Additional Remarks on the Prologue, Joh_1:1-18. The Prologue is a condensed statement of the results of John’s contemplation and experience as a faithful witness of the life and work of Christ on earth, and furnishes the key that unlocks the true meaning of the following narrative. It contains the theme and leading ideas of the Gospel, the eternal substratum, as it were, of the temporal history of Jesus, and creates the impression that in approaching the gospel history the reader treads on holy ground; Jesus of Nazareth being none other than the eternal Son of God, in whom we must believe in order to have eternal life (comp. Joh_20:31). The theme is the eternal Logos or personal Word that was with God and of divine essence from the beginning of beginnings, and at last became incarnate for the salvation of the world. The leading ideas are life and light, grace and truth, as emanating from and centering in the Logos. Starting with the divine genealogy or eternal divinity of Christ, the Evangelist presents, in a few bold outlines, the progress of revelation from, the creation to the incarnation, a sort of miniature photograph of the history of preparation for Christ’s coming in the flesh, and states the impression which His workings and personal appearance made upon the unbelieving world and the believing disciples. John the Baptist is mentioned as the representative of the Old Test. revelation, which directly prepared the way for the Christian dispensation.
We have here brought together the characteristic features of the fourth Gospel—its simplicity, sublimity, depth and ideality. We hear the sounds of thunder uttered by the “son of thunder.” Every sentence, every word, is pregnant with meaning, and furnishes inexhaustible material for meditation and reflection. In the whole range of literature, ancient and modern, there is no passage or chapter that can at all compare with this Prologue. It is not poetic in form—yet, like the account of the creation in Genesis, to which it forms the New Testament pendant, it rises, by its calm dignity, simplicity and grandeur, to more than poetic beauty. The theme so far transcends the boundaries of time and sense, that the ordinary arts’ of rhetoric and poetry are struck with the silence of adoration and awe. “In pregnant fullness and purest simplicity,” says the great scholar, Ewald (Comm. on John, p. 111), “the Prologue is unique,” even in this unique Gospel.—The Prologue has ever exerted a mysterious and irresistible charm upon the profoundest thinkers, from Origen and Augustine down to Fichte, Schleiermacher and Schelling.3
As to the division of the Prologue, Dr. Lange, with Olshausen and Godet, divides it into three sections: (1) the præ-mundane or eternal being of the Logos, and His relation to God and the world, Joh_1:1-5; (2) His activity from the creation to the incarnation, especially in the Old Dispensation, Joh_1:6-13 (Godet, Joh_1:6-11). (3) His incarnation and activity in the Christian Church, Joh_1:14-18. Ewald (p. 113) adopts a similar view, but closes the first division with Joh_1:3. According to Meyer (in his fifth edition, p. 98), the Prologue represents the Logos—(1) as præ-existent in His creative activity (1–3); (2) as the Fountain of light to men (4–13); (3) in His divine-human manifestation (14–18); the last section returns to the first in identifying the λόγος ἔνσαρκος with the λόγος ἄσαρκος (“who is in the bosom of the Father”). Lücke, Alford and others make but two divisions: the eternal existence of the Logos, Joh_1:1-5, and His historic manifestation and working, Joh_1:6-18. Luthardt and Hengstenberg substitute for chronological sections three concentric cycles (1–5; 6–13; 14–18), of which each reproduces the same idea of the activity of the Logos, but under new aspects—the first in relation to God and the world at large, the second with special reference to John the Baptist and Jewish unbelief, the third with reference to the blessings which result to true believers.—There is evidently a progress of ideas from eternity to time, from the creation to the Old Testament dispensation, and to the incarnation, but more in the form of comprehensive intuition, which is peculiar to John, than of strict logical order, which was more congenial to the mind and training of Paul. For particulars, see below.—P. S.]
Footnotes:
[1][Codd. Sin. and Vatic., the two oldest, have simply: κατὰ Ἰωάννῃν (B.—ανην). So Tischend. in the 8th ed. Later MSS. read εν̓αγγ. κατὰ ̓Ιωάνν. (so Griesb., Lachm.), or τὸ κατὰ ̓Ι. εν̓αγγέλιον, or ἅγιον εν̔αγγέλιον, etc.—P. S.]
[2][Comp. Chrysostom: “The other evangelists begin with Christ’s incarnation in time; St. John with his eternal gene-ration.” Augustine (Tractatus xxxvi. in Johannis Evang. c. 8, §1.): “The other three Evangelists walked as it were on earth with our Lord as Man (tamquam cum homine Domino in terra ambulabant) and said but little of his divinity. But John, as if he found it oppressive to walk on earth, opened his treatise so to speak with, a peal of thunder…To the sublimity of this beginning all the rest corresponds, and he speaks of our Lord’s divinity as no other.” Godet, Commentaire, I. p. John 143: “Chaque évangelist entre en matière de la manière la mieux appropriée à l'esprt de sa narration. Matthieu veut démontrer le droit de Jésus au trône théocratique: il commence par une généalogie. Marc rédige ses souvenirs: il se jette sans exorde in mediam rem, (in medias res, or medias in res, is the proper phrase). Luc prétend écrire une histoire proprement dite: il rend compte dans son préambule de ses sources et de sa méthods.”—P. S.]
[3] [Even heathen philosophers and heretical Gnostics were captivated by the speculative depth of the Prologue. (Comp. Lampe, Com. Tom. I., 231 sq., 239 sqq.) Göthe, too, connects the deepest mental struggles of Faust with an attempt to fathom the depth of the first sentence of John:
“Geschrieben steht: im Anfang war das Wort!
Hier stock ich schon! Wer hilft mir weiter fort!
Ich kann das Wort so hoch unmöglich schützen,
Ich muss es anders übersetzen,
Wenn ich vom Geiste recht erleuchtet bin;
Geschrieben steht: im Anfang war der Sinn!
Bedenke wohl die erste Zeile,
Dass deine Feder sich nicht übereile!
Ist es der Sinn, der alles wirkt und schafft?
Es sollte stehn; im Anfang war die Kraft!
Doch, auch indem ich dieses niederschreibe
Schon warnt mich was, dass ich dabei nicht bleibe
Mir hilft der Geist! Auf einmal seh ich Rath
Und schreib getrost: im Anfang war die That!—P. S.]
See Joh_18:1 ff for the passage quote with footnotes.
Joh_19:1. Then therefore Pilate took Jesus and scourged Him [ἕλαβεν οὖν ὁ Πιλ. τὸν Ἰησ. καὶ ἐμαστίγωσεν].—The second wretched politic attempt of the Roman, according to John. He took, or received, Jesus and scourged Him. The sending of Jesus before Herod’s tribunal, as also the hand-washing, likewise belong in this category. With this attempt he hopes to satisfy the vindictiveness of Jesus’ foes, perhaps even to excite their compassion—and so much the more, since according to his ideas, Jesus by this ignominious treatment, would be stripped of dignity in the eyes of the people and made of nope effect. On the act of scourging see Comm. on Matthew [p. 512]. As also on the different signification assumed by the scourging according to the Synoptists and according to John.
[Pilate probably, subjected Jesus to this disgraceful and horrible punishment in the vain hope of satisfying His accusers and moving them to compassion. The Roman mode of scourging is here meant, which was much more cruel than the Jewish; it was never inflicted upon Roman citizens, but only upon foreigners and slaves whose lives were considered of no account, either as a torture to extort a confession, or as a correction preparatory to crucifixion. The body was stripped, tied in a stooping posture to a low block or pillar, and the bare back lacerated by an unlimited number of lashes with rods or twisted thongs of leather, so that the poor sufferers frequently fainted and died on the spot.—P. S.]
Joh_19:2-3. And the soldiers, etc. [καὶ οἱ στρατιῶται πλέ ξαντες στέφανον ἐξ ἀκανθῶν, κ. τ. λ.].—See Comm. on Matthew [p. 514]. “The derisive blow on the cheek [ἐδίδουν αὐτῷ ῥαπίσματα] is substituted for the kiss.”
Joh_19:4. I bring Him forth to you [Ἴδε ἄγω ὑμῖν αὐτὸν ἔξω ἵνα γνῶτε, κ. τ. λ.]—According to Matthew, the scourging of the Lord had been consummated before the eyes of the people (not “in the court of the prætorium”). For after the scourging, the soldiers had led Him into the prætorium, probably in a mocking procession as though the king were brought into his castle. The scene probably took place in the fortress-court or in a hall. Therefore we read here: “I bring Him forth unto you.”—That ye may know.—The Jews not possessing the right of capital punishment, the return of the person of Jesus to them was a declaration that He was free from the offence with which they charged Him. Pilate, however, utters his testimony unconditionally: no fault [οὐδεμίαν αἰτίαν].—The leading forth has been in different ways misinterpreted in regard to its intention,—by Gerhard, for instance: they should see how compliant he would be in punishing Him, if he found any fault in Him.
Joh_19:5. Behold, the man. [Ἴδε, or rather Ἰδοὺ ὁ ἄνθρωπος, see Text. Notes].—Ecce Homo! “But from the Lord cometh what the tongue shall speak.” (Pro_16:1 [Luther’s Bible. “The preparation of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue, is from the Lord.” E. V.]). Pilate’s words, unconsciously to himself, assume, like his superscription and the sentence of Caiaphas, a significance corresponding to the great situation. [An involuntary prophecy of heathenism, as the word of Caiaphas (Joh_11:51-52) was an involuntary prophecy of hostile Judaism.—P. S.] The word seems to express compassion; at all events it is designed to excite that emotion. There is no doubt as to the sense: there ye have Him again, and what a pitiable object! Take Him thus and let Him go. He forebodes not that Jesus is indeed the Man κατ’ ἐξοχήν [the one perfect Man], who, through his wicked pliancy, steps forth so outraged in His outward appearance.
Joh_19:6. The high-priests and the officers.—They cried as leaders—which does not exclude the joint crying of the assembled populace.
Take Him yourselves and crucify Him.—Pilate still makes a stand at the present stage, with a feeling of his own authority that causes him to deride the impotence of the Jews.
Joh_19:7. We have a law [ἡμεῖς νόμον ἔ χομεν].—The political accusation having borne no fruit, they now come out with the religious accusation in pursuance of which Jesus, at least according to their law, must die (as a blasphemer of God, namely, Lev_24:16, doubtless also as a false prophet, Deu_18:20). The ἡμεῖς, etc., defiantly arrayed against the ἐγώ—αἰτίαν of Pilate. They feel confident of Pilate’s obligation to respect their law. See Joseph. Antiq., XVI, 2, 3.
Joh_19:8. When Pilate—he was the more afraid [μᾶλλον ἐφοβήθη].—Their saying, in the first place, entirely missed the designed effect; it was productive of the opposite effect. Hitherto Pilate had been restrained by a fear of conscience or of law alone; now religious fear supervened, in connection with a fear of Jesus’ personality itself, of which latter sentiment he now became fully conscious. According to Matthew, the message of his wife has already been received, hence is jointly influential.
Joh_19:9. Again into the pretorium [καὶ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸ πραιτώριον πάλιν]—We must supply in imagination the leading of Jesus before Pilate, in order to a fresh, private examination.—Whence art Thou? [πόθεν εἶ σύ].—The inquiry after the whence of Christ is indefinitely framed, in accordance with the Jews’ accusation and Pilate’s fear. Meyer: He pictures to himself the υἱὸς θεοῦ after the analogy of the heathen heroes, and fears the vengeance of the Jewish God Jehovah. Religious awe, in a moment of superstitious excitement, pictures to itself all manner of things, however, and nothing quite distinctly. Whether He were a Magus or a hero, an angel, after the religion of the land, or a divine apparition,—it now seemed very possible to him that there might be something super-terrestrial in the appearance of the Man;—and he had so unconcernedly caused Him to be scourged. In any case, celestial vengeance seemed to threaten him. Whether the πόθεν, etc., is timid (Meyer) or cautiously sifting, is difficult to decide; fear and prudence may be united in it.
No answer [Ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦδ ἀπόκρισιν οὐκ ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ].—Luthardt: He would not answer him, in order that He might not step in the way of God’s will. An abstractly supernaturalistic view. If the answer had been a moral duty, no religious duty would have stood in the way of it. God had power, notwithstanding any answer of His, to accomplish His will. Under such a supposition as Luthardt’s, Jesus would in no case have dared answer anything. He was silent, “as also before Herod and Caiaphas, because He had already testified enough for the susceptible; and for him who had turned his back upon the King of truth, neither could another testimony avail.” Tholuck. Jesus could foresee that this transaction led to nothing. Pilate, with his question, abandoned his judicial position, for he was bound to acquit Jesus not on account of His danger-menacing Godhead, but on account of His protection-demanding human innocence. [Alford: “This silence was the most emphatic answer to all who had ears to hear it,—was a reference to what He had said before, Joh_18:37, and so a witness to His divine origin. Would any mere man, of true and upright character, have refused an answer to such a question, so put? Let the modern rationalist consider this.”—P. S.]
Joh_19:10. Dost Thou not speak unto me? [ἐμοὶ οὐ λαλεῖς].—Himself full of fear, he exacted considerations of fear from Jesus. He boasts of his power [ἐ ξουσίαν ἔχω] instead of remembering his duty, and of his freedom to release Jesus [ἀπολῦαί σε], while the weight of temptation, drives him in his impotence resistlessly forward. Ἐμοί has the emphasis of offended authority [pride of office], making efforts at once terrifying and alluring. Crucify, release, a more probable sequence than the converse. See the Textual Notes. [The opposite order is better attested by external authority (א. A. B., etc.), and more natural, as releasing appeals more to the prisoner, and crucifying follows as the other alternative.—P. S.]
Joh_19:11. No power over Me unless it had been given, etc. [οὐκ ἔχεις ἐξουσίαν οὐδεμίαν κατ’ ἐμοῦ, εἰ μὴ ἦν σοι δεδομένον ἄνωθεν].—δεδομένον. Namely, the exercise of power—if that had not been given thee. [The neuter is more general than δεδομένη, and includes, as Meyer says, τὸ ἐξουσιάζειν κατ’ ἐμοῦ.—P. S.].—From above.—Not: from the Roman emperor (Usteri), or from the Sanhedrin (Semler), but from God (Joh_3:3; Joh_3:31). [Grotius aptly: inde scilicet, unde ortus sum; ἄνωθεν is a precise anwer to the πόθεν of Pilate (Joh_19:10). It is equivalent to ἐκ θεοῦ or ἐκ τοῦ πατρός μου, but this Pilate would not have understood.—P. S.].—No power.—Ἐξουσία is interpreted:
1. As judicial authority, by Luther, Calvin, Baur and others. Thus, because thou hast this authority from above, the misuse of it is sin; the authors of this offence, however, the Jews, have the greater guilt.
2. Actual power, Beza, Gerhard, Tholuck: It is the providence of God that I, through the obduracy of My people, have fallen into thy hands. With this interpretation the διὰ τοῦτο [on this account, because of the power being given thee] is certainly better explained, yet this actual power rests upon the magisterial authority.
He that delivereth Me unto thee; ὁ παραδιδούς [the present, because the act is just going on].—Bengel, Meyer [Lampe, Alford, Ewald, Hengstenberg]: The high-priest [Caiaphas]; Tholuck collectively: The hardened Jewish nation. [Still others the Sanhedrin; some, unaptly, Judas who is now out of sight]. The declaration of Pilate Joh_19:35 is pertinent: Thy nation and the high-priests have delivered Thee unto me. Wherefore has the deliverer (ὁ παραδιδούς) the greater sin [μείζονα ἁμαρτίαν ἔχει]? Explanations:
1. Euthymius: Pilate’s guilt rests more upon softness and weakness.
2. Grotius: Because he could not know, as well as the Jews, who Christ was.
3. Lampe: Because the Jews had not received this power from God.
4. Meyer: Because thou hast the disposal of Me not from any sovereign power of thine own, but by divine authorization.
But the abuse of his judicial authority does not excuse him. Decisive in the first place is the fact that Pilate is an ignorant Gentile, the deliverer Jewish; then, that the Jews claim, with a certain legal title, that he has but to execute their sentence. Pilate found himself in no clear position. He had to do, not with a Roman, but with a Jew, and not with a civil law, but with a religious accusation in regard to which the Jewish tribunal had already decided. This might readily mislead him in his simple judicial duty, and it was his fatality. His guilt would be still less than it really was, had he not been aware that they had delivered Jesus for envy, had not Jesus made so strong an impression on him, and had he not really known it to be his duty to release Him. Even in the case of the Jews there was also taken into account a consideration of excuse because of ignorance, which consideration exhibited the guilt of many of them as other than final obduracy. See Act_3:17; comp. Luk_23:34. Meyer, in a note [p. 621], has with reason set aside the interpretation of Baur.
Joh_19:12. For the sake of this; ἐκ τούτυ.—Not: from thenceforth [E. V. and most commentators], but: for the sake of this saying [Meyer, Stier, Luthardt, comp. Joh_6:66.—P. S.]. It cast a bright accidental light upon his obscure, fateful, perilous situation, that for an instant marked the path of duty as a path of deliverance.—Pilate sought to release Him.—Ἐζήτει certainly cannot denote simply an increased striving (Lücke), it being expressive of a distinct act immediately provocative of the most excited outburst on the part of the Jews. But the interpretation: he demanded that He should be released (Meyer), gives rise to the supposition that Pilate must needs ask the Jews’ sanction to the release of Jesus. This word, to which not sufficient regard is paid, means rather: he was really on the point of ordering the release of Christ. Perhaps he caused the guard to fall back, or he may hare stated to the Jews that they might go home, that he would leave Jesus behind in the prætorium, under his own protection. At all events, here it is that the tragic knot was tied. The liberation of Jesus seems already decided.
But the Jews cried out, saying.—Now, in the uproar of the Jews, the whole storm of hell rises. At first the high-priests and officers led the voices,—now the entire mass is full of excitement and needs no starter. The demoniacal syllogism with which they debauch Pilate, scarcely originates, however, in the brain of the populace. The hierarchs take refuge in the political accusation, declaring Jesus is a revolutionist against the emperor, and if thou let Him go, thou comest thyself under suspicion of treason to the emperor. Now the emperor was—Tiberius. The threat of being accused to this man of treason fells the weak courtling. On Pilate as manifoldly guilty, especially of extortions and outrages: Joseph., Antiq. XVIII. 3, 1 ff.; Philo, De leg. ad Caj., 1033, on the suspicious character of Tiberius, Sueton., Tib., 58; Tacit., Ann., III.38. Majestatis crimen omnium accusationum complementum erat.—φίλος Καί σαρος, a predicate of honor, since the time of Augustus conferred, by the emperor himself and by others, partly upon prefects and legates, partly upon allies (Ernesti, Suetonius, Excurs. 15).” Tholuck. According to Meyer [and Alford], the term means simply: loyal to the emperor; unfavorable to this view is the technical use of the predicate: amicus Cæsaris. Even if Pilate did not formally possess the title, it is alluded to.—Speaketh against—is at variance with—the emperor (ἀντιλέγει). Meyer: He declareth against the emperor, not: he rebelleth (Kuinoel), etc. But rebelling is exactly what declaring against the sovereign means.
Joh_19:13. When Pilate therefore heard these words.—Pilate’s playing with the situation is past; now the situation plays with him. First he said—not asked—: what is truth? Now his frightened heart, to which the emperor’s favor is the supreme law of life, says: what is justice? “He who fears not God above all things, is condemned to fear man.” Tholuck.1—He brought Jesus forth.—Since the last examination, Joh_19:8 ff., he had left Him in the pretorium.—And sat down in the judgment-seat [ἐκάθισεν ἐπὶ βήματος εἰς τόπ νλεγόμενον λιθόστρωτον].—“Sentence was pronounced sub divo, not ex æquo loco, but superiore; there stood the judgment-seat on a floor of mosaic: pavimentum, tessellatum (Sueton. Cæsar, chap. 46).” Tholuck. [Such a tesselated pavement Julius Cæsar carried about on his expeditions, Suet. Cæs., c. 46.]—But in the Hebrew, Gabbatha.—“The name Ταββ. must not be derived from גִבְעָה, hill [so Hengstenberg],—against which derivation the double β would militate (comp. ταβαθᾶ, Jos. Antiq. V. 1, 29), but from גַּב, ridge, hump.” Meyer. Is it not, perhaps, still more probably an Aramaic modification of גָּבֹהַּ, altum, altitudo? [Alford from נָּבָה, altus fuit, Ewald from the root גָּבַע with a signification similar to λιθόστρωτον—P. S.]
Joh_19:14. It was the preparation-day,—Παρασκευἠ τοῦ πάσχα, see Comm. on Matt. [pp 455, 468]; John on chap. 13 [p. 405].
1. Friday in the passover-season, or paschal week, as a day of preparation for the Sabbath. Wieseler, p 336 f; Wichelhaus, p. 209 f. Only apparently a modification is Tholuck’s explanation: The Paschal preparation-day as the preparation for the Sabbath falling in the Paschal season; since the terms Friday and Sabbath preparation-day were of necessity synonymous to the Jews, just as to the Germans the terms Samstag and Sonnabend are.
[This is the correct view, and is maintained also by Olshausen, Luthardt, Hengstenberg, Riggenbach, Robinson (Harmony, p. 219). The term παρασκευή here does not correspond (as Meyer, Lücke, Alford and others assert) to the Hebrew עֶרֶב הַפֶּסַח, “the vigil of the Passover,” “passover-eve” (mentioned in the Talmud, see Buxtorf, Lex., p. 1765, but nowhere in the Bible), but to עַרוּבְתָא, eve, as being the עֶרֶב הַשַׁבָּת, eve of the Sabbath (see Buxtorf, Lex., p. 1659). It is equivalent to προσάββατον, fore-sabbath (Mar_15:42; Jdt_8:6), or προεόρτιον, as Philo (De vita contempl., p. 616) calls it. In other words, it is a technical Jewish name for Friday, just as the corresponding terms in the Syriac and Arabic, and as the German Sonnabend (Sunday-Eve) is used for Samstag (Saturday). It was so called from the Jewish habit of preparing the meals (הכין, παρασκευάζειν) on Friday for the Sabbath, since it was forbidden to kindle a fire on the Sabbath (Ex. xvi.5; Joseph. Antiq. XVI. 6, 2). This is the uniform meaning of παρασκευή in all other passages of the New Testament where it occurs, viz., in this very chapter, Joh_19:31-32; Mat_27:62; Luk_23:54; Mar_15:42 (where it is expressly explained for non-Jewish readers, as being=προσάββατον). Why should our passage be an exception? The addition τοῦ πάσχα, which John always uses in the wider sense for the whole feast (not for the eating of the paschal lamb), makes no difference: it is simply the Paschal Friday, or Easter-Friday, as we speak of Easter-Sunday, Easter-Monday, Easter-Tuesday.2 We have here a very significant hint that after all John is in perfect harmony with the Synoptists on the day of Christ’s death, which was not the 14th, but the 15th of Nisan, or the first day of the paschal festival. John, probably chose this very term to expose the awful inconsistency and crime of the Jews in putting the Lord and Saviour to death on the day when they should have prepared for the holy Sabbath—doubly sacred now as being at the same time the first day of the great passover.—P. S.]
John 2 : Meyer following Lücke, Bleek, etc. [p. 623, comp. pp. 600 seq., 5th ed., where the discussions are]: “In order that the παρασκωυή might not be apprehended as the weekly one, referable to the Sabbath (Joh_19:31; Joh_19:42; Luk_23:54; Mar_15:42; Mat_27:62; Joseph. Antiq. XVI. 6, 2 al.), but that it might be regarded as connected with the feast-day of the Passover, John expressly adds τοῦ πασχα. Undoubtedly it was a Friday, consequently Preparation-day for the Sabbath also—this reference, however, is not the one to be pointed out here; the true reference is to the paschal feast coming in on the evening of the day,—of which feast the first day fell, according to John, upon the Sabbath.” [So also Alford.]
This view is contradicted:
(1) By the fact that in that case John would, shortly after, Joh_19:31 [ἐπεὶ παρασκευή ἦν, and Joh_19:42, διὰ τὴν παρασκευὴν τῶν Ἰουδ.], have used the word παρασκευὴ in another sense.
(2) That he then in Joh_19:31 would have been obliged to write παρασκευὴ τοῦ σαββάτου3 in order to distinguish between the two senses.
(3) That, therefore, according to Joh_19:31; Joh_19:42, παρασκευή had a thoroughly fixed signification and denoted the day of preparation for the Sabbath, in consequence of which fact, therefore, the παρασκευή τοῦ πάσχα is also to be interpreted as the day of preparation for the Sabbath of the paschal season.
(4) That John elsewhere uses the word πάσχα as a term for the ἑορτή, the paschal season. So, expressly, Joh_2:23; Joh_6:4; Joh_11:55-56; Joh_18:39. And hence, assuredly, also here.
It was going on towards the [es war gegen die] sixth hour [ὤρα ἦν ὡς ἕκτη. This is the correct reading instead of ὤρα δε ὡσεὶ ἕκτη—P. S.]—See Note on Joh_1:39 [p. 93]; Comm. on Matthew at this passage [Mat_27:45, p. 525, Am. ed.]; Mark [Joh_15:25, p. 152]. According to Jewish reckoning it was on the way to 12 o’clock, i.e., between 9 and 12 o’clock. On the difficulty of this notice, see the passages cited. [The difficulty is this, that according to John the hour of crucifixion was the sixth, i.e., (counting with the Jews from sunrise) 12 o’clock of our time; while according to Mar_15:25 it was the third, i.e., 9 o’clock, A. M., with which the statement of Mat_27:45, and Luk_23:44, agrees, that at the sixth hour or noon, when Jesus had already for some time been hanging on the cross, darkness covered the land for three hours, and that Jesus died about the ninth hour (i.e., 3 P.M.); consequently according to the Synoptists the Saviour suffered for nearly six hours on the cross, according to John only about three hours.—P. S.] Solutions of the apparent contradiction:
1. Assumption of a writing-error (Euseb. and others): ς [6], instead of γ [3].
[So also Theophylact, Severus, Beza (ed. 5th), Bengel, Alford, Robinson, Harmony, p. 226, where Robinson says: “The ὥρα τρίτη of Mark, as the hour of crucifixion, is sustained by the whole course of the transactions and circumstances; as also by the fact stated by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, that the darkness commenced at the sixth hour, after Jesus had already for some time hung upon the cross. The reading ἕκτη in John is, therefore, probably an early error of transcription for τρίτη (ς for Γ). Indeed, this last reading is found in Cod. Bezæ and Cod. Reg. 62, as well as several other authorities; so that its external weight is marked by Griesbach as nearly or quite equal to that of the common reading, while the internal evidence in its favor is certainly far greater.” But ἕκτη is undoubtedly the correct reading as far as external authority goes. See Text. Note, and Tischend. ed. VIII. in loc.—P. S.]
2. Roman reckoning is employed=6 A. M. (Rettig, Tholuck, Hug, and others). [So also Olshausen, Wieseler, Ewald, Townson, Wordsworth.—P. S.] But after the examination before Caiaphas, the first examination before Pilate, the examination before Herod (Luk_23:9), the further proceedings in Pilate’s presence, the scourging and mocking, it is impossible that it was only approaching or about 6 o’clock in the morning, since the final session in presence of Caiaphas did of itself presuppose the dawn of day, to make it legal. [Besides, this view creates the difficulty of too long a period (three hours) intervening between the sentence of death and the crucifixion. It is also very unlikely that John, with the Synoptical statements before him, should without any notice have introduced a different mode of reckoning, and with it an element of confusion rather than rectification.—P. S.]
3. It was about the sixth hour of the paschal feast, reckoned from midnight (Hofmann, Lichtenstein).4 The passover, however, did not begin at midnight, but on the previous evening at about 6 o’clock; irrespective of the fact that this “would be an unprecedented way of reckoning hours, namely as belonging to the feast, not to the day (in opposition to Joh_1:39; Joh_4:6; Joh_4:52).” Meyer.
4. “Again a difference from the Synoptists, according to whom (see Mar_15:25, with which Mat_27:45; Luk_23:44 agree) Jesus is crucified as early as 9 o’clock in the morning.” (Meyer and others.)
5. The third hour of Mark is the third quarter of the day (Aret., Grot. [Calvin, Wetstein], and others), against which Mar_15:33. [“And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour. And at the ninth hour Jesus cried,” etc.]
6. An indefinite computation of hours, according to which the sections of time between the third, sixth and ninth hours are indefinitely stated. Thus the third hour in Mark may mean: nine o’clock was past,—it was between nine and twelve o’clock when the crucifixion of Christ began; and this is the more probable since Mark regards the scourging as the prelude to the crucifixion, which, when the former took place, was really already decided (see Joh_19:15). And so the words of John: it was towards the sixth hour: it was past nine o’clock and approaching noon when Pilate—the scourging being accomplished, and the Scourged One having been presented to the populace—spoke the final words upon which the procession to Golgotha immediately followed. John’s employment of the later indefinite hour-date is accounted for by the thought; they now hastened to the close, because, with noon, the second, already more Sabbatic, half of the παρασκευή was approaching. Mark’s choice, on the other hand, of the earlier indefinite hour-date is accounted for by the significant antithesis which he wishes to institute between the third and the sixth hour.
[This solution of the difficulty has been adopted by Godet, who remarks that the apostles did not count with the watch in their hands. So also Hengstenberg, who, however, very mechanically splits the difference and fixes the crucifixion at half-past ten! In this case the statements both of Mark and John would be wrong. Meyer rejects all attempts at reconciliation and gives John the preference over the Synoptists. But Lange’s view has a strong support in the ὡς or ὡσεὶ of John, which excludes strict accuracy on his part and leaves room for some approach at least towards the third hour of Mark. At noon Christ must certainly have been already hanging on the cross; for this is the unanimous testimony of the Synoptists.—P. S.]
Behold, your king [Ἴδε ὁ βασιλεὺς ὑμῶν]!—Pilate, inwardly overcome, designs, by this mocking of the Jews, not only to mask his disgrace but also to avenge it; it may be that these words unfold even this threatening thought: your King, then, shall first be crucified, and after Him, yourselves. At all events, he shifts the guilt to their shoulders.
Joh_19:15. Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him [Ἆρον ἆρον, σταύ ρωσον αὐτόν]!—The words: ἆρον, ἆρον!5 present to us something more than the meaning: Away with Him! away with Him! At this last moment there is still a mutual effort to shuffle off the legal responsibility upon each other. Pilate’s meaning is: if He is to be executed, ye may execute Him. The meaning of the Jews is: thou shalt have Him, thou shalt crucify Him! It was only in this way that they could be assured of Pilate’s inability to institute later a review of the proceedings. The Hierarchs make the same claim again at the present day: the rude State, the Pilate of the Middle Ages, adjusted the terrors of the Inquisition in accordance with the laws then existing. The brief, passionate exclamation is likewise expressive of the bitterness called forth by the word of Pilate: Behold, your King!
Shall I crucify your king?—This question of Pilate is an intimation of his last wavering in resolve—a wavering in all probability particularly induced by the message of his wife. See Comm. on Matthew. Not merely a “reverberation” of the preceding derisive words, but also a distincter expression of the same idea: If He is to be crucified as your King in your sense, He must, according to your law, die as a religious criminal. Hence the high-priest’s reply.
We have no king but the emperor [Οὐκ ἔχομεν βασιλέα εἰ μὴ Καίσαρα].—i.e. He shall and must die as a political seditionary. At the same time it is the consummation of the godless perfidy with which they disclaim their own Messianic hope, deny the Messianic claims, traduce the Lord as a seditionary, whilst they themselves feign a zeal of the most loyal fidelity demonstrable by subjects, with which they would fain shame and terrify even the Roman governor. [Some of these very men who here made a hypocritical show of loyalty to carry their point and to make a tool of Pilate, perished afterwards miserably in rebellion against Cæsar. Bengel: Jesum negant usque eo, ut omnino Christum negant. Alford: “A degrading confession from the chief priests of that people of whom it was said, ‘The Lord your God is your King,’ 1Sa_12:12.”—P. S.]
Joh_19:16. Then therefore he delivered Him up unto them, to be crucified.—The repeated threatening hint of the high-priest completes the conquest of Pilate. A compromise results, in pursuance of which Christ is delivered (παρέδωκεν not simply yielded, after Grotius and others) to the high-priests, to be taken to their place of execution, and is, nevertheless, crucified by Roman soldiers, according to Roman criminal law. It is to be presumed that Pilate combined the delivery of Jesus to the Jews with the symbolical act of washing his hands (according to Matthew). This compromise is one of the many legal contradictions in the history of the crucifixion, by means of which contradictions the summum jus of the ancient world is converted into the summa injuria. Comp. Comm. on Matthew, Mat_27:22 [pp. 512, 514, Am. Ed.]. Other contradictions: Declared innocent, and yet sent before another tribunal, and yet scourged. Scourged in order that He might be released, and yet afterwards crucified. Contradictions of the forum, of sentence, of cognizance, of the degree of punishment, of the form of punishment.
They therefore took Jesus [παρέλαβον οὖν τὸν Ἰησοῦν. Joh_19:16 ought to close with σταυρωθῇ, and παρέλαβον begin the next section. So Tischendorf, Alford, Westcott and Hort.—P. S.] The high-priests, not (as De Wette thinks) the soldiers.—And led Him away [καὶ ἀπήγαγον
Very doubtful, see Text. Notes.—P. S.] The taking was also consummated with the declaration: His blood be upon us, etc. (see Comm. on Matt.). On the site of Golgotha, outside of the city, see Comm. on Matt. [520 ff.] “The site of the place, without the city, is likewise attested by Heb_12:12.” Tholuck.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. By many supplementary touches John presents us with the clearest view of the incidents of the secular trial undergone by Jesus. To these supplementary traits belongs, above all, the gradation of the Jews’ accusation.
(1) They charge Jesus with being an ecclesiastical criminal whom they have already sentenced, and whose sentence Pilate has but to confirm. (2) In the most ambiguous sense: With making Himself the King of the Jews. (3) With being an ecclesiastical criminal,—because He had made Himself the Son of God. (4) With being a political revolutionist,—because He claimed to be the King of the Jews.
These form two accusations which they alternately bring forward: a Jewish one and a Roman political one. The first time each is couched in ambiguous and innuendo-like terms; the second time each is formulated in calumnious audacity.
Another of these supplementary traits is the conflict maintained between Pilate and the high-priests throughout the entire procedure—a conflict in which the personal character of Pilate, as well as that of the high-priests, is most clearly reflected; as is also the more general character of a vain, worldly state-craft in its haughty and nevertheless impotent struggle with a crafty hierarchical power and its fanatical tools in the popular life. Then those moments also stand out clearly, in which Christ is, as a delinquent, by the Jews delivered to, or pressed upon, Pilate; by Pilate delivered to, or pressed upon, the Jews,—down to the moment when a kind of compromise is effected. From Joh_18:28-31 Pilate refuses judgment. From Joh_18:32-38 he receives the Accused, granting Him a pre-examination; then, however, he does not simply acquit Him, but seeks to entrap the Jews and, by the offer of presenting Jesus to them for their paschal procession, which was annually graced by some recipient of governmental pardon, to move them to acquit Him with éclat. Pilate then for the second time receives Jesus, in order, for the gratification of the Jews, to perpetrate upon Him a police execution that was destitute of all judicial grounds,—viz. the scourging.
The expression Ecce Homo contains another return of the person of Jesus to the Jews. For the third time Pilate enters into judgment with Jesus upon the accusation: He made Himself the Son of God. He now designs setting Him free himself, but the Jews weaken his purpose by a threat accompanied with tumult; and he is now inwardly so discomfited that the last time he does not simply deliver the Accused to the Jews—he delivers Him under sentence of crucifixion, purposing a formal participation in the affair himself, while the Jews are to assume, and really do assume, the actual execution and responsibility of it. Both these facts are summed up in the words: “He delivered Him unto them that He might be crucified.” As regards the contrasts of conduct, the stately, artificial repose of Pilate is overcome by cringing sub-missiveness; his political calculation by demoniacal craft and pertinacity; his effort of conscience by audacious menace; his attempt to turn the accusers into ridicule by treating them scornfully and mocking them, by fanatic popular agitation and a revolutionary, tumultuous petition, masking itself in pure zeal for the authority of the emperor.
The individual items for which, as new disclosures, thanks are due to John, are
a. The competence strife in regard to the trial;
b. The analysis of the ambiguous expression, King of the Jews, by the wisdom of the Lord—making manifest the vileness of the high-priests and the felony to the Messianic idea, of which they are guilty;
c. The antithesis of the Kingdom of Truth and the kingdom of this world, and the utterance of Pilate;
d. The circumstance that it is pre-eminently the Jews who are guilty of bringing the Lord into juxtaposition with Barabbas;
e. The real purpose of the scourging;
f. The effect which the charge that Jesus made Himself the Son of God, produced upon the soul of Pilate—the anguish of superstition, following hard upon the self-upliftment of unbelief;
g. The innuendo-like threat of the Jews to accuse Pilate to the emperor—as the weapon that prostrates him (Pilate);
h. The double masking: The rebellion of the Jews against their King and against the emperor’s governor, in the mask of the most faithful Jewish piety and Roman subjection; Pilate’s dejection, in the mask of a stately session for judgment, and a derisive treatment of the accusers and the whole Jewish nation;
i. The share of both—Pilate and the Jews—in the crucifixion.
John, in the close unity of his presentation, has however passed over, together with minor features, the trial in the morning (Mat_27:1); the dream of Pilate’s wife (Mat_27:19); Pilate’s washing of his hands, and the self-execration of the Jews (Mat_27:24-25); the reed (Mat_27:29); and the bespitting on the part of the soldiers (Mat_27:30). Similarly, the sending of Jesus to Herod, and the resultant friendship of Herod and Pilate (Luk_23:6-12); finally, the notice that Barabbas had perpetrated a sedition in the city (Mark, Luke).
2. The joint implication of a hierarchical Church and a despotic State in the guilt of Christ’s execution under pretext of His being a religious criminal:
(1) In losing the right of inflicting capital punishment, the hierarchs should have recognized the fact that their discipline could extend no further than to excommunication (Mat_18:17). (2) With the assumption of rule over different national religions, the Roman State should have been constrained to penetrate to a purely political position and a distinction of matters religious and political,—to a principle of which the better men already had a presentiment (Act_18:14-15). The two principles, however, the religious and the political, continue, on the one hand, involved, and, therefore, on the other hand, strained, because the Jewish hierarchy has not purified itself to a pure conception of the Church, nor the Roman power to a pure conception of the State.
This mingling of State and Church has been repeated from the time of Constantine, increasing more and more in the Middle Ages until the arrival of the Reformation. It still continues in the Greek economy of State and Church (Cæsaropapism), likewise in the Roman Ecclesiastical State,6 as, partially, in the other Catholic States (Papal-Cæsarism). Christ and Christianity have always had to suffer under this confusion, the ground of which is a want of respect for the religious conscience.
(2) In taking for granted that disagreeable religious tendencies are to be punished, the hierarchy is fain to shuffle off the execution of punishment upon the despotism, the latter to shift the responsibility of punishment upon the hierarchy.
(3) Afterwards they both seek to excuse themselves; Pilate writes: “The King of the Jews,” i.e. a religious motive has brought Him to the cross. The hierarchs wish the inscription to read: “He said that,” i.e. He is a misleader of the people, and a disturber;—the motive is a political one.
In a similar manner ultramontane authors now try to impute the execution of heretics to the State of the Middle Ages.
(4) Pilate constituted himself and his Roman authority constable of the hierarchy, and from this time forth he rushes to perdition. Similar was the fate of the Maccabean house, and, since then, of several European dynasties. The clean sunderment of Church and State is a vital impulse of the spirit of Christianity, one of the greatest tasks of Christian times. See the author’s essay: Ueber die Neugestaltung des Verhältnisses zwischen Kirche und Staat. Heidelberg, 1.
3. The fearful treason of the Jews to their Messianic idea, consummated in the ambiguous accusation: “Jesus is the King of the Jews.” A similar felony was committed by Josephus in applying the Messianic predictions of the Old Testament to Vespasian, De Bello Jud., VI. 5, 4. See Gieseler, p. 47.
4. The world-historical encounter of the Spirit of Christ with the genius of the Roman nation on the occasion of the discourse concerning His kingdom (see Exeg. Notes; and my Leben Jesu, II. 1508); analogous to His encounter with the genius of the Greek nation, Joh_12:20 ff.
5. Christ’s kingdom not of this world, but in this world, for it and over it. Christ the King in the Kingdom of Truth.
6. The question of Pilate no question, but a frivolous, unbelieving utterance. Characteristic of the Græco-Roman world-culture of his time.
7. Pilate surrendered truth first, and afterwards justice,—in consequence.
8. Ecce Homo. The scourging of Christ is intended by Pilate to save His life and, hence, to be an act of humanity. But as that governor’s official administration is without consistency, his justice without any foundation of truth, his wit without wisdom, so his humanity is destitute of the fear of God, of strength and of blessing. Such a humanitarian idea gave issue to the African slave trade.
9. Pilate’s superstitious fear at the saying: “Jesus made Himself the Son of God,”—a characteristic trait of the unbeliever. The indissoluble connection between unbelief and superstition. But after all, unbelieving Pilate is more believing than the superstitious high-priests in the consummate unbelief with which they reject Christ. Of the threefold terror of Pilate: his terror at the law, his terror of conscience, his religious terror—there appears no trace in these practical atheists, who have donned the mask of the holiest zeal.
10. The greater sins of the high-priests. Christ’s sympathy with the judicial fate of the weak Pilate. In this, Christ’s sentence upon Pilate, there lies a stronger Ecce Homo! than in the exclamation of Pilate. Ecce Homo—who believes he is administering divine government and justice, and stands impotent—the tool of divine judgment, destined himself to be the prey of judgment.
11. Ecclesiastical and political masks. See No. 1.
12. The hierarchy here begets a revolution and allies itself to the same, with a view to shaking the political authority. Hierarchy, popular insurrection, and political authority, in wicked alliance, sentence the King of the Kingdom of God and Protector of all holy order and authority, the High-priest and true Friend of the people, to death upon the cross, as a kindler of rebellion. See Leben Jesu, II. 1533.
13. No King but the Emperor. In that hour the besotted nation did, with hypocritical fanaticism, renounce, not its Messiah only, but also its Messianic hope, cherishing in its heart meanwhile rebellion against the emperor and the hope of a political Messiah. Yet even this judgment of hardening must, according to Romans 9, redound to the salvation of the world—the Gentile world, primarily.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
See the Doctrinal Notes, and Comm. on Matthew, Mark and Luke.
Christ at once being judged by, and judging, the world.—Christ at the bar of the Roman State.—Christ before Pilate, and Pilate before Christ.—How Christ’s glance pierced through all the mazes of judgment: 1. Through all entanglements, to the right; 2. through all concealments and misrepresentations, to the bottom; 3. through all ambiguities, to the purpose; 4. through all waverings, to the issue.—How the judgment upon the Lord judgeth itself: 1. In its accusations; 2. in its examinations; 3. in the motives for its sentence.—The grave sign in the fact that the great prospect that existed of Christ’s acquittal was immediately blighted: 1. The great prospect: a. Pilate at first repulses the accusers. b. He nevertheless holds the examination and declares the innocence of Jesus, c. He tries to adjust the matter with the scourging. d. He is convulsed with religious awe and already proceeds to release Jesus. 2. Blighted: a. By the stratagem of hypocrites; b. the audacity of fanaticism; c. the impotence and guilty consciousness of Pilate; d. the rule of Tiberius; e. the plots of Satan; f. the providence and judgment of God. 3. The grave sign: a. Of the depravity of the world; b. of the magnitude of human unrighteousness; c. of the majesty of divine righteousness; d. of the fixedness and depth of the Redemption.—As Roman State-spirit delivered the Lord Christ Himself to the will of the Hierarchy, so it subsequently pursued the same course with Christianity.—The light of the calm majesty of Christ alone illumines the dark scene of His condemnation.
Section First—Joh_18:28-40. The cunningly calculated appearing of the accusers: 1. Hypocritical: they keep the legal Passover holy, to the end that they may the more surely deliver up the true Paschal Lamb to the Gentiles; 2. Dissembling, naïve: they make as if the sentence were already decided; Pilate has nothing to do but to set the great seal to it; 3. Truckling: “we may not put any man to death;” 4. Slanderously and disclaimingly shameless: they design to entrap Pilate with the ambiguous phrase: “the King of the Jews;” 5. Crafty, bold: they choose a mob-hero, Barabbas, who has made a sedition (probably against the Roman authorities).—The competence conflict, or the embroilments between the Hierarchy and the despotic State, and the ultimate, wicked peace.—The counter-question of Christ (Joh_18:34) a word of the heavenly Judge (for instruction): 1. For the elucidation of the matter; 2. for the warning of Pilate; 3. for the illumination of the accusers.—The Roman interrogation: What hast Thou done?—The declaration of Jesus: My kingdom is not of this world: 1. As defence; 2. as accusation.—The kingdom of Christ in its spiritualness and heavenliness: 1. How it differs from the kingdom of the Romans 2. but also from the government of the Priests.—The royal confession: A King Amos 1.—The royal Kingdom of Truth: l. The Kingdom of the King: Truth in its profoundest essence, as a revelation of God; in its highest power, as the Gospel; in its broadest extent, as the uniting bond of all life; in its bodily appearance, as the Person of Christ. 2. The King of the Kingdom: Christ personal Truth itself, as the light centre of all life, thoroughly at one with itself, and therefore the Light of the world. 3. The title of the King: Perfect agreement of His birth and His mission (His office); His ideal and His historical vocation. 4. His government: The faithful Witness, with His testimony; the Host-leader of all faithful witnesses (martyrs). 5. Increase of the Kingdom: The Word received as His voice by all who are of the truth.—The word of Pilate: What is truth? 1. How word might have become the saving of his life (if he had spoken inquiringly and submitted himself to the answer); 2. How it became the judgment of his life (because he spoke it triflingly and scornfully, going out immediately.—What is truth? This question may be considered according to its divine meaning; 1. As the sneering exclamation of the impious scoffer; 2. as the mere declaration of a frivolous worldling (Pilate); 3. as the doubting question of an earnest investigator; 4. as the vital question of a longing heart.—The Pilate-question of the Roman spirit of tradition. (We must abide by the tradition, cried the Roman pagans to the Christians. How can ye think of such a thing as proclaiming new truths?) Pilate’s declaration without: I find no fault in Him; in connection with the preceding utterance: What is truth?—Pilate’s testimony to the innocence of Jesus. First attempt to release the Accused.—But it is your custom; How Pilate, with the first deviation from the right, had entered upon the road of calamity. Barabbas, see the Synoptists.
Section Second, Chap, Joh_19:1-16. The scourging of Christ, in respect to its two-fold signification: 1. In respect to Pilate’s intention (made prominent by John), it was to avert the crucifixion. 2. In respect to the actual result, it formed (according to the statement of the Synoptists) the beginning of the crucial sufferings of Christ.—Second attempt to release the Accused.—Lo there, the Man! 1. The word in the sense of Pilate. 2. The word in respect of its higher signification.—The second accusation in respect to its contradiction of the first in the sense of the accusers.—Pilate’s fear. Close connection between unbelief and superstition.—Second examination by Pilate, by reason of the charge: He made Himself the Son of God.—Jesus’ silence in the second examination by Pilate compared with His silence before Caiaphas.—The haughtiness in Pilate’s reproof (Joh_19:19), and the august-ness in the answer of Christ.—Christ sees even in the power of Pilate and its misuse, pre-eminently an instrument and a work of Divine Providence.—The greater and the less great sinners, or Jesus Himself in judgment, the holy Judge in righteousness and clemency.—Pilate’s resolution to release Jesus; or the last attempt, frustrated by the bold menace of the Jews. Why was it possible for this menace so to disturb him? 1. Because he was Pilate (on account of his extortions, destitute of a good conscience and of trust in God, and setting his earthly self-preservation above all things). 2. Because his sovereign was the emperor Tiberius (the cruel and suspicious tyrant who lent a ready ear to denunciations of all kinds). 3. Because he knew the Jewish priests (their deceitful cunning and fanatical boldness).—The priestly revolutionists with the bugbear of revolution in their mouths: 1. Revolutionists against the emperor (in their hearts;—against the authority of the governor). 2. Declaring Christ to be a revolutionist; And Pilate himself to be open to suspicion of this crime.—Gabbatha and Golgotha.—Pilate wraps himself in all the pomp of a judge, while his judicial dignity is drabbled in the dust.—The priests put on the mask of devotion to the emperor while they condemn their King to the cross.—The scoffs of a Pilate cannot break the power which the priests exercise over the blind populace.—Gentile-Roman policy overcome by the Jewish hierarchy.—The glory of Jerusalem and the glory of Rome sink away in one ordeal in which they judge the Lord of the world;—and with them the glory of Judaism and the glory of heathenism—the glory of the whole old world.—Agreement (concordance) of Pilate and the priests.—The suffering of the Lord in Pilate’s tribunal: 1. In view of Pilate tottering to his fall; 2. in view of the priests of His nation in their obduracy and craftiness; 3. in view of the delusion of the infatuated, raging people.—The temptation of Christ in these sufferings, and His victory.
Starke: To Joh_18:28-40. The Most Holy, in suffering Himself to be delivered into the hands of the uncircumcised, did thereby (take upon Himself the shame of our spiritual foreskin and) purpose to procure for us poor Gentiles a right to the citizenship of Israel.—How stiff-necked men still are in their superstition; and on the contrary, how secure and careless about that which is really in accordance with God’s word.—Hall: It is the way of all hypocrites to be exceedingly conscientious about things concerning which they really need have no scruples; but for things of which they should make scruple, they keep an accommodating conscience.—Cramer: It is a rickety proof—the pledging of one’s own authority in human affairs: We say so, therefore ‘tis true. Such are the vain-glorious,—they speak great blasphemy—slanders;—what they speak, must be spoken from heaven; what they say, must have weight on the earth, Psa_73:8-9 [another variation in translation].—Quesnel: Judges should examine everything—and their own hearts more than all other things.—Christ’s kingdom and the emperor’s can well exist together. Worldly order and government are serviceable to the Church, and the Church, by her prayer and intercession, preserveth police and kingdom. Certainly: the better Christian, the better magistrate! the better Christian, the more blessed teacher! the better Christian, the more loyal subject!—True servants of Jesus must fight manfully for their King and His kingdom.—Bibl. Wirtemb.: Dear Christian, what if thou be poor, despised, rejected in the world? for all that, thou art a king; thy Saviour hath made thee one, Rev_1:6; Rev_5:10. The kingdom is prepared thee from the beginning of the world, Mat_25:34—with this thought breast the devil and the world.—Zeisius: Let all thy words and works proceed from truth, if thou wilt be Christ’s subject, for thy King Christ is a King of Truth, Zec_8:19.—Ibid.: Politicians of the present day think with Pilate: What is truth? and hold such as suffer for its sake, to be fools, and, on the contrary, such as stoutly simulate, they account very clever and lucky.—Ibid.: So raging mad is the foolish and hardened world that it condemns the good and preserves the lives of the veriest knaves, preferring them, honoring them, and endowing them.—O what insane choice! a refractory subject is preferred to the King of Glory; a murderer, to the Prince of Life; a ravening wolf, to the Good Shepherd.—Cramer: As it is an abomination to God to wrong the righteous, so it is in like manner an abomination in His eyes not to punish archknaves.
Gerlach: The true King and the true Kingdom are the King and the Kingdom of Truth, Truth in the fullest, deepest sense (comp. Joh_1:14), according to which this word includes perfect essentiality, agreement with itself, holiness. Every king except the King of Truth, has a limited dominion, is at the same time a subject and servant; but God’s Truth and therefore His King and His Kingdom, are finally victorious over all opposition. On this very account, however, this dominion of Truth is no purely internal one, else it would not exercise sway over things external, and consequently it would itself be untrue, and not a thoroughly true, perfect dominion. All the kingdoms of the world shall servo this King when His testimony of the Truth shall have made all His foes His footstool. But every other weapon would itself be of falsehood and darkness. Christ was born such a King—in Him person and office are one—in this respect also He is nothing but Truth; and for this end He came into the world (of which He and His Kingdom arc not. Joh_18:36); His appearance, life and ministry have no other aim.—With the mid-day Sun in his face, Pilate shut his eyes and thought there was nothing but darkness about him. Christ stood before him, Himself the Truth, and he unbelievingly despaired of men’s ever being able to know the truth. Pilate’s question is no scoff, but the expression of the superficial, hopeless unbelief of a man of the world.
Braune: My kingdom, etc.; It twines its blessing around all kingdoms, all circumstances; it is the flying bee, clinging with quiet diligence to the fast-fading flowers and their perishable glory, that it may extract honey from them for its kingdom of the future, creating, meanwhile, not the slightest disturbance in the garden of the world. But it is likewise the great power that in all the migrations of nations, in great wars, and the ruins of the kingdoms of the world, proves itself active in advancing the eternal kingdom of peace. It will not be confined to the heart and the world of thought, but will be set up in the living spirit which gives proof of itself in all situations and which ought to prove itself Christian.—It is founded upon truth—God’s promises; it is erected by truth—testimony concerning them; it is enjoyed in truth—obedience towards them; truth is universally disseminated by it; in doctrine and life, ideas, feelings, words, deeds, relations, impulses, truth comes; vanity and falsehood are overcome.—“In the kingdoms of the world, the vanity, ambition and weakness of man are misused, roused and cherished, while truth in the conscience is hindered by unrighteousness. But in the kingdom of God, man’s conscience, his sense of truth, and the truth active in that sense, are aided as a drawing to eternity” (Rieger).—There are minds that ring loud and clear when the truth touches them, while others brought into contact with the truth continue dead and soundless. Purity of heart is the condition whereon depends clearness in the knowledge of God. The light-minded worldliness and dull skepticism of so-called culture lead to a despair of truth.
Gossner: They wish to make Christ a male-factor by means, simply, of their authority and office, which, notwithstanding, they had from Him alone. And He was constrained, and did will, to suffer it so to be. We will invert their proposition and say: Friend Pilate, if we were not malefactors, we would not have delivered the Innocent and Righteous One unto thee.—If we were not sinners, such things could and must never have befallen Christ.—With truth,—thought Pilate, like so many other men—a man does not get on in the world. The world shrugs its shoulders, saying: “Truth? Bah! A fellow can’t be so particular.”
Heubner: God’s people delivers up its Saviour, its Crown, the sum of all the promises, to the Gentiles to be executed. What a spirit is this in comparison with the spirit of the waiting, hoping fathers! It happens in the morning, at the approach of the holiest of feasts,—at a time when the spirit should clearly see the right. The priests were moved, we doubt not, with the desire to cover Jesus with infamy in the sight of the people.—Lavater: “Whenever a righteous person is sentenced and judged by an uncalled man, there stands a Jesus before Pilate.”—Rambach says of Pilate: It is laudable in him that he examines Jesus according to the rule: audiatur el altera pars,—that he himself makes the investigation, conversing undisturbedly with Christ alone.—The Kingdom of Christ is not worldly, but the kingdom of the world becometh Godly and Christly (Bengel).—The truth that Christ gives, is “truth unto a knowledge of the Father, truth unto an assurance of the forgiveness of sins, truth unto everlasting comfort through grace, truth and strength in godliness” (Rieger).—Truth’s seat is least of all at the courts of the great in this world. A king of France complained that though he had all things else in his kingdom and at his court, he yet did lack truth, people to tell him the plain, unvarnished truth (the same).—But what was the innocence which in Pilate’s eyes Jesus possessed? The innocence of a good-hearted fanatic.
Starke: On Joh_19:1-16. Bibl. Wirt. We must not do evil that good may come of it, Rom_3:8.—Zeisius: Let this: Lo, what a man! never depart out of thy thoughts; but let it be to thee a monition penitently to recognize the enormity of the sins wherewith thou broughtest thy Saviour to such a pass; a warning earnestly to guard against them henceforward, and a word of consolation, partly in view of the hideous picture of thine approaching death, partly for the time when the world shall make a spectacle and a monster of thee.—Quesnel: A judge must not terrify others with his power; but must be in fear himself on account of the power which he hath received from God, and look to it that he use it aright.—Zeisius: When we must suffer wrong, there is no better means of calming our souls and inspiring them with patience and consolation than by turning our eyes utterly away from secondary causes and fixing them on God, 2Sa_16:10; Luk_21:18-19.—One sin is indeed more grievous than another, and hence deserving of heavier punishment and condemnation, Eze_16:51-52.—A frank confession of the truth hath great power and is never without blessing, Act_24:25.—Satan knows how to take hold of every man in the place where he is weakest, 2Sa_11:2; Joh_13:2.—Satan understands making a masterly use of honor, consideration, favor, grace with great lords—with them he blinds the eyes of men and ensnares their hearts, thus bringing or keeping them under his dominion, Joh_12:43.—Hall: A carnally-minded man is more anxious for his bodily prosperity and temporal honor than for his soul.—Zeisius: It is a sorrowful fact that the servants of great lords are far more afraid of their masters, than of God’s displeasure; but cursed is the man that trusteth in men and, etc., Jer_17:5 : Act_5:29.—Truth is often made a mere laughing-stock,—yet the mocker must be defeated and truth victorious.
Gerlach: The heathen even, struck by the divine majesty of Jesus, must gain some inkling of the fact that He was really the Son of God—a fact, the presage of which augmented the sin of the high-priests and that of Pilate also.—Pilate nevertheless did not escape the fate that he here, by his sinful yieldingness, sought to avoid; three or four years after he was deposed by Vitellius, governor of Syria, and sent to Rome to answer to the charges of tyranny preferred against him by the Jews.—On Joh_18:15. With which they most solemnly renounce God, their King, and the Messiah whom they looked for from Him.—Lisco: Hence the question: Whence art Thou? i.e., art Thou really of divine descent? Jesus is silent, not willing to deny His divine origin and yet unable to instruct the unreceptive Pilate concerning the truth.—In mockery of their rebellious tendencies that longed for a king of their own, yet now rejected Him whom God sent them, Pilate asked: Shall I crucify your King? Whereupon the Jews, feigning devotion and loyalty, say: none but the emperor do we recognize as our king.
Braune: Thou art but the instrument of a supreme will—saith the Condemned unto the judge. It is the self-same thought of the Redeemer that He thus expressed to Peter (Joh_18:11)—Shall I not drink the cup My Father hath given Me? Here the Redeemer taketh His stand, even in the midst of the turbid tumult of Jewish passion and Gentile dissoluteness; the pure will of God remaineth serene for Him, as the sky letteth its blue be seen through clouds.—In the destruction of Jerusalem the blood of the fathers and the children flowed. And Pilate bore his load still earlier.
Gossner: That is a wicked pliancy men manifest when, like Pilate, to win people they yield the half of what they unjustly demand and consider that they discharge their duty inasmuch as they refuse the other half. Duty and fidelity towards God and one’s conscience cannot be divided, else infidelity is already an accomplished fact.—Let him that carrieth his head on high and refuseth to bow his neck beneath the lowly yoke of Christ, look often upon the thorn-crowned and scornéd head of his King.—O thou weak man! thou miserable judge! So oft dost thou publicly attest His innocence, and sufferest Him to be more and more cruelly maltreated, and even committest the innocent Lamb to the wolves again; instead of tearing Him from their clutches. Thou preachest unto deaf ears when thou discoursest to the wolves concerning the innocence of the Lamb.—He who yields once to godless, unscrupulous men and does their pleasure, must and will do it the second time, must do everything until their thirst is quenched.—Behold, what a man! how guiltless! and how wretched! So stood He there, the Only and Incomparable One, before His people! how must the angels have looked into it. And He, whither must He have looked, how must He have gazed up to His Father! how must His soul have prayed that eternal honor and glory might grow out of this, His disgrace.—Behold, that is the Man who restoreth men and maketh them again what man was in the beginning when he came from God’s hands. Behold, that is the Man, the God incarnate, who maketh men partakers in the divine nature; that is the perfect Man, for all others are men no longer—they can and shall, however, become men once more through Him.—It is noteworthy that God’s Son must die because He was God’s Son, and acknowledged and affirmed Himself lo be the Son of God.—A pious judge will never boast of his authority, for it is not, his, but belongs to justice and law.—Pilate vaunted his power so, and yet was so impotent, so tottering, that every wind, every menace, cast him to the ground and dispersed his power.—He was always endeavoring, always intending and never performing. The foes strive too, and strive more earnestly and more zealously than thou with thy half will.—But thou, O pious soul, when the world, when sin tempteth thee and provoketh thee to do something hostile to God and Jesus, do thou ask: Shall I crucify my King?
Heubner: Christ’s crown of thorns and the crowns of the princes of this world afford matter for careful comparison. In respect of outward appearance, the former is disgraceful and agonizing, and the latter gloriously radiant, envied; but in respect of reality, the former is bought with the wearer’s own blood, the latter purchased oft-times with the blood of subjects; the former a token of the utterly self-sacrificing, all sorrows-enduring Martyr, the latter a sign of ambition that gratifies itself only; the former wins salvation and freedom for the human race, the latter often bring woes and bondage upon men; the former beams eternally before God and leads to heavenly glory, the latter soon fade away and procure for those that wear them no honor in the presence of God, but frequently rejection from that presence. (Comp. Lavater Pontius Pil. iv. 21.)—Pilate is restless, he goes in and out.—Behold, what a man! Ecce Homo! Words of many meanings! (Comp. Lavater, Pontius Pilatus, iv. 24–78).—One of the choicest paintings in the Düsseldorf Gallery is (was) an Ecce homo with the Latin inscription: All this I did for thee; what doest thou for Me? Zinzendorf was greatly affected at the sight of this picture; he is minded that he would not be able himself to make much response to this query, and he prays his Saviour to pull him forcibly into the fellowship of His sufferings if he be inclined to remain without.
Joh_18:11. Pilate had encroached upon the rights of the heavenly Father, Jesus protects the honor of His Father. Even Pilate’s power Jesus recognizes as a divine ordinance. Everything is of God, even the power of an unjust authority. Good men are never delivered up to it unless God wills their delivery. A distinction must be made between the work of God and that of Pilate. The guilt of the High Council was greater than that of Pilate, because they had a better insight into religion, into God’s counsel and promise, Jesus’ deeds and holiness. At the same time the “greater sin” awards blame implicite to Pilate: he too had sin.—Earthly power is perilous; let not him who has it presume upon it, or him who has it not, desire it.—Luther, xvi. John 61: “The Jews said, we have no king, and their saying has come to be such earnest that they must (eternally?) be without a king.”
Krummacher. The Suffering Christ, a Passion Book. Bielefield, 1854 (Trans. into English by Samuel Jackson. Boston, 1868). Christ before Pilate.—Christ a King.—What is Truth?—The Lamb of God.—The Great Spectacle: Ecce Homo! etc., pp. 378–690.
[Craven; From Augustine: John 18 : Joh_18:28. O impious blindness! They feared to be defiled by the judgment hall of a foreign Prefect; to shed the blood of an innocent brother they feared not.
Joh_18:30. Ask the freed from unclean spirits, the blind who saw, the dead who came to life again, and, what is greater than, all, the fools who were made wise, and let them answer, whether Jesus was a malefactor. But they spoke, of whom He had Himself prophesied in the Psalms, They rewarded Me evil for good.
Joh_18:36. All that are born again in Christ, are made a kingdom not of this world. Thus hath God taken us out of the power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son.
Joh_18:37. But when Christ bears witness to the truth, He bears witness to Himself; as He said above, I am the truth.—Joh_19:5. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the Man! as if to say, If ye envy the King, spare the outcast. Ignominy overflows, let envy subside.
Joh_18:11. So He answers. When He was silent, He was silent not as guilty or crafty, but as a sheep; when He answered, He taught as a shepherd.——From Chrysostom: Chap, John 18 : Joh_18:36. He means that He does not derive His kingdom from the same source that earthly kings do; but that He hath His sovereignty from above; inasmuch as He is not mere man, but far greater and more glorious than man; If My kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight that I should not be delivered to the Jews; here He shows the weakness of an earthly kingdom, that it has its strength from its servants, whereas that higher kingdom is sufficient to itself, and wanting in nothing.—When He says, My kingdom is not from hence, He does not deprive the world of His government and superintendence, but only shows that His government is not human and corruptible.
Joh_19:7. They kill Him for the very reason for which they ought to have worshipped Him.
Joh_19:15. We have no king but Cæsar; With one accord they denied the kingdom of God, and God suffered them to fall into their own condemnation; for they rejected the kingdom of Christ, and called down upon their own heads that of Cæsar.——From Bede: Joh_19:2. Though the soldiers did this in mockery, yet to us their acts have a meaning; for by the crown of thorns is signified the taking of our sins upon Him, the thorns which the earth of our body brings forth; and the purple robe signifies the flesh crucified.——From Alcuin: Chap, 18. Joh_18:38. He did not wait to hear the reply, because he was unworthy to hear it.
From Theophylact: Chap. 18 Joh_18:36. He says, from hence, not here; because He reigns in the world, and carries on the government of it, and disposes all things according to His will; but His kingdom is not from below, but from above, and before all ages.
Joh_18:38. Pilate said unto Him, What is truth? For it had almost vanished from the world, and become unknown in consequence of the general unbelief.——From Herbert: Chap, 18 Joh_18:40.
Thou who condemnest Jewish hate,
For choosing Barabbas, a murderer,
Before the Lord of glory;
Look back upon thine own estate,
Call home thine eye (that busy wanderer)—
That choice may be thy story.
[From Burkitt: Chap, 18. Joh_18:28. When persons are over-zealous for ceremonial observances, they are oftentimes too remiss with reference to moral duties.
Joh_18:29-30. When we lie under calumny and unjust imputation, we imitate Christ, who opened not His mouth but committed His cause to Him that judgeth uprightly. [He defended Himself before the High-Priest.]
Joh_18:36. It is a clear evidence that Christ’s kingdom is spiritual, inasmuch as it is not carried on by violence and force of arms, as worldly kingdoms are, but by spiritual means and methods.
Joh_18:37. Observe 1. The dominion and sovereignty of Jesus Christ,—He has a kingdom: My kingdom; 2. The condition and qualification of this kingdom, negatively expressed: not of this world; 3. The use and end of this kingdom, that the truth may have place among the children of men for their salvation: to this end was I born, and came into the world, to bear witness unto the truth; 4. The subjects of Christ’s kingdom declared: Everyone that is of the truth, heareth My voice.
Joh_18:38. “What is truth? A most noble and important question, had it been put forth with an honest heart, with a mind fairly disposed for information and satisfaction.
Joh_18:40. No persons, how wicked and vile soever, are so odious in the eyes of the enemies of God as Christ Himself was, and His friends and followers now are.—Joh_19:1. It is a vain apology for sin, when persons pretend that it was not committed with their own consent.
Joh_18:2-3. What they did in jest, God permitted to be done in earnest.
Joh_18:5. Thorns and briers shall the earth bring forth, Gen_3:18. Christ, by His bitter and bloody sufferings, has turned all the curses of His people into crowns and blessings. In spite of all malice, innocence shall find some friends and abettors; rather than Christ shall want witnesses, Pilate’s month shall be opened for His justification.
Joh_18:6. The chief priests and elders “persuaded the multitude:” Woe be to the common people, when their guides and leaders are corrupt; and woe be unto them much more, if they follow their wicked and pernicious counsels.
Joh_18:7-8. Serious thoughts of a Deity will strike terror even into a natural conscience, especially when the sinner is following a course which his own judgment cannot approve.
Joh_18:10. It is the great sin and snare of men in power, to forget from Whom they derive their power, and to think that they may employ it as they please.
Joh_18:11. He that delivereth Me unto thee, hath the greater sin; the greater means of light and knowledge persons sin against, the more aggravated is their guilt, and the more heightened will be their condemnation.
Joh_18:12. Hypocrites within the pale of the visible church may be guilty of such tremendous acts of wickedness as the conscience of an Infidel and Pagan boggle at and protest against.—Conscience bids him spare, popularity bids him kill.
Joh_18:12-13. The natural consciences of men, and their innate notions of good and evil, may carry men on a great way in opposing that which is a bare-faced iniquity; but at last either fear or shame will over-rule, if there be not a superior and more noble principle.
[From M. Henry: Chap, Joh_18:28. Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment; They took this course that He might be put to death 1. More legally and regularly; 2. More safely; 3. With more reproach to Himself by the death of the cross; 4. With less reproach to them; thus many are more afraid of the scandal of an ill thing, than of the sin of it.—Two things are here observed concerning the prosecution: 1. Their policy and industry therein; 2. Their superstition and vile hypocrisy.
Joh_18:29. Looking upon Pilate as a magistrate, here are three things commendable in him: 1. His diligent and close application to business; men in public trusts must not love their ease; 2. His condescension to the humor of the people, and receding from the honor of his place, to gratify their scruples; he goes out to them; for when it is for good, we should become all things to all men; 3. His adherence to the rule of justice in demanding the accusation, suspecting the prosecution to be malicious.
Joh_18:31. If the Jews have no power to put any man to death, where is the sceptre? Yet they ask not, Where is the Shiloh?
Joh_18:32. Even they who designed the defeating of Christ’s sayings, beyond their intention were made serviceable to the fulfilling of them by an over-ruling hand of God.—It is likewise determined concerning us, though not discovered to us, what death we shall die, which should free us from all disquieting cares about that matter.
Joh_18:35. Am I a Jew? Good names often suffer for the sake of the bad men that wear them. It is sad, that when a Turk is suspected of dishonesty, he should ask, “What! do you take me for a Christian?”—Christ, in His religion, still suffers by those that are of His own nation, even the priests, that profess relation to Him, but do not live up to their profession.
Joh_18:36. My kingdom is not of this world; 1. Its rise is not from this world; it is not by succession, election, or conquest, but by the immediate and special designation of the divine will and counsel; 2. Its nature is not worldly; it is a kingdom within men; 3. Its guards and supports are not worldly; its weapons are spiritual; 4. Its tendency and design are not worldly; 5. Its subjects, though they are in the world, yet are not of the world.
Joh_18:37. The good confession which our Lord Jesus witnessed before Pontius Pilate, 1Ti_6:13.—Though Christ took upon Him the form of a servant, yet even then He justly claimed the honor and authority of a king.—Christ’s errand into, the world, and His business in the world, were to bear witness to the truth: 1. To reveal it, Joh_1:18; Joh_7:26; John 2. To confirm it, Rom_15:8—Learn 1. The foundation and power, the spirit and genius, of Christ’s kingdom, is truth, divine truth; 2. The subjects of this kingdom are those that are of the truth.
Joh_18:39. Pilate was willing to trim the matter and please all sides; and was governed more by worldly wisdom than by the rule of equity.
Joh_18:40. The enemies of Christ’s holy religion cry it down, and so hope to run it down; witness the outcry at Ephesus, Act_19:34.—There is cause to suspect a deficiency of reason and justice on that side which calls in the assistance of popular tumult.—Now Barabbas was a robber; Sin is a robber, every base lust is a robber, and yet foolishly chosen rather than Christ, who would truly enrich us.
Joh_19:1. This pain and shame Christ submitted to for our sakes; 1. That the Scripture might be fulfilled, Isa_53:5, etc.; 2. That by His stripes we might be healed, 1Pe_2:24; 1 Peter 3. That stripes, for His sake, might be sanctified, and made easy to His followers.
Joh_19:1-3. See and admire 1. The invincible patience of a sufferer; 2. The invincible love and kindness of a Saviour.—He that bore these sham honors, was recompensed with real honors, and so shall we be, if we patiently suffer shame for Him. Joh_19:5. Did He go forth thus bearing our reproach? Let us go forth to Him bearing His reproach, Heb_13:13.—Behold the Man; It is good for every one of us, with an eye of faith to behold the Man Christ Jesus in His sufferings, “Behold Him, and 1. Be suitably affected with the sight; 2. Mourn because of Him; 3. Love Him; be still looking unto Jesus.”
Joh_19:6. Did their hatred of Him sharpen their endeavors against Him, and shall not our love to Him quicken our endeavors for Him and His kingdom?—Pilate had not courage enough to act according to his conscience, and his cowardice betrayed him into a snare.
Joh_19:7. In vain did they boast of their law, when they abused it to such bad purposes.
Joh_19:8. Pilate fears lest he should run himself into a premunire.
Joh_19:10-11. When Pilate used his power, Christ silently submitted to it; but when he grew proud of it, He made him know himself.
Joh_19:11. All sins are not equal; but the guilt of others will not acquit us, nor will it avail in the great day to say, that others were worse than we, for we are not to be judged by comparison, but must bear our own burden.
Joh_19:12. It never does well, when our resolutions to do our duty are swallowed up in projects how to do it plausibly and conveniently. If Pilate’s policy had not prevailed above his justice, he would not have been long seeking to release Him, but would have done it.—A few madmen may out-shout many wise men, and then fancy themselves to speak the sense (when it is but the nonsense) of a nation, or of all mankind.—It has always been the artifice of the enemies of religion, to represent it as hurtful to kings and provinces, when it would be highly beneficial to both.
Joh_19:13. They that bind up their happiness in the favor of men, make themselves an easy prey to the temptations of Satan.
Joh_19:15. Had not Christ, interposed, and been thus rejected of men, we had been for ever rejected of God.
Joh_19:16. Then delivered he Him therefore unto them to be crucified; It is common for those who think to keep themselves from greater sins by venturing upon lesser sins, to run into both.
From Scott: Joh_18:30-31. Those who are scandalously unjust, frequently expect credit for their regard to justice; and are greatly affronted to be suspected of the least crime, while actually committing the greatest, 2Sa_20:8-10; 2Sa_20:20-22.
Joh_18:38. Numbers give Jesus and His people a good word, who will not join them, or venture anything in His cause.—Numbers commit injustice for fear of their dependents, and from a desire of popularity.
Joh_18:40. Let us beware of deliberately sparing our lusts, (those robbers of God, and murderers of the soul,) thus crucifying Christ afresh, and putting Him to open shame.
Joh_19:1-16. The conflict between convictions and corrupt affections, is often strong; but where faith is wanting, the world will get the victory.—Those rulers of every description, who have sat in judgment on Christ and His servants, will soon stand before His tribunal.
From A. Clarke: Joh_18:28-40. The most that we can say for Pilate, is, that he was disposed to justice, but was not inclined to hazard his comfort or safety in doing it. He was an easy, pliable man, who had no objection to doing a right thing, if it should cost him no trouble; but he felt no disposition to make any sacrifice, even in behalf of innocence, righteousness, and truth.——From A Plain Commentary (Oxford): Joh_18:36. Our Saviour does not say that He has no earthly kingdom; but that His kingdom is not of earthly origin.
Joh_18:37. Every one that is of the truth heareth My voice; “Being of the truth” implies belonging to it; being mastered by it; taken up into it: it implies the being possessed by a principle which moulds that wherein it dwells to itself, as the weaker is held by the stronger; even the possession of the soul by the very Essence of Being and of Life, manifested in the person of the Son, and administered by the Holy Ghost.
Joh_18:38. “Probably Pilate thought that Jesus professed only to add one more to the list of philosophies, or systems of ideas, and turned away from it in sickness of heart.” (Archdeacon Grant.)
Joh_18:40. “His own, they among whom He had gone about all His life long, healing them, teaching them, feeding them, doing them all the good He could; it is they that cry, ‘Not this Man, but Barabbas!’ ” (Bishop Andrews.)
Joh_19:2. And the soldiers plaited a crown of thorns and put it on Sis head; “A most unquestionable token this, that Christ’s kingdom was not of this world, when He was crowned only with thorns and briars, which are the curse of the earth.” (Lightfoot.)
Joh_19:5. Behold the Man! As if he said,—Behold the afflicted and tortured object of your malice and cruelty; “a worm, and no man.” If ye have human hearts, ye cannot behold such a dismal spectacle without commiseration!
Joh_19:6. Monstrous that a heathen should have had thus to remonstrate with the chief priests of a nation taught of God!
Joh_19:8-9. The heathen Procurator again puts the descendants of Abraham to shame. Like Gamaliel he is seized with a salutary apprehension “lest haply he be found even to fight against God.”
Joh_19:10. “Pilate further condemns himself in servilely yielding to a popular clamor, after so plainly declaring his own absolute, unfettered authority.” (Grotius.)
Joh_19:12-13. Pilate fears less to put the Son of God to death, than to incur the Roman Emperor’s displeasure.
[From Krummacher: Joh_18:28. They purposely push Him into the house they deemed unclean, and thus tangibly and symbolically expel Him as a publican and sinner from the commonwealth of Israel; but all this was to happen thus, in order that Christ’s character as the sinner’s Surety might become increasingly apparent, and every one perceive in Him the Man who, by virtue of a mysterious transfer, had taken upon Himself everything that was condemnatory in us.—Who is not acquainted with individuals who scrupulously abstain from worldly amusements, and carefully avoid coming into social contact with the worldly-minded, who not only vie with the world in the arts of dissimulation, uncharitable judgment of others, and hateful scandal, but even go beyond it?—The life of godliness is a harmonious organization, and not a sticking together of single acts of piety.
Joh_18:30. Though they were endeavoring to murder innocence and do the devil’s work, yet because they do it, it must be right and blameless.
Joh_18:36-37. Christ is a King; you are, therefore, not in error who wear His uniform, and have trusted your life and destiny to His hands.—He does not say that His Kingdom makes no claim eventually to the government of the whole world, or He would have denied more than was consistent with the truth; He only asserts that His government was not of this world, and clearly intimates by laying the emphasis on the word “this,” that another æon than the present would certainly see His delegates seated on the thrones, and His word and Gospel the Magna Charta of all nations. It is particularly to be observed that in); the sentence, “Now is My Kingdom not from hence,” the word “now” evidently refers to a period in which His Kingdom should occupy a position very different from what it did at that time.—Those who hear His voice are citizens of His Kingdom.—The expression, every one that is of the truth, betokens an inward preparation for conversion which no one experiences without the operation of “preventing grace.”
Joh_18:38. What is truth? A seeking after truth belongs to human nature, and is wont to be the last feature of it that perishes.—In Pilate there was doubtless something of the proud philosopher, something of worn-out indifference, something of the professed skeptic, something of the frivolous free-thinker and scoffer, and something of the hasty, jealous and haughty blusterer; but still there is something beside this, something better and nobler—an unperverted, inquiring mind—a longing for deliverance. (If this last be true, would not Christ, have answered?—E. R. C).
Joh_18:38-39. Pilate stands as a warning example of the consequence of endeavoring to satisfy God and the world: We meet with Pilate under various forms; many a one has placed himself, like him, in a situation in which he must either set Barabbas free, or give up the Saviour, because he was deficient in courage to brave every danger for Christ’s sake; many reckoning, like Pilate, on the instinctive moral feelings of the multitude, with whom they do not wish to be at variance, have cowardly asked, “Which will you choose, right or wrong?” and the unexpected reply has been thundered back, “We choose rebellion and treason.”
Joh_18:40. Not this man, but Barabbas; Such is the world’s favor, and so little truth is there in the saying, “The voice of the people is the voice of God.”—Barabbas does not stand before us merely as an individual; he represents, allegorically, the human race in its present condition bound in the fetters of the curse of the law till the day of judgment. Before he was presented with Jesus to the people’s choice, every prospect of escape had been cut off; and such is also our case. It is now Barabbas or Jesus: if Jesus is set at liberty Barabbas is inevitably lost; if the former is rejected, then, hail to thee, Barabbas, thou art saved! His ruin is thy redemption; from His death springs thy life,—”God made Him to be sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be the righteousness of God in Him;” in Barabbas’ deliverance we see our own.
Joh_19:1-5. There is a closer connection between the garden of Eden and the Roman prætorium than might at first sight be supposed; debts incurred in Eden are there liquidated, and sins committed in Paradise are there atoned for. What ought to have been the fate of Adam for lusting after the forbidden fruit, and for his impious infringement of God’s prerogatives? At least, the scourge instead of sensual delight; a crown of thorns instead of the longed for diadem; and a robe of mockery instead of the imperial purple.—Does not Christ still wear, in a hundred different forms, the purple robe and crown thorns in the world? Is He not exposed to public ridicule and treated as a liar and an enthusiast because He bears witness to His superhuman dignity? Is not His name, even to this day, proscribed by thousands, like scarcely any other? Does not an ironical smile dart across the lips of many, when it is mentioned with reverence and fervor?—The words, Behold the Man, point not only to what is past, they have also a condemning reference to the present. Alas, the world has become a Gabbatha! The thorn-crowned martyred form exhibited there mutely condemns us all without distinction.—Behold the Man: In the mock robe in which He stands before you, He gains victories which He never could have won in the sumptuous robe of His divine majesty; in it He overcomes eternal justice, the irrevocable law, sin, Satan, death. It is a strange ornament that decks His head—in this wreath He possesses and uses a power of which He could not boast while adorned only with the crown of Deity; in the latter He could say to the dying thief only “Be thou accursed;” in the former He is able to say to him, “This day shalt thou be with Me in Paradise;” in the former He certainly reigned, but over a hopelessly ruined race, devoted to destruction; in the diadem of thorns, He rules over a world replete with great and glorious anticipations: A feeble reed is His rod of office, but with the Sceptre of Omnipotence, which He wielded from the beginning, He did not perform the wonders which He works with this mark of abasement and weakness; true, the gates of hell opened for transgressors at a wave of the former; but when He sways the latter, the doors of the paradise they have forfeited open for them; with the former, He was Lord over mankind only as a lost race destined for the slaughter; with the latter, He now tends a flock of them called to eternal salvation. Can you mistake the Conqueror of the world in Him whom you see before you—the “stronger” who takes away the spoils and armor of the “strong man,” and makes an end of all opposing authority? In the same attire in which He there yields Himself up to the world, He continues to overcome it; the sight of the suffering Saviour is still the mighty power which silently changes lions into lambs, breaks and melts the strong heart and prepares the way for His most glorious achievements: Thus arrayed He exhibits Himself in the cell of the contrite penitent, and how is the heart, of such an one relieved, for He bare our iniquities; to the sorely tempted, and renders their victory secure; to the grievously afflicted, and they exclaim, “Through the cross to the crown;” to His children despised and rejected by the world, and they exclaim, “We desire no other array from you than that in which you once clothed our Glorious Head;” to those grieved at base ingratitude and coldness, and their sorrow turns to deep confusion at their desire for human praise; to those of His flock seduced by the allurements of the world, and restores them.
Joh_19:12-16. Pilate is compelled to take the part of the Holy One to the setting aside of all private considerations, or to afford his sanction to the most cruel and bloody deed the world ever witnessed; The case is similar with us; if we refuse to do Him homage, we are compelled to aid in crucifying Him.—We find in Pilate a degree of humanity and susceptibility for something better; God indeed, will judge him, but not with the lukewarm who disgust Him, and whom like the Laodiceans, He will spew out of His mouth.—Who could be able to form a correct idea of the spectacle, and yet believe that divine justice rules the world, if we were permitted to behold our Saviour only in His own person, and not at the same time as Mediator and High Priest!
[From Barnes: Joh_18:38. Pilate saith unto Him, What is truth? Thousands ask the question in the same way. They have a fixed contempt for the Bible; they deride the instructions of religion; they are unwilling to investigate, and to wait at the gates of wisdom; and hence, like Pilate, they remain ignorant of the great Source of truth, and die in darkness and in error.—Joh_19:4. The highest evidence was given that the charges were false, even when He was condemned to die.
Joh_18:6. When men are determined on evil, they cannot be reasoned with; thus sinners go in the way of wickedness down to death.
Joh_18:11. How many men in office forget that God gives them their rank, and vainly think that it is owing to their own talents or merits, that they have risen to that elevation.—The providence of God was remarkable in so ordering affairs, that a man, flexible and yielding like Pilate, should be entrusted with power in Judea. He so orders affairs that the true character of men shall be brought out, and makes use of that character to advance His own great purpose.——From Jacobus: Joh_18:38. What is truth? This is the kind of questioning which the world makes. It is rather a taunt thrown out against Christ and His religion—it waits for no answer.—I find in Him no fault at all; How many are willing to pronounce Him innocent, but rebel at the thought of relying on Him for salvation.—Joh_19:5. Behold the Man! Pilate pointed to Him as a spectacle calculated to move them.
Joh_18:11. Christ acknowledges that Pilate’s power is given him from on high.
[From Owen: Joh_18:37. This shows that the kingly domain of Jesus was in the domain of truth, that His followers were those who received the truth in the love of it, and that from all who were the subjects of truth, would be rendered to Him the most implicit obedience.
Joh_18:38. The conversation had taken too serious a turn to suit Pilate’s pleasure; he therefore waits for no reply.—“Pilate mocks both—the Witness to the Truth, and the haters of the Truth.” (Alford.)
Joh_18:40. “Thus was Jesus the goat upon which the Lord’s lot fell, to be offered for a sin-offering.” (Luthardt after Krafft.)—Joh_19:14. Behold your King! It is no longer, Behold the Man! to excite their sympathy and effect His release. Every emotion of tenderness, every principle of honor and justice, is now lost in the desire to evince his loyalty to Cæsar, and shield himself from an accusation like that threatened in Joh_18:12.
Joh_18:15. We have no king but Cæsar; To such a depth of degradation did these chief men of the nation descend, in their hellish desire to rid themselves of Jesus.
[Chap. 18 Joh_18:13; Joh_18:24; Joh_18:29; Joh_18:40 (Mat_27:1; Mar_15:1; Luk_23:7). Our Lord was tried and condemned by every power having, or that might be supposed to have, authority over Him—Annas, Caiaphas, the Sanhedrin, Pilate, Herod, the Populace—1. That it might be apparent that He was condemned by every ecclesiastical and world power; 2. As prophetic of His future rejection by every conceivable form of human government.
Joh_18:36. My kingdom is not of this world—now is My kingdom not from hence; My kingdom is not yet established; the present is, for Me and My disciples, the period of submission and patient endurance of wrong and suffering.7]
Footnotes:
[1][Of John Knox it is truly said: “He never feared the face of man.” The reason was because be feared God. Only he is truly free and independent of men, who feels bound in God and dependent on Him.—P. S.]
[2][Robinson, Tholuck, Wieseler and others, quote also as a parallel σάββατον τοῦ πάσχα in Ignatius Ep. ad Phil., c. 13; but this is not the Sabbath of the Easter-week, but the Saturday preceding Easter-Sunday, Easter-eve.—P. S.]
[3][Or in Joh_19:14, ἦν δὲ παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα ὅ ἐστι προσάββατον τοῦ πάσχα comp. Mar_15:42.—P. S.]
[4][In this case τοῦ πάσχα must be disconnected from παρασκευή, and connected with ὥρα in this way: ἦν δε παρασκευή, τοῦ πάσχα ὤρα ἦν ὡς ἕκτη, i. e., it was preparation-day (Friday), about the sixth hour of the paschal feast (counting from midnight). Ingenious, but very artificial and without a parallel for such reckoning. Hofmann, of Erlangen, proposed this view in an article of the Erlangen Zeitschriftf. Prot. und Kirche, 1853, p. 260 ff., and again in his Schriftbeweis. Lichtenstein adopts it in his article Jesus Christus, in Herzog’s Theol, Encycl, Vol. 6, p. 595,—P. S.]
[5][Tischendorf, Alford and Westcott and Hort put no comma between the two ἆρον, which were no doubt spoken in rapid succession with all the vehemence of furious passion.—P. S.]
[6][Overthrown in 1870, soon after the adoption of the blasphemous dogma of papal infallibility by the Vatican Council.—P. S.]
[7][It is not denied that Christ, as God, had a kingdom which existed from the beginning, nor that at His ascension He was exalted “Head over all things,” nor that His future earthly-kingdom is to be spiritual as well as political; it is simply-denied that His earthly kingdom (the kingdom here referred to) was then (or now) established. To regard the νῦν as a particle of inference, and not of time, is to suppose that our Lord whispered into the ear of a heathen, in the privacy of the Prætorium (Joh_19:28), the great truth concerning His kingdom which He concealed from His Apostles, not twelve hours before, at the institution of the Supper, Luk_22:29; and again concealed throughout the forty days during which He gave them instruction concerning “the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.” Act_1:3; Act_1:6-7!—E. R. C.]
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv2–3 The same, &c.--See what property of the Word the…
The same, &c.--See what property of the Word the stress is laid upon--His eternal distinctness, in unity, from God--the Father (Joh 1:2).
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv1, 3 1. In the beginning—Originally: before all things else.
1. In the beginning—Originally: before all things else.
Was the Word—Not was created, or brought into existence, but was. Fix any assignable point as the beginning, and the Word was, and still was. That is, the Word is absolutely eternal.
Read full note →
The Word—As mind manifests itself in the spoken word, so God, the eternal mind, manifests himself in the eternal LOGOS or Word. And as this Word is in Joh_1:14 said to have been made flesh, and in Joh_1:14; Joh_1:18 is called the only begotten of the Father, the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, so this Word by which God manifests his own hidden and unknowable nature is identified with Jesus the Messiah. The propriety and beauty of both the terms Word and Son, to designate that in God by which his absolute essence is revealed in the universe, are such that we might suppose them originated by the mind of the Evangelist himself, under the guidance of inspiration. But we know, historically, that the term Word is used in a somewhat similar sense in the Old Testament, in the old Jewish Targums, in the Jewish apocryphal writings, by the Greek philosopher, Plato, and Greekish Jew, Philo, of Alexandria. Consult Watson’s Institutes, Part II, chap. 12. and Clarke’s excellent notes on John 1. In the Old Testament the first chapter of Genesis describes the creation as taking place at the divine word spoken. We have, Gen_15:1, “The WORD of the Lord came to Abraham.” 1Sa_3:21, “The Lord revealed himself by the word of the Lord.” 2Sa_7:21, “For thy word’s sake.” In the Targums we find the term Word, (Memra,) used for God revealing himself. Thus they say, “The Word [Memra] of Jehovah creates man.” “Jehovah thy God, his Word [Memra] goeth before thee.” “The Lord said unto his Word.” Philo applies such passages as we have above quoted from the Old Testament expressly to the Logos. He describes the Logos as being the image of God, the second God, the eldest son of the eternal Father, etc. The term Logos being thus prepared and used by uninspired writers and in different systems, John adapts and limits it to the true Christian use. This Logos, as now defined, is the second person in the Holy Trinity, incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ. The term “Word” is used in the New Testament by John alone in this sense.
Was with God—Literal Greek, was TO God. The eternal word was inherent to, in, with, God. This mysterious inherence is, as Asthanasius said, “hid by the wings of the cherubim.”
The Word was God—The Arians, who hold that the Word is inferior in essence to the supreme God, though superior to all other finite beings, read this clause the Word was a god. But there is no reason for interpreting this word God differently from the same word in the former part of this verse, or from the same word, God, in Joh_1:6; Joh_1:12-13, etc. The Arian hypothesis has a strong tendency to polytheism.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv1–3 1–5. The Word in His own Nature
1–5. The Word in His own Nature
1. In the beginning] The meaning must depend on the context. In Gen_1:1 it is an act done ‘in the beginning;’ here it is a Being existing ‘in the beginning,’ and therefore prior to all beginning. That was the first moment of time; this is eternity, transcending time. Thus we have an intimation that the later dispensation is the confirmation and infinite extension of the first. ‘In the beginning’ here equals ‘before the world was,’ Joh_17:5. Compare Joh_17:24; Eph_1:4; and contrast ‘the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ,’ Mar_1:1, which is the historical beginning of the public ministry of the Messiah (Joh_6:64): ‘the beginning’ here is prior to all history. To interpret ‘Beginning’ of God as the Origin of all things is not correct, as the context shews.
Read full note →
was] Not ‘came into existence,’ but was already in existence before the creation of the world. The generation of the Word or Son of God is thus thrown back into eternity. Thus S. Paul calls Him (Col_1:15) ‘the firstborn of every creature,’ or (more accurately translated) ‘begotten before all creation,’ like ‘begotten before all worlds’ in the Nicene creed. Comp. Heb_1:8; Heb_7:3; Rev_1:8. On these passages is based the doctrine of the Eternal Generation of the Son: see Articles of Religion, i. and ii. The Arians maintained that there was a period when the Son was not: S. John says distinctly that the Son or Word was existing before time began, i.e. from all eternity.
the Word] As early as the second century Sermo and Verbum were rival translations of the Greek term Logos = Word. Tertullian (fl. a.d. 195–210) gives us both, but seems himself to prefer Ratio. Sermo first became unusual, and finally was disallowed in the Latin Church. The Latin versions all adopted Verbum, and from it comes our translation, ‘the Word.’
None of these translations are at all adequate: but neither Latin nor any modern language supplies anything really satisfactory. Verbum and ‘the Word’ do not give the whole of even one of the two sides of Logos: the other side, which Tertullian tried to express by Ratio, is not touched at all; for ὁ λόγος means not only ‘the spoken word,’ but ‘the thought’ expressed by the spoken word; it is the spoken word as expressive of thought. It is not found in the N.T. in the sense of ‘reason.’
The expression Logos is a remarkable one; all the more so, because S. John assumes that his readers will at once understand it. This shews that his Gospel was written in the first instance for his own disciples, who would be familiar with his teaching and phraseology.
Whence did S. John derive the expression, Logos? It has its origin in the Targums, or paraphrases of the Hebrew Scriptures, in use in Palestine, rather than in the mixture of Jewish and Greek philosophy prevalent at Alexandria and Ephesus, as is very commonly asserted.
(1). In the Old Testament we find the Word or Wisdom of God personified, generally as an instrument for executing the Divine Will. We have a faint trace of it in the ‘God said’ of Gen_1:3; Gen_1:6; Gen_1:9; Gen_1:11; Gen_1:14, &c. The personification of the Word of God begins to appear in the Psa_33:6; Psa_107:20; Psa_119:89; Psa_147:15. In Proverbs 8, 9 the Wisdom of God is personified in very striking terms. This Wisdom is manifested in the power and mighty works of God; that God is love is a revelation yet to come. (2) In the Apocrypha the personification is more complete than in O.T. In Ecclesiasticus (c. b. c. 150–100) Sir_1:1-20, Sir_24:1-22, and in the Book of Wisdom (c. b. c. 100) Wis_6:22 to Wis_9:18 we have Wisdom strongly personified. In Wis_18:15 the ‘Almighty Word’ of God appears as an agent of vengeance. (3) In the Targums, or Aramaic paraphrases of O.T., the development is carried still further. These, though not yet written down, were in common use among the Jews in our Lord’s time; and they were strongly influenced by the growing tendency to separate the Godhead from immediate contact with the material world. Where Scripture speaks of a direct communication from God to man, the Targums substituted the Memra, or ‘Word of God.’ Thus in Gen_3:8-9, instead of ‘they heard the voice of the Lord God,’ the Targums have ‘they heard the voice of the Word of the Lord God;’ and instead of ‘God called unto Adam,’ they put ‘the Word of the Lord called unto Adam,’ and so on. ‘The Word of the Lord’ is said to occur 150 times in a single Targum of the Pentateuch. In the theosophy of the Alexandrine Jews, which was a compound of theology with philosophy and mysticism, we seem to come nearer to a strictly personal view of the Divine Word or Wisdom, but really move further away from it. Philo, the leading representative of this religious speculation (fl. a.d. 40–50), admitted into his philosophy very various, and not always harmonious elements. Consequently his conception of the Logos is not fixed or clear. On the whole his Logos means some intermediate agency, by means of which God created material things and communicated with them. But whether this Logos is one Being or more, whether it is personal or not, we cannot be sure; and perhaps Philo himself was undecided. Certainly his Logos is very different from that of S. John; for it is scarcely a Person, and it is not the Messiah. And when we note that of the two meanings of Λόγος, Philo dwells most on the side which is less prominent, while the Targums insist on that which is more prominent in the teaching of S. John, we cannot doubt the source of his language. The Logos of Philo is preeminently the Divine Reason. The Memra of the Targums is rather the Divine Word; i.e. the Will of God manifested in personal action; and this rather than a philosophical abstraction of the Divine Intelligence is the starting point of S. John’s expression.
To sum up:—the personification of the Divine Word in O.T. is poetical, in Philo metaphysical, in S. John historical. The Apocrypha and Targums help to fill the chasm between O.T. and Philo; history itself fills the far greater chasm which separates all from S. John. Between Jewish poetry and Alexandrine speculation on the one hand, and the Fourth Gospel on the other, lies the historical fact of the Incarnation of the Logos, the life of Jesus Christ.
The Logos of S. John, therefore, is not a mere attribute of God, but the Son of God, existing from all eternity, and manifested in space and time in the Person of Jesus Christ. In the Logos had been hidden from eternity all that God had to say to man; for the Logos was the living expression of the nature, purposes, and Will of God. (Comp. the impersonal designation of Christ in 1Jn_1:1.) Human thought had been searching in vain for some means of connecting the finite with the Infinite, of making God intelligible to man and leading man up to God. S. John knew that he possessed the key to this enigma. He therefore took the phrase which human reason had lighted on in its gropings, stripped it of its misleading associations, fixed it by identifying it with the Christ, and filled it with that fulness of meaning which he himself had derived from Christ’s own teaching.
with God] i.e. with the Father. ‘With’ = apud, or the French chez: it expresses the distinct Personality of the Logos. We might render ‘face to face with God,’ or ‘at home with God.’ So, ‘His sisters, are they not all with us?’ Mat_13:56; comp. Mar_6:3; Mar_9:19; Mar_14:49; 1Co_16:7; Gal_1:18; 1Th_3:4; Phm_1:13; 1Jn_1:2.
the Word was God] i.e. the Word partook of the Divine Nature, not was identical with the Divine Person. The verse may be thus paraphrased, ‘the Logos existed from all eternity, distinct from the Father, and equal to the Father.’ Comp. ‘neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance.’
Chap. Joh_1:1-18. The Prologue or Introduction
That the first eighteen verses are introductory is universally admitted: commentators are not so unanimous as to the main divisions of this introduction. A division into three nearly equal parts has much to commend it:
1. The Word in His own Nature (Joh_1:1-5).
2. His Revelation to men and rejection by them (Joh_1:6-13).
3. His Revelation of the Father (Joh_1:14-18).
Some throw the second and third part into one, thus:
2. The historical manifestation of the Word (Joh_1:6-18).
Others again divide into two parts thus:
1. The Word in His absolute eternal Being (Joh_1:1).
2. The Word in relation to Creation (Joh_1:2-18).
And there are other schemes besides these. In any scheme the student can scarcely fail to feel that the first verse is unique. Throughout the prologue the three great characteristics of this Gospel, simplicity, subtlety, and sublimity, are specially conspicuous; and the majesty of the first verse surpasses all. The Gospel of the Son of Thunder opens with a peal.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv1–3 (1) In the beginning.—The reference to the opening words…
(1) In the beginning.—The reference to the opening words of the Old Testament is obvious, and is the more striking when we remember that a Jew would constantly speak of and quote from the book of Genesis as Berçshîth (“in the beginning”). It is quite in harmony with the Hebrew tone of this Gospel to do so, and it can hardly be that St. John wrote his Berçshîth without having that of Moses present to his mind, and without being guided by its meaning. We have then, in the earlier words, a law of interpretation for the later, and this law excludes every such sense as “the Everlasting Father” or “the divine wisdom,” which is before all things, though both these have been supported by here and there a name of weight; much more does this law, strengthened as it is by the whole context, exclude any such sense as “the commencement of Christ’s work on earth,” which owes its existence to the foregone conclusion of a theory, and is marked by the absence of any support of weight. Our law seems equally to exclude from these words the idea of “anteriority to time,” which is expressed, not in them, but in the substantive verb which immediately follows. The Mosaic conception of “beginning” is marked by the first creative act. St. John places himself at the same starting point of time, but before he speaks of any creation he asserts the pre-existence of the Creator. In this “beginning” there already “was” the Word. (See expressions of this thought in Joh_17:5; Pro_8:23; 1Jn_1:1; Rev_3:14.)
Was the Word.—See Excursus A: Doctrine of the Word.
Read full note →
With God.—These words express the co-existence, but at the same time the distinction of person. They imply relation with, intercourse with. (Comp. the “in the bosom of the Father” of Joh_1:18, and “Let us make man” of Gen_1:26.) “Throned face to face with God,” “the gaze ever directed towards God,” have been given as paraphrases, and the full sense cannot be expressed in fewer words. The “with” represents “motion towards.” The Being whose existence is asserted in the “was” is regarded as distinct, but not alone, as ever going forth in communion with God. (Comp. the use of the same word “with” in Mat_13:56; Mat_26:11; Mar_6:3; Mar_9:19; 1Co_16:6-7; Gal_1:18; Gal_4:18.)
Was God.—This is the completion of the graduated statement. It maintains the distinction of person, but at the same time asserts the oneness of essence.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv1–3 The first part of the Gospel, consisting of ch.…
The first part of the Gospel, consisting of ch. 1-4, we have already described as
I THE REVELATION OF THE LOGOS TO THE WORLD.
Read full note →
Vers. 1-18. 1. The hypothesis framed by the evangelist to account for the series of facts which he is about to narrate is seen especially in ver. 14; but before asserting this great fact that the Word was made flesh, he proceeds to show
(1) The pre-existence, personality, and Divinity of the Logos.
In the beginning was the Word. From early times expositors have perceived that the evangelist essayed here a comparison with the en arch ("in the beginning") of the first verse of the Book of Genesis. This can hardly be doubted; but the resemblance immediately ceases or is transformed into an antithesis; for whereas the Mosaic narrative proceeds to indicate the beginning of the creation and of time by saying, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth," this passage asserts that the Word then was. He was neither created, nor did he then begin to be. Consequently, there is no reason to gather from this passage the temporal origin of "the Word," or from the first verse of Genesis to argue the eternity of matter. The writer here shows that he was profoundly impressed by the Lord"s own self-consciousness which permitted his disciples to believe in a personal Being and glory "before the world was," and "before the foundation of the world". (Joh_17:5, Joh_17:24) The idea of existence before the world is attributed to the Divine (Sophia or) wisdom. (Pro_8:23 and elsewhere; 1Jn_1:1) The same apostle speaks moreover of "that which was (ap archv) from the beginning," but has been manifested to us. The interpretations which made the arch mean, with Cyril, the Divine "Father;" the Valentinian notion that arch was a distinct hypothesis, distinct from the Father or from the Logos; Origen"s notion that it meant the "Divine Wisdom;" the Socinian view that it referred to "the beginning of the preaching of the gospel; are not now seriously maintained. "The beginning of time" launches the mind into the abyss of the eternal now. At that starting point of all creation and all Divine manifestation, "the Word was. " It would be difficult to express in human speech more explicitly the idea of eternal existence. In Greek usage and philosophy the term LOGOS sustained the double sense of reason or thought immanent in the supreme Godhead (logov endiayetov), and also of "speech" or "word" (logov proforikov ). Attempts have often been made to identify the logov of John with the former phase of its meaning common to Plato or Philo, and to find in the prologue the metaphysical speculations of the Alexandrine school to identify the logov with the Philonic conception of the kosmov nohtikov , with the Divine "idea of all ideas," the archetype of the universe, the personality of God personified, or the Divine self-consciousness. But Philo"s entire system of philosophy by which he tried to explain the creation of the world, his theory of the Logos which was abhorrent to and entirely incapable of incarnation, which was based on a thorough going dualism, which was significantly reticent as to the Messianic idea, and knew nothing of the hopes or national anticipations of Israel, was not the source either of John"s revelation or nomenclature (see Introduction). The disciple of the Baptist and of Jesus found in Holy Scripture itself both the phraseology and the idea which he here unfolds and applies. The New Testament writers never use the term Logos to denote "reason," or "thought," or "self-consciousness," but always, denote by it "speech," "utterance," or "word the forthcoming, the clothing of thought, the manifestation of reason or purpose, but neither the "thought," nor the "reason," nor the "purpose" itself. The term is used here without explanation, as though it would be well understood by its readers. Numerous explanations have been offered in later times, which are far from satisfactory. Thus Beza regarded the term as identical with o legomenov , "the Promised One the Personage spoken of by the prophets. This, even with Hofmann"s modification of it, viz. "the Word of God, or Gospel, the great theme of which is the personal Christ," breaks to pieces as soon as it is referred to the various predicates which follow, and especially to the statement of ver. 14, that "the Word was made flesh, and tabernacled amongst us." Readers of the Old Testament would not forget that, in the record of the creation in Genesis 1., the epochs of creation are defined eight times by the expression, "And God said." The omnific Word uttered itself in time, and thus called into being "light" and "life" and "all things," and gave birth to man. The record thus preserved is confirmed by the corresponding teaching of the Psalms: "By the Word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth". (cf. 1Sa_3:21 Psa_33:6 Psa_107:20 Psa_148:5 Isa_55:10, Isa_55:11) Moreover, the Scripture in the Book of Proverbs, (Pr 8,pr 9) Job, (Job_28:12) as well as the apocryphal Books of Wisdom, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, had set forth the Divine "wisdom," hmkj, sofia , with more or less of personification and even personal dignity, answering to the creative energy and resources here attributed to the Logos. From eternity was it brought forth, in the beginning of all God"s ways. "The Lord possessed me," Wisdom says, "before his works." In the controversy of the third and fourth centuries the LXX translation in Pro_8:22 of hnq by ektise led Arius and others to the idea of the creation of the Logos before all worlds. The Vulgate translation, "possessed me," is a far closer approach to the original. The whole of the passage, Pro_8:22-27, is in correspondence with the functions and dignity of him who is here described as "in the beginning with God." The Jewish translators and commentators had so thoroughly grasped the idea, that they were accustomed, in their Chaldee paraphrases of the Old Testament, to substitute for the name of the Most High, the phrase Memra-Jah, "The Word of the Lord," as though the Lord, in his activities and energies, and in his relations with the universe and man, could be better understood under the form of this periphrasis than in that which connoted his eternal and absolute Being. The Targum of Onkelos the oldest, most accurate, and precious of these documents in numerous places substitutes "the Word of the Lord" for Jehovah, "the Word of Elohim" for Elohim and "the Word of the Lord" for the angel or messenger of Jehovah. Thus in Gen_7:16 it is said, "The Lord protected Noah by his Word;" Joh_21:20, "The Word of the Lord was with Ishmael in the wilderness." In Gen_28:21 Jacob made a covenant that "the Word of the Lord should be his God;" Exo_19:17, "Moses brought forth the people to meet the Word of God." The term Deburah, which is analogous in meaning to Memra, is also used in the Jerusalem Targum of Num_7:89 in a similar sense. The substitution was adopted in the same way by Jonathan ben Uziel, in his paraphrase of Isa_63:7 and Mal_3:1, so that the Jewish mind was thoroughly imbued with this method of portraying the instrument and agent of the Divine revelations, as one savouring of the smallest amount of anthropomorphism, which they were willing to attribute to the Holy One of Israel. Another group of highly important biblical representations of the activity and self-revelation of God consists of the personal "Angel (or Messenger) of Jehovah," who not infrequently appears, even in human form, conversing with the patriarchs, and making covenant with man. (see Gen_32:24, etc.; Exo_33:12, etc.; Hos_12:4 Isa_63:9 Mal_3:1 and other places) In some of these passages the Name of Jehovah himself is attributed to his Angel, and the form of Divine manifestation becomes more and more clearly personal. Nevertheless, this Angel appears to stand within, rather than without, the very bosom of the Eternal One. Jehovah does not lose his Name of unapproachable dignity and absolute existence while yet he clothes himself with angelic powers, or even human form, and enters into living and intimate relations with his own people. Kurtz ("Old Covenant," vol. 1. pp. 181-201) has urged that the numerous references in Old Testament to the "Angel Jehovah," are compatible with the idea of a created spirit, endowed with plenipotentiary functions and titles, and perfectly distinct from the Logos. " The strength of his position is that during the Incarnation and afterwards the New Testament writers still speak of the activity and might of "the Angel of the Lord." But this position is greatly modified by the obvious fact that the Logos did not become depotentiated and limited to the life of Jesus during the thirty years of his earthly manifestation. During the whole of that period, and ever since, the Logos has not ceased to exercise the functions which belong to his eternal glory. It cannot be said that Philo was ignorant of these modes of expression, though in the main he allows the idea of "Word" to pass away from the terra logov , and he charged it with a meaning which he found in Platonic and stoical philosophy, and used it, not in the historic or theocratic sense, which was current in the Palestinian schools, but in the metaphysic and speculative sense which enabled him to make the Hebrew Scriptures the vehicle of his ethical system. Word, in the Old Testament and in the Chaldee Paraphrases, represented the nearest possible approach to a definition of the activity and revelations of God; and. that activity is regarded, not as a mere attribute, but as an essential and personal aspect of the Eternal One. In the hands of the Apostle John (unlike Philo"s), the Logos was a distinct hypostasis, identifiable with God, and yet in union and relation with him. He was "in the beginning," and therefore before all creation. He did not become. He was not made. He was. As speech answers to the immanent realities of which it is expression, the idea of John in this first verse suggests, though the suggestion does not come into further expression, the "thought" or "reason" which evermore was shaping itself into "word." It would seem as though the apostle had been led to gather together into one teaching the various suggestions of the Old Testament. He realized the significance of the omnific Word. He embodied and improved upon the sapiential philosophy in its conception of Divine Wisdom, of the Brightness of the Father"s glory, and the express Image of his substance; he felt the force and justice of the Hebrew periphrases for God, the only God, in his gracious relations with man; and he was not ignorant of the speculations of the Hellenists who found in this term the phasis of all Divine self-consciousness, and the symbol of pure being in its relation with the universe. In the beginning the Logos was. And the Word (Logos) was with God (pron Yeon). The preposition is difficult to translate; it is equivalent to "was in relation with God,...stood over against," not in space or time, but eternally and constitutionally. It is more, even, than the para soi ; (Joh_17:5) for, in addition to the idea of proximity, there is that of "motion towards" involved in prov . A verb of rest is here combined with a preposition of motion, exactly as in wn eiv tolpon of ver. 15. In Mar_6:3 9:19 Mat_13:36 Mat_26:55 1Co_16:6, 7 Gal_1:18 the similar use of prov shows that the idea of intercourse is suggested, and mutual acquaintance, so that the personality of the Logos is therefore strongly forced upon us. The strength and peculiarity of the expression precludes the interpretation of some who see here simply some "intuition in the Divine mind," or that "the Word was eternally in the Divine plan." There is relation between these two, laying the foundations of all ethic in the nature and subsistence of Deity. Righteousness and love are inconceivable perfections of an Eternal Monad. But if within the bosom of God there are affirmations, hypostases in relation with each other, the moral nature of the Eternal is assured. Philo"s conception of Logos as "the sum total of all Divine energies made it possible for him to urge that God, so far as he reveals himself, is called Logos, and Logos, so far as he reveals God, is called God" (Meyer). But this falls short of the Johannine thought. The Logos was with the God (ton) was in relation with the Supreme and Absolute One, was in eternal communion with him. The notion of "Logos" limited to the mere revelation of the Divine to the universe, or the Mediator or Archangel of the Divine counsels to men, is seen to be insufficient. The pron implies communion as anterior to revelation. And the (Logos) Word was God. Though Yeov precedes the verb, yet the disposition of the article shows that it is the predicate, and not the subject, of the sentence. The absence of the article is important. If Yeov had been written with the article, then the sentence would have identified the Logov and Yeov , and reduced the distinction expressed in the previous clause to one that is purely modal or subjective. Again, he does not say Yeiov , Divine, which, seeing the lofty dignity of the Logos, would have been a violation of the eternal unity, and have corresponded with the deuterov Yeov which Philo attributed to the Logos; but he says Yeov simply (not Yeou , according to Crellius, for which there is no justification) God in his nature, essence, and kind; God, i.e., as distinct from man, from angel, or from the kosmos itself. Thus the Son is not confounded with the Father, but declared to be of the same ousia , the same fusiv . Though with God when God is regarded in all the fulness of his eternal being, he is nevertheless of the same order and kind and substance. Luther translates the passage, "Gott war das Wort," but this translation jars on the sublime symmetry of the whole passage, which is not concerned with definitions of God, but with revelations concerning the Logos.
Vers. 1, 2. Prologue of the Gospel.
The prologue is in harmony with the design of a biographic history which is to set forth Jesus Christ as the Son of God. The Fourth Gospel is thus a distinct advance, dogmatically, upon the other Gospels, for Matthew exhibits him in his Messianic royalty; Mark, as the Son of man and the Servant of God; Luke, as the Son of man and Saviour of the race of man, without distinction of Jew or Gentile. The Apostle John exhibits him in the glorious activity of his Divine nature.
I THE SUBJECT OF THE PROLOGUE. "The Word." Jesus Christ is the Word as he is the essential Revealer of the Divine Being. "There is in the Divine Essence a principle by which God reveals himself the Logos; and a principle by which he communicates himself the Spirit." Christ is "the express Image of the Father"s Person", (Heb_1:3) just as a word is an image or picture of a thought. But he is also the Interpreter of the Divine will. "The only begotten Son hath declared the Father", (Joh_1:18) through Creation, through prophets, through the Incarnation. He was called the Word.
1. Not as man; for as man he was not in the beginning with God, neither was he Creator.
2. He was the Word before he was man; for it was as the Word he became flesh (ver. 14).
3. He was the Word as he was the Son of God only begotten Son of the Father.
4. Yet he is called here the Word rather than the Son of God, because the Jews were familiar with this name as applied to the Messiah, and, as has been suggested, the apostle would not at first alienate their hearts by the title "Son of God," which was so offensive to the unbelieving Jews. (Joh_10:30, Joh_10:33)
II THE ESSENTIAL NATURE OF THE WORD.
1. He is an absolute Eternal Being. "In the beginning was the Word.
(1) The beginning carries us back to the initial point of time. As the "beginning" of the Book of Genesis starts from that point, dating Creation from it, the apostle carries us still further back, even beyond "the beginning.
(2) The Word existed in the beginning. The word "was" suggests a continuous state. The Word was therefore in existence before time and before Creation. It was "before all things." It was from all eternity. Jesus spoke of the glory which he had with the Father "before the world was". (Joh_17:5)
(3) This passage condemns alike the Socinian and the Arian theories; for it asserts, against the first, that Christ had an existence before his birth at Bethlehem; and, against the second, that he existed before the highest angels, who are created beings, for he "was," not "he was created." Basil says, "These two terms, "beginning" and "was," are like two anchors," which the ship of a man"s soul may safely ride at, whatever storms of heresy may come. There never, therefore, was a time when Christ was not.
2. He is a distinct Person from God, yet one with him. "And the Word was with God." Coleridge remarks upon the significance of the preposition (prov) as implying that the Word was "with God," not in the sense of coexistence, or local proximity, or communion, but of mysterious relation with God. The preposition implies that the Word was with God, before he revealed God. The distinct personality of the Son is asserted against the error of the Sabellians, who held that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are but three Names of one Person. The "life eternal" was not only "manifested to men," but it was "with the Father". (1Jn_1:2) Not with God, as if to emphasize the distinction of Persons in the Godhead; not with men or angels, for they were yet to be created; but with the Father in eternal glory. "It was he," says Pearson, "to whom the Father said, "Let us make man in our image. We have no mental capacity to explain the oneness of essence, any more than the distinctness of Persons, in the Godhead. The apostle does not say that "God was with God," but that the "Word was with God." We therefore receive believingly the words of our Lord himself, "I am in the Father, and the Father in me;" "I and the Father are one;" "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father," as different expressions of the same Divine truth.
3. He is God. "And the Word was God." The passage asserts the Divinity of Jesus Christ our Lord in the plainest terms. It places him within the unity of the Godhead. The Son is, therefore, not inferior to the Father. The text refutes the Arians, who say he is a super-angelic Being inferior to God; the Socinians, who say he is only Man; and the Sabellians, who deny any distinction of Persons in the Trinity.
4. The doctrine of the Trinity is a deep mystery, but it is fundamental in Christianity. Therefore the apostle reiterates the eternity, the personality, the oneness of the Word with God. "The same was in the beginning with God." Some person might say there was a time when the Word was not a distinct Person in the Trinity. The statement is made that the same Person, who was eternal and Divine, was from eternity a distinct Person of the Godhead. Well may we say with Bernard, "It is rashness to search too far into it. It is piety to believe it. It is life eternal to know it!"
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv1–3 In the beginning was the Word
Joh_1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word
Read full note →
I.
THE APOSTLE ASSERTS THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST.
1. His name: the Word.
(1) He is the chief subject of Revelation--the Word of promise--the substance of all shadows, types, and prophecies.
(2) The medium of Gods communications with the world. To Him the Father communicates Himself in counsel; He, as the Wisdom of God, communicates the Fathers counsels to men.
2. His eternity. Not from, but in, the beginning.
3. His distinct personality and co-existence with the Father.
II. THE APOSTLE CONFIRMS HIS STATEMENT BY REFERRING TO CHRISTS PRE-INCARNATE MANIFESTATION TO THE WORLD.
1. The worlds and the things in them are not eternal. Reason teaches us that there must have been a first cause.
2. All things were made by the Word (Col_1:16; Heb_1:2).
3. He Himself was not made; therefore cannot be a creature, however exalted, such as Socinians, Mohammedans, and Arians represent Him.
4. Every form of life is in Him, of whatever rank, from inanimate matter up to rational and spiritual man.
5. All light proceeds from Him.
6. The restoration of the ruined is by Him. Souls in the darkness of death are illumined and revived by Him. (A. Beith, D. D.)
I. THE RELATION OF THE WORD TO GOD, as possessing the Divine nature and existing with God before creation.
II. THE RELATION OF THE WORD TO THE UNIVERSE, as its Creator.
III. THE RELATION OF THE WORD TO MEN, as being the source of life and light to them.
IV. THE RELATION OF THE WORD TO FALLEN HUMANITY, as shining in the darkness, though the darkness comprehended it not. (W. Perkins.)
Practical reflections
I. WOULD WE KNOW THE EXCEEDING SINFULNESS OF SIN? Let us read these verses. If no one less than the Eternal God, the Creator and Preserver of all things, could take away the sin of the world, sin must be a far more abominable thing in the sight of God than most men suppose. If Christ is so great, then sin must indeed be sinful!
II. WOULD WE KNOW THE STRENGTH OF A TRUE CHRISTIANS FOUNDATION FOR HOPE? Let us often read these verses. Let us mark that the Saviour in whom the believer is bid to trust is nothing less than the Eternal God, One able to save to the uttermost all that come to the Father by Him. He that was with God, and was God, is also Emmanuel, God with us. (Bp. Ryle.)
Christ and God
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (Joh_1:1). As the translation ofthis passage cannot be improved, and the words are plain, no verbal exegesis is required. The subject is Christ and God, and we are here taught
I. THAT CHRIST IS THE ETERNAL REVEALER OF GOD. In the beginning was the Word--the Logos. He is not a word but the word. As the Revealer, this Word is distinguished
1. By its faithfulness. Christ is the exact exponent of the Divine intellect and heart.
2. By its fulness. Other words only speak part of God.
3. By its forcefulness. Human words are sometimes powerful, they are not always air; they are sometimes a force. Gods words in nature are mighty.
II. THAT CHRIST IS THE ETERNAL SELF OF GOD. And the Word was with God. The expression implies that He had a conscious existence distinct from the Absolute One. He was with Him. He that is with me is not me.
1. Christ was with Him in the sense of agreement. There was a perfect concurrence.
2. Christ was with him in the sense of contact. Never out of His presence, living in His light, breathing His inspirations.
III. THAT CHRIST IS THE ETERNAL SELF OF GOD. And the Word was God.
1. He was God in form. Deep, it would seem, in the constitution of moral soul, is the craving for some form of God. As He appears in the universe, He transcends the limits of human vision. Christ is the form He has assumed; the form in which, in all probability, He appears to His intelligent universe as well as to man.
2. He was God in action. Through Him the eternal volitions are carried out and realized. He is the Actualizer of Gods eternal ideas. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
The Word made flesh
A fourfold contrast.
I. In respect of ESSENCE. Word and flesh. The first suggests pure spirituality, power, eternity; the second materiality, weakness, mortality.
II. In respect of EXISTENCE. In the beginning the Word was. In time the Word was made flesh. The eternal becomes an infant of days. He who was in the beginning, and had.no beginning, has also an existence numbered by every year that passes away.
III. In respect of ASSOCIATION. With God; among us. In perfect holiness and blessedness; acquainted with grief and beset by sin. In the bosom of the Eternal Father, receiving and returning infinite love; and in the arms of a human mother, soon to taste the hatred and cruelty of man.
IV. In respect of NATURE. The supreme contrast. He who was God became man. In man are united spirit and matter, angel and brute, seraph and clay. But what extremes meet in Christ! Creator and creature, eternity and time; and these in unbroken union. (W. Perkins.)
The Word
I. The ETERNITY of the Word.
1. By the phrase in the beginning is to be understood eternity. Had St. John said before the beginning, he would have presented eternity under the laws of time, a mistake as grave as to describe the Infinite under the conditions of the finite. But mounting up higher than time and space, he leads us to the calm where God dwelleth.
2. Four times he repeats the word was; which
(1) Joined with beginning, makes the idea of eternity dawn upon the mind in all its awful grandeur.
(2) Joined to with God, involves a contrast with verse 3. The sun, moon, and stars in the beginning were made; the Word in the beginning was. His existence and theirs consequently differ radically.
(3) Joined to God contrasts with verse 14. In the beginning was the Word; in the fulness of time the Word was made flesh.
3. Christ always existed as the Word. It was not in the course of history that He became the Word. In His pre-existence Jesus Christ is God speaking to Himself; in His post-existence God speaking to us. The same word He speaks to Himself and to us; therefore it has the same meaning on the Divine as on the human side.
II. The PERSONALITY of the Word.
1. The Word was with God in respect of personality. Omnipotence is eternally in God; Jesus Christ is eternally with God--a mode of speech signifying distinct, but not separate, personal subsistence. God spent eternity in self-communion; but He so far transcends us in the power of thinking that His ideas become realities. His one thought becomes a Word consubstantial with Himself.
2. He was with God in respect of complacency. God took unspeakable delight in His Word, for in Him He beheld His own portraiture, without defect, fault, or flaw. God, as Father, infinitely, eternally, loves the Son. This intense love the Son cherishes towards the Father. He was not simply with, but towards, God. He had His face, so to speak, turned fully towards Him, returning all the wealth of thought and affection poured upon Him. With the perfect thinker the perfect Word reflects back the perfect thought. A further idea still lurks here. The Word was at home with God. Christ in His preexistent state never felt restrained or ill at ease as an inferior with a superior, but as a loving child with an indulgent father Pro_8:22-31); not as a subject in the presence of his monarch, or a creature in the presence of his Creator, but as an equal in the society of his friend.
3. He was with God in respect of counsel or purpose.
(1) In respect of creative counsel. All things were gathered together in the pre-existent Christ (Rev_3:4; Col_1:15-16).
(2) In respect of redemptive purpose. In the centre of the earth all the mountains meet. In the centre all terrestrial objects stand together. Similarly Christ is the centre of the plan of our salvation (Eph_1:3-4).
III. The proper DIVINITY of the Word.
1. Was God implies co-equality. Two persons may be in amicable fellowship, whilst in nature and standing the one may be inferior to the other.
(1) As Mediator, indeed, in His state of humiliation, Christ was the Fathers subordinate and servant; wherefore He says, My Father is greater than I.
(2) But as He is the Second Person in the Trinity, St. John teaches His equality with the Father. The idea of perfect sonship excludes that of subordination. The man of forty is as much a son as a child of four; the fact of sonship is undiminished, but subordination is gone. But Jesus Christ is from the first a perfect Son, and therefore on a footing of equality with the perfect Father.
(3) The Son being thus equal with the Father, God will have no occasion to repeat His Word. The perfect revelation is summed up in one word--Jesus Christ.
2. Was God teaches consubstantiality. The Word was with God; there it is God with the article denoting the Fathers person; here without the article indicating substance, being. The Son can never be the Father; but is of the same essence as.the Father--of the same, not of like; homo-ousia, not homoiousia.
3. Let us therefore hold fast the doctrine once delivered to the saints. Beware of running away with the notion that all the intellects are opposed to orthodoxy. The acute intellects may be, but the profound intellects, which see far and deep, are not. (J. Cynddylan Jones, D. D.)
The Word
1. As the mental work in man is the thought of the mind by which the mind holds converse with itself insensibly--that is, without effort and without passion or emotion--and is the perfect image and similitude of the mind from which it proceeds, so does the Son derive a free and unseen origin from the Father, being His express image and similitude.
2. As the mind holds converse with itself by its own thought and cogitation, and sees and knows itself and all things by means of this thought, so does the Father see Himself as in a mirror in the person of His Son.
3. As the intellectual, immaterial word abides in mans mind, so does the Divine Word abide and remain in the bosom of the Father. (W. Denton, M. A.)
1. Where the Word was--in the beginning.
2. Where the Word was--with God.
3. What the Word was--God. (Beaux Amis.)
The resemblance between the Written and the Personal Word
I. CHRIST IS DIVINE-HUMAN.
1. He assumed into union with His Godhead a human soul, a human body, and an animal nature. He hungered, thirsted, was fatigued, and had as real a need of meat, drink, and sleep as other men.
2. He grew, not only in stature, but in wisdom.
3. As regarded His human mind, He knew not the time of the consummation of all things.
4. He was as much mixed up with the manifold, humbling, petty details of daily life as any of us.
5. But every now and then there flashed rays of that glory which He had with the Father before the world was.
II. THE WRITTEN WORD IS DIVINE-HUMAN.
1. Its Divine element is twofold.
(1) Inspiration, which pervades the whole of it.
(2) Revelation, which characterizes the most important parts of it--the creation, the whole range of prophecy, the law, the gospel.
2. It is perfectly human--a fact attested by the variety of its style. It is coloured with the human mind, affections, experiences, reasonings.
3. This human element gives the Scriptures that geniality which wakens so many chords in our hearts, and which makes us find them such a sympathetic book. If they spoke only the tongues of angels they might reveal to us mysteries, impress and even scare us, but where would their comfort be?
4. Like the Personal Word, the Written Word, though both human and Divine, is but one book; inasmuch as all its treatises were given by inspiration of one Spirit, who did for them what the living soul does for the animal frame--gave them a regular organization and development which makes the Bible truly and really one body.
III. THE PERFECT HUMANITY OF THE WRITTEN WORD INVOLVES ITS BRING COMPASSED WITH INFIRMITY, AS THE WRITTEN WORD WAS. Hence the weaknesses of its human language and thought.
1. In censuring sin it speaks with a fidelity which our false delicacy does not relish, and which no uninspired preacher would dare to imitate.
2. Frequently the writers descend to matters of comparatively local, temporal, and mundane interest.
3. They were unacquainted with scientific truth.
4. In many points they give a handle to the misconstructions of enemies.
IV. THERE IS A GROWTH OF HOLY SCRIPTURE EXACTLY CORRESPONDING TO THE GROWTH OF THE PERSONAL WORD.
1. Prophecy is built up stone upon stone on the foundation of the original promise (Gen_3:15). This promise is handed over to Abraham in an enlarged and expanded form (Gen_12:3). When Abrahams family branches out into twelve tribes, Judah is selected as the tribe in which the promise should run (Gen_49:8; Gen_49:10). As soon as an earthly kingdom is established, David is indicated as the king on whose throne Messiah should sit (2Sa_7:12-16).
2. The Written Word is ever developing itself from Genesis to Revelation. In Genesis you have the dawn of Divine knowledge and thought; in the New Testament you have its noontide blaze. God, Christ, morality, the Fall, justification, sanctification are not seen as clearly in the Old Testament as in the New, nor in the earlier books of the Old as in the later. Yet from first to last it is the very Word of God, as Jesus is; as much exalted above other books as He is by His Divinity above other men.
V. IT EXHIBITS ALL THE SYMPTOMS OF ITS EXALTED CHARACTER AND ORIGIN, It abounds in passages of supernatural sublimity, foresights, revelations of heaven, oracles which seem to vibrate with the voice of the archangel and the trump of God. Like the Personal Word, the Written Word rises up in meek majesty to make those who approach it with hostile intent go backward and fall to the ground; upon it descends the holy dove; over it hangs the bright cloud; it quickens human souls; it says to the stormy sea of the human heart, Peace, be still; before it the demons of lust, pride, covetousness, worldliness, quake and flee. As both in His generation and resurrection and ascension Jesus was declared to be Divine, so both at its commencement, when it stoops down to inaugurate the narrative of earth, and at its close ascends to heaven again and exhibits man purged from all stain, so the Written Word is declared to be the Word of God with power.
VI. IF CHRIST WERE NOT HUMAN, WE SHOULD NOT HAVE THE CONSOLATION OF HIS SYMPATHY; IF THE SCRIPTURES WERE NOT HUMAN, THEY COULD NOT COME HOME AS THEY DO TO HUMAN HEARTS AND CONSCIENCES. Let us therefore regard them with but one whir the less affectionate veneration. There could be no trial of faith if they presented no difficulties. To what shall we go if we give them up? (Dean Goulburn.)
The heavenly analogy of the connection of speech with reason
Mans reason was formed in the image of God, and our Lord is called the Word; these are the two Scriptural intimations which guide us into part of the truth respecting the Divine nature.
1. Reason involves a thing distinct from itself, namely, speech, or the power of communicating the processes of reason, so that whosoever has the faculty of reason has in that faculty the faculty of speech or the Word.
2. Though reason wraps up speech in itself, yet we can conceive of reason as energizing latently, and of the faculty of speech as having no exercise.
3. Neither reason nor speech can make any claim to priority of existence; they are twin faculties, born at the same instant. Now listen to what the Catholic Church has gathered from the Scripture respecting the nature of God.
I. There is a TRINITY IN UNITY, that is, more than one Person in the Divine nature. Mans spirit, the Bible says, was made in the image of that nature. In mans spirit there are two faculties, reason and speech. The second Person in the Divine nature goes by the name of the Word, that is, He stands to the first in the same relation as that in which utterance stands to understanding.
II. St. John intimates that THERE WAS A PERIOD WHEN, although both blessed Persons existed, yet THE SON WAS IN THE BOSOM OF THE FATHER; when, though the Word was, yet the Word came not forth. That is like reason, with the faculty of speech latent in it, not put forth.
III. THE MAJESTY OF THESE PERSONS IS CO-ETERNAL. The administration of this in the human spirit is the twin birth of reason and speech. Speech, then, in the nature of man, represents Christ in the nature of God. What a value and a dignity does this impress on human speech! When you reason and communicate to others the result you adumbrate in the limits of a finite nature, the nature of the Infinite One. Shall any child of man, then, degrade this faculty of speech to vain and profane and unclean communications? (Dean Goulburn.)
The relation of this revelation with that of Gen_1:1-31.
which is an introduction to the story of the first man, as this is an introduction to the story of the second Man, the Lord from heaven. The great words are the same in both cases, though they have evidently deepened in their later use--the beginning, God, the Word (God said), all things, light, darkness,life, to be, to become. While the evangelist begins with creation, he goes very far beyond, and consequently uses many words that were not needed in Genesis, but are indispensable to his purpose, such as law, grace, truth, faith, sons of God and sin. As in Genesis, God is taken for granted. There is no attempt to prove that He is, and there is no notice taken of any denial that He is. With a grand daring of disregard, as if there could be no controversy on such a subject, the paragraph proceeds on the assumption that He is, as beyond question, like a postulate or axiom. (J. Culross, D. D.)
Controversy about Christ
This verse is an unanswerable argument against three classes of heretics. It confutes
1. The Arians, who regard Christ as a Being inferior to God.
2. The Sabellians, who deny any distinction of Persons in the Trinity, and say that God sometimes manifested Himself as Father, sometimes as Son, and sometimes as the Spirit, and that the Father and the Spirit suffered on the cross.
3. The Socinians and Unitarians, who say that Jesus Christ was not God, but man, a most holy and perfect man, but only a man. (Bp.Ryle.)
A notable conversion
A memorable hour arrived in the history of a youth belonging to an honourable French family in the second half of the sixteenth century. Though scarcely fifteen years of age, he had been led by blind guides to unbelief, and the dragons teeth, sown on an unguarded field, had already begun to produce their destructive harvest. His godly father, deeply concerned for his salvation, placed a New Testament in his room, and offered the silent prayer that he might take it and read it. The son did so. His eye rested accidentally upon a passage which, according to his own words, so affected him that he suddenly felt the Divinity of the subject, and, together with the majesty, also the power of the words that so infinitely surpassed the flow of all human eloquence. My whole body was convulsed, he continues, my soul was confounded, and I have been so affected this whole day that I have scarcely been conscious of my own identity. It was not quite twenty-five years after this remarkable event that he was preaching the Gospel of the Reformation at Antwerp, while the light from the blaze of the funeral pile which was consuming his companions in faith shone against the windows of the hall where he preached. And when the pestilence that raged in Leyden in 1602 numbered him among its victims, it was universally acknowledged and lamented that a shining light had set. This young man was the celebrated Professor Francis Junius, and the passage which was the power of God to his salvation was Joh_1:1. (J. J. Van Oosterzee, D. D.)
The nature of Christ perfectly similar and equal to that of the Eternal Father
1. This subject yields m importance to none. The views we take of it will influence those we take of all other doctrines, and must terminate in results which affect Gods glory.
2. Our state of mind should be one of perfect neutrality. The slightest prepossession is incompatible with the love of truth.
3. The language of the Scriptures must be taken in its obvious signification, just as the Jews took Joh_10:30; Joh_15:13.
4. Should this doctrine be clearly taught, no difficulty can affect its certainty or ought to affect our faith.
5. The lines of proof are five.
(1) Divine names are given to Christ.
(2) Divine attributes are ascribed to Him.
(3) Divine works are wrought by Him.
(4) Divine relations are sustained by Him.
(5) Divine worship is demanded by and paid to Him. The line suggested by our text is the first.
I. Christ is called JEHOVAH (Joh_12:37; cf. Isa_6:1-10).
II. GOD (Rom_9:5; Heb_1:8).
III. GREAT GOD (Tit_2:3).
IV. TRUE GOD (1Jn_5:20).
V. MIGHTY GOD (Isa_9:6).
VI. GOD OF ISRAEL (Exo_24:9-10; Psa_68:17-18; Eph_4:8). In reference to these instances:
1. Has any other received such appellations.
2. Compare these appellations with the religious state of the Jews at the time of Christ. They were strict monotheists, as were Christ and the apostles. If, therefore, it was intended to convey the idea of Christs Divinity, no better terms could have been used; but if to convey the idea that He was a mere man, they are totally misleading.
3. Compare these appellations with the state of the Pagan world. They were idolaters, and Christs design and that of His apostles was to deliver them from idolatry. A strange method was employed if Christ were a mere creature.
4. Examine whether events have justified the notion which the prophets gave if Christ be not God. It was predicted that He should utterly abolish idols, and has He not done so?
5. The supposition that the Deity of Christ was taught by the Saviour and His apostles will alone enable us to account for His rejection.
Conclusion:
1. Is the Deity of Christ a doctrine of Scripture? Then how is the accuracy of His precepts ratified? How entire the proof of their conformity to the will of God!
2. Is the Saviour possessed of a Divine nature? How absolutely, therefore, is He able to scrutinize our professions of His gospel!
3. The same truth also invites the utmost confidence in His declarations of mercy and offers of pardon. (J. F. Denham.)
On books
1. What is it which makes men different from all other living beings we know of? Is it not speech--the power of words? The beasts may make one another understand many things, but they have no speech.
2. But where did this power of uttering thoughts come from? The beasts have been on the earth as long as man, and yet they can no more speak than they could when they were created. But Adam could speak at once, and could understand what God said to him. Who gave him that power but Jesus, the Word who was in the beginning with God, and lighteth every man that cometh into the world?
3. By Christ the Word God has spoken to man in all ages. It was He whom Moses and the seventy elders saw, for no man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father He hath declared Him. He put rote Davids mouth those glorious Psalms. The Lord … hath put a new song into my mouth. He, as the Word of God, came unto the prophets. When He became incarnate, He spake as never man spake. And since then He has given to all wise and holy poets, philosophers, and preachers the power to speak and write the wonderful truths they have thought out.
4. Ought not the knowledge of all this
(1) make us better and wiser;
(2) make us reverence the Bible;
(3) reverence all good books?
Except a living man, there is nothing more wonderful than a book, a message from a human soul thousands of miles away which can amuse, terrify, comfort, teach us. Why is it that neither angels, nor saints, nor evil spirits appear now to speak to men as they once did? Because we have books by which Christs messengers and the devils can communicate with us. If they are good and true, they are the message of Christ, the Teacher of all truth. If they are false and wicked, we ought to fear them as evil spirits loosed among us. This is an age of books, a flood of writings of all sorts is spreading over the world. We ought not to stop that. It is Gods ordinance. It is of His grace and mercy that we have a free press. It was dearly bought. The men who died to buy us this liberty knew that it was better to let in a thousand bad books than to shut out one good one, for a grain of Gods truth will outweigh a ton of the devils lies. We cannot silence evil books, but we can take care what we read, and that what we let others read shall be good and wholesome. (Charles Kingsley, M. A.)
The Word of Scripture concerning the beginning
I. THE OLD TESTAMENT WORD IN THE NEW TESTAMENT LIGHT.
II. THE NEW TESTAMENT WORD ON THE OLD TESTAMENT BASIS. (Lange.)
I. AS THE GREAT DISTINCTION BETWEEN ETERNITY AND TIME.
II. AS THE GREAT UNION BETWEEN ETERNITY AND TIME. (Lange.)
What is gained by defending the eternal pre-existence of Jesus Christ
Much every way. The Revealer of God being eternal, He is competent to give the world an eternal revelation--a re, elation of eternal truth, a revelation of the eternal God. Moses and others might serve as organs of the Old Testament revelation, for the religion they established was temporal, designed to last only till the time of reformation. In the nature of things a temporal revealer can only found a temporal religion; you must have an everlasting Revealer to make known the everlasting gospel. (J. Cynddylan Jones, D. D.)
The origin of the term Logos, or Word
The claims of Philo to be regarded as the source of St. Johns doctrine have been largely advocated. But
I. IT IS NOT CERTAIN THAT JOHN WAS ACQUAINTED WITH PHILO OR THE ALEXANDRINE GNOSIS.
1. The relations which existed between Ephesus and Alexandria.
2. The assumption that Apollos carried over the Philonian doctrines.
3. The statement that Cerinthus drew the germs of his doctrine from an Alexandrian source. And
4. The circumstance that Neoplatonism had spread widely amongst the Hellenistic Jews only make it probable that John was acquainted with Philo, but cannot be regarded as establishing it.
II. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE TERM LOGOS, THE GOSPEL CONTAINS NOT A TRACE OF PHILONISM, which is remarkable if John began its composition under the influence of that celebrated master. The number of parallels between the philosopher and the evangelist are at the most four, and these are confined exclusively to the prologue.
III. THE LOGOS OF PHILO IS ESSENTIALLY DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF JOHN.
1. It is impossible to determine whether the former is a person or an attribute, or a personification, whereas the latter is distinctly personal.
2. The former is not Divine in the sense that the latter is. Philo gives the name of δεύτερος θεὸς to the Loges only metaphorically, whereas John calls Him θεὸς in the strictest didactic sense.
3. The former is a metaphysical conception; the latter an object of religious contemplation.
4. The former has no real connection with human history and salvation such as the latter has.
IV. IT WAS UNNECESSARY FOR JOHN TO HAVE RECOURSE TO PHILO FOR THIS PECULIAR EXPRESSION.
1. In the Hebrew Scriptures we have the germs of the doctrine.
(1) In Gen_1:1-31. creation is attributed to so many separate voices or spoken words of Elohim. What if John purposed to represent the uncreated Loges as the personal Being by whom these creative words were altered?
(2) The Maleach Jehovah who appeared as Gods messenger, who announced His will (Gen_15:1), and who, if distinguished from Him Gen_16:11), was identified with Him (Gen_16:13; Gen_19:16; Gen_32:30), would unquestionably prepare the way for such a conception as Johns.
(3) The creative activity assigned to the Word of Jehovah (Psa_33:6-9) would tend to foster the notion.
(4) The personification of wisdom (Pro_8:22-31) would further serve to develop the idea.
2. In the Chochmah writings of the Post-Exilian Period, which carried on and perfected the tendency already begun, John would find another contributory source to the doctrine. In these the transition from an impersonal to a personal Sophia is an accomplished fact (Wisdom of Sir_1:1; Sir_1:4; Sir_24:3; Sir_42:9; Wisdom of Solomon, 7:25, 26, 22); and the Chaldee Targumists substitute for Elohim and Jehovah Memra da Yeya, a personal being who served as the permanent agent or representative of God, and who was identified with the Shekinah and the Messiah.
3. While Christ never employed the term, an examination of His utterances concerning His person might easily suggest the propriety of using it. Without alluding to Joh_5:38; Joh_14:24; Joh_17:14, the aspect m which Christs person, character, and work are here contemplated is that of one who has come with the Divine words of truth and life, and the transition must have seemed natural and easy from Christ as the speaker of Gods words to Him as Gods spoken Word Himself. (T. Whitelaw, D. D.)
Christ the Word of God
What is a word? It is a thought in the depths of the heart made audible to a second person. If Christ be the Word of God, He is Gods love sounding in the language of mankind, Gods truth reverberating among the centuries as amid the corridors of a grand temple, Gods justice revealed to our comprehension. Once this orb was a bright mirror which reflected Gods image, but sin darkened it, and it is dim. Once the rolling of its waves, the murmurings of its streams, the noise of its winds, was the word of God; but sin has laid its hand upon all its heartstrings and deadened and disordered its vibrations. Christ is now what the world once was, and more than the world was--Gods love, Gods truth, audible to men. So that in hearing Christ speak I hear God; in seeing Christs portrait I see Gods; in seeing the picture of Christ delivered in the gospel I see all that is comprehensible of the High and Holy One that inhabiteth eternity and the praises thereof. (J. Cumming, D. D.)
The Word was with God
The Divine Father and Son
Ask the sun if ever it were without its beams. Ask the fountain if ever it were without its streams. So God was never without His Son. (Arrowsmith.)
God not solitary
God did not spend the everlasting ages in sublime, solitary, masterly inactivity. He had a Word with Him, equal to Himself, the reflex image of His own person. That God from everlasting loved is an idea with which we are all familiar enough; it is the prominent idea in the correlates Father and Son. But in the text Jesus Christ is presented, not as the Son, but as the Word; accordingly the main idea is not God as love, but God as mind. Not only God loved from eternity, but He thought from eternity; He thought as intensely as He loved. (J. Cynddylan Jones, D. D.)
The Word was God
The Deity of Christ an impossible invention
Imagine yourselves in the position of St. John.. Think of any one whom you have loved and revered in past years. He has gone; but you cling to him more earnestly in thought and affection than while he was here. His words, haunts, phrases, handwriting, likeness, are for you precious and sacred. Others may be forgotten, but one such memory cannot fade. But can we conceive it possible that after any lapse of time we should express our reverence and love by saying that our friend was superhuman? Can we imagine ourselves incorporating our recollection with some current theosophic doctrine elevating him to the rank of a Divine hypostasis? And if Jesus was merely human, St. Johns statements about Him are among the most preposterous fictions which have imposed on the world. They were advanced with a full knowledge of what they involved. St. John was convinced as profoundly as we are of the truth of the unity of God, and of the interval which separates the highest of creatures from the Creator. And if we are not naturally lured to deify our friends, neither was St. John. If Jesus had been merely human, He would have felt as we feel about a beloved lost friend. In proportion to our belief in our friends goodness, and to our reverence for his character, is the strength of our conviction that we could not do him a more cruel injury by entwining a blasphemous fable around the simple story of his life.
This deification of Jesus by St. John would have been consistent neither with his reverence for God nor his loyalty to his merely human teacher. St. John worshipped the jealous God of Israel; and he has recorded the warning he received against worshipping the angel of the Apocalypse. If Christ had not really been Divine, the real beauty of His human character would have been disfigured by any such exaggeration, and Christianity would assuredly have perished within the limits of the first century. (Canon Liddon.)
The Divinity of Christ revealed in the Gospel of John
I remember once talking with a lady who said she did not believe Jesus was the Son of God, although she believed He was a good man, and admired very much the teaching He had left. Strangely enough, I found her (with all the beautiful inconsistency of a womans mind, and that inconsistency is frequently very beautiful and much better than the logical consistency of mans mind) particularly fond of the sayings of Jesus as recorded in the Gospel of St. John; such, for instance, as In My Fathers house are many mansions; I go to prepare a place for you. Now, I said, will you go home and read again the Gospel of St. John, and cross out every word that intimates He is Divine, and say you dont believe that and that? She thought it would be a good idea, and I gave her little Testament and told her to mark and cut it as much as she liked. She came back in a week, as she had promised. Well, how did you get along? I didnt get along at all. The truth is, I found I had to cross out the whole of the first chapter, and I began to think, If its like this, whatll become of the beautiful promises and sayings? so I stopped and cried, Lord, I see it is so. I accept Thee as Son of God, my Lord and my God. (Dr. Pentecost.)
The term Word applicable to Christ
A person officiating as a medium of correspondence between the throne and its functionaries or subjects might be styled the word; or the person who should carry the command of a general to those who should see them executed. Such an one might also be styled the word, as standing in a mid-position between the person holding supreme command and those set under authority. No transference of words from a general to a special signification could be more easy and even striking than this. If, then, we assume that the person invested with mediatorial attributes and relations is called in several passages of Scripture the Word, or the Word of the Lord, because His official position is analogous to the examples just given or to others which human experience suggests, is there not a manifest propriety in its being used in this instance? and could the whole compass of language supply us with a second term in all respects so suitable as this--the Word? (G. Steward.)
Christ the true God
Two gentlemen were once disputing on the Divinity of Christ. One of them, who argued against it, said, If it were true, it certainly would have been expressed in more clear, unequivocal terms. Well, said the other, admitting that you believe it, were authorized to teach it, and allowed to use your own language, how would you express the doctrine to make it clear and indubitable? I would say, replied the first, that Jesus Christ is the true God. You are happy, rejoined the other, in the choice of your words, for you have happened to hit upon the very words of inspiration. John, speaking of Jesus, says, This is the true God and eternal life.
Christ is God
The commencement of Christian work in Japan happened thus: An American lady, of the name of Prince, interested herself in the country, and four or five missionaries were sent out, but only occupied themselves in the translation of the Scriptures. After some time this lady offered to teach English to a young Japanese, and gave him the Gospel of St. John to translate. Shortly after, it was observed that he became very agitated and restless, walking up and down the room constantly. At last he could contain himself no longer, and burst out with the question, Who is this Man about whom I am reading--this Jesus? You call Him a Man, but He must be a God. Thus the simple word itself had forced on him the conviction that Jesus Christ was indeed God.
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On v1 Chapter 1
Chapter 1
THE INCARNATION.
Read full note →
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; and without Him was not any thing made that hath been made. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not. There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for witness, that he might bear witness of the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came that he might bear witness of the light. There was the true light, even the light which lighteth every man, coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. He came unto His own, and they that were His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, to them gave He the right to become children of God, even to them that believe on His name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth. John beareth witness of Him, and crieth, saying, This was He of whom I said, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for He was before me. For of His fulness we all received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him.- Joh_1:1-8.
In this brief introduction to his Gospel John summarises its contents, and presents an abstract of the history he is about to relate in detail. That the Eternal Word, in whom was the life of all things, became flesh and was manifested among men; that some ignored while others recognised Him, that some received while others rejected Him,-this is what John desires to exhibit at large in his Gospel, and this is what he summarily states in this compact and pregnant introductory passage. He briefly describes a Being whom he names The Word; he explains the connection of this Being with God and with created things; he tells how He came to the world and dwelt among men, and he remarks upon the reception He met with. What is summed up in these propositions is unfolded in the Gospel. It narrates in detail the history of the manifestation of the Incarnate Word, and of the faith and unbelief which this manifestation evoked.
John at once introduces us to a Being whom he speaks of as The Word. He uses the term without apology, as if already it were familiar to his readers; and yet he adds a brief description of it, as if possibly they might attach to it ideas incompatible with his own. He uses it without apology, because in point of fact it already had circulation both among Greek and Jewish thinkers. In the Old Testament we meet with a Being called The Angel of the Lord, who is at once closely related, if not equivalent, to Jehovah, and at the same time manifested to men. Thus when the Angel of the Lord had appeared to Jacob and wrestled with him, Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, for, said he, I have seen God face to face.[1] In the apocryphal books of the Old Testament the Wisdom and the Word of God are poetically personified, and occupy the same relation to God on the one hand, and to man on the other, which was filled by the Angel of the Lord. And in the time of Christ the Word of the Lord had become the current designation by which Jewish teachers denoted the manifested Jehovah. In explaining the Scriptures, to make them more intelligible to the people, it was customary to substitute for the name of the infinitely exalted Jehovah the name of Jehovahs manifestation, the Word of the Lord.
Beyond Jewish circles of thought the expression would also be readily understood. For not among the Jews only, but everywhere, men have keenly felt the difficulty of arriving at any certain and definite knowledge of the Eternal One. The most rudimentary definition of God, by declaring Him to be a Spirit, at once and for ever dissipates the hope that we can ever see Him, as we see one another, with the bodily eye. This depresses and disturbs the soul. Other objects which invite our thought and feeling we easily apprehend, and our intercourse with them is level to our faculties. It is, indeed, the unseen and intangible spirit of our friends which we value, not the outward appearance. But we scarcely separate the two; and as we reach and know and enjoy our friends through the bodily features with which we are familiar, and the words that strike upon our ear, we instinctively long for intercourse with God and knowledge of Him as familiar and convincing. We put out our hand, but we cannot touch Him. Nowhere in this world can we see Him more than we see Him here and now. If we pass to other worlds, there, too, He is concealed from our sight, inhabiting no body, occupying no place. Job is not alone in his painful and baffling search after God. Thousands continually cry with him, Behold, I go forward, but He is not there; and backward, but I cannot perceive Him: on the left hand, where He doth work, but I cannot behold Him: He hideth Himself on the right hand, that I cannot see Him.
In various ways, accordingly, men have striven to alleviate the difficulty of mentally apprehending an invisible, infinite, incomprehensible God. One theory, struck out by the pressure of the difficulty, and frequently advanced, was not altogether incompatible with the ideas suggested by John in this prologue. This theory was accustomed, although with no great definiteness or security, to bridge the chasm between the Eternal God and His works in time by interposing some middle being or beings which might mediate between the known and the unknown. This link between God and His creatures, which deemed to make God and His relation to material things more intelligible, was sometimes spoken of as The Word of God. This seemed an appropriate name by which to designate that through which God made Himself known, and by which He came into relations with things and persons not Himself. Vague indeed was the conception formed even of this intermediary Being. But of this term the Word, and of the ideas that centred in it, John took advantage to proclaim Him who is the manifestation of the Eternal, the Image of the Invisible.[2]
The title itself is full of significance. The word of a man is that by which he utters himself, by which he puts himself in communication with other persons and deals with them. By his word he makes his thought and feeling known, and by his word he issues commands and gives effect to his will. His word is distinct from his thought, and yet cannot exist separate from it. Proceeding from the thought and will, from that which is inmost in us and most ourselves, it carries upon itself the imprint of the character and purpose of him who utters it. It is the organ of intelligence and will. It is not mere noise, it is sound instinct with mind, and articulated by intelligent purpose. By a mans word you could perfectly know him, even though you were blind and could never see him. Sight or touch could give you but little fuller information regarding his character if you had listened to his word. His word is his character in expression.
Similarly, the Word of God is Gods power, intelligence, and will in expression; not dormant and potential only, but in active exercise. Gods Word is His will going forth with creative energy, and communicating life from God, the Source of life and being. Without Him was not any thing made that was made. He was prior to all created things and Himself with God, and God. He is God coming into relation with other things, revealing Himself, manifesting Himself, communicating Himself. The world is not itself God; things created are not God, but the intelligence and will that brought them into being, and which now sustain and regulate them, these are God. And between the works we see and the God who is past finding out, there is the Word, One who from eternity has been with God, the medium of the first utterance of Gods mind and the first forthputting of His power; as close to the inmost nature of God, and as truly uttering that nature, as our word is close to and utters our thought, capable of being used by no one besides, but by ourselves only.
It is apparent, then, why John chooses this title to designate Christ in His pre-existent life. No other title brings out so clearly the identification of Christ with God, and the function of Christ to reveal God. It was a term which made the transition easy from Jewish Monotheism to Christian Trinitarianism. Being already used by the strictest Monotheists to denote a spiritual intermediary between God and the world, it is chosen by John as the appropriate title of Him through whom all revelation of God in the past has been mediated, and who has at length finished revelation in the person of Jesus Christ. The term itself does not explicitly affirm personality; but what it helps us to understand is, that this same Being, the Word, who manifested and uttered God in creation, reveals Him now in humanity. John wishes to bring the incarnation and the new spiritual world it produced into line with the creation and Gods original purpose therein. He wishes to show us that this greatest manifestation of God is not an abrupt departure from previous methods, but is the culminating expression of methods and principles which have ever governed the activity of God. Jesus Christ, who reveals the Father now in human nature, is the same Agent as has ever been expressing and giving effect to the Fathers will in the creation and government of all things. The same Word who now utters God in and through human nature, has ever been uttering Him in all His works.
All that God has done is to be found in the universe, partly visible and partly known to us. There God may be found, because there He has uttered Himself. But science tells us that in this universe there has been a gradual development from lower to higher, from imperfect towards perfect worlds; and it tells us that man is the last result of this process. In man the creature at last becomes intelligent, self-conscious, endowed with will, capable to some extent of meeting and understanding its Creator. Man is the last and fullest expression of Gods thought, for in man and mans history God finds room for the utterance not merely of His wisdom and power, but of what is most profoundly spiritual and moral in His nature. In man God finds a creature who can sympathise with His purposes, who can respond to His love, who can give exercise to the whole fulness of God.
But in saying that the Word become flesh John says much more than that God through the Word created man, and found thus a more perfect means of revealing Himself. The Word created the visible world, but He did not become the visible world. The Word created all men, but He did not become the human race, but one Man, Christ Jesus. No doubt it is true that all men in their measure reveal God, and it is conceivable that some individual should fully illustrate all that God meant to reveal by human nature. It is conceivable that God should so sway a mans will and purify his character that the human will should be from first to last in perfect harmony with the Divine, and that the human character should exhibit the character of God. An ideal man might have been created, Gods ideal of man might have been realized, and still we should have had no incarnation. For a perfect man is not all we have in Christ. A perfect man is one thing, the Word Incarnate is another. In the one the personality, the I that uses the human nature, is human; in the other, the personality, the I, is Divine.
By becoming flesh the Word submitted to certain limitations, perhaps impossible for us to define. While in the flesh He could reveal only what human nature was competent to reveal. But as the human nature had been created in the likeness of the Divine, and as, therefore, good and evil meant the same to man as to God, the limitation would not be felt in the region of character.
The process of the Incarnation John describes very simply: The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us. The Word did not become flesh in the sense that He was turned into flesh, ceasing to be what He had previously been, as a boy who becomes a man ceases to be a boy. In addition to what He already was He assumed human nature, at once enlarging His experience and limiting His present manifestations of Divinity to what was congruous to human nature and earthly circumstance. The Jews were familiar with the idea of God dwelling with His people. At the birth of their nation, while they were still dwelling in tents outside the land of promise, God had His tent among the shifting tents of the people, sharing all the vicissitudes of their wandering life, abiding with them even in their thirty-eight years exclusion from their land, and thus sharing even their punishment. By the word John here uses he links the body of Christ to the ancient dwelling of God round which the tents of Israel had clustered. God now dwelt among men in the humanity of Jesus Christ. The tabernacle was human, the indwelling Person was Divine. In Christ is realized the actual presence of God among His people, the actual entrance into and personal participation in human history, which was hinted at in the tabernacle and the temple.
In the Incarnation, then, we have Gods response to mans craving to find, to see, to know Him. Men, indeed, commonly look past Christ and away from Him, as if in Him God could not be satisfactorily seen; they discontentedly long for some other revelation of the unseen Spirit. But surely this is to mistake. To suppose that God might make Himself more obvious, more distinctly apparent to us, than He has done, is to mistake what God is and how we can know Him. What are the highest attributes of Divinity, the most Divine characteristics of God? Are they great power, vast size, dazzling physical glory that overpowers the sense; or are they infinite goodness, holiness that cannot be tempted, love that accommodates itself to all the needs of all creatures? Surely the latter, the spiritual and moral qualities, are the more Divine. The resistless might of natural forces shows us little of God till we have elsewhere learned to know Him; the power that upholds the planets in their orbits speaks but of physical force, and tells us nothing of any holy, loving Being. There is no moral quality, no character, impressed upon these works of God, mighty though they be. Nothing but an impersonal power meets us in them; a power which may awe and crush us, but which we cannot adore, worship, and love. In a word, God cannot reveal Himself to us by any overwhelming display of His nearness or His power. Though the whole universe fell in ruins around us, or though we saw a new world spring into being before our eyes, we might still suppose that the power by which this was effected was impersonal, and could hold no fellowship with us.
Only, then, through what is personal, only through what is like ourselves, only through what is moral, can God reveal Himself to us. Not by marvellous displays of power that suddenly awe us, but by goodness that the human conscience can apprehend and gradually admire, does God reveal Himself to us. If we doubt Gods existence, if we doubt whether there is a Spirit of goodness upholding all things, wielding all things, and triumphant in all things, let us look to Christ. It is in Him we distinctly see upon our own earth, and in circumstances we can examine and understand, goodness; goodness tried by every test conceivable, goodness carried to its highest pitch, goodness triumphant. This goodness, though in human forms and circumstances, is yet the goodness of One who comes among men from a higher sphere, teaching, forgiving, commanding, assuring, saving, as One sent to deal with men rather than springing from them. If this is not God, what is God? What higher conception of God has any one ever had? What worthy conception of God is there that is not satisfied here? What do we need in God, or suppose to be in God, which we have not in Christ?
If, then, we still feel as if we had not sufficient assurance of God, it is because we look for the wrong thing, or seek where we can never find. Let us understand that God can best be known as God through His moral qualities, through His love, His tenderness, His regard for right; and we shall perceive that the most suitable revelation is one in which these qualities are manifested. But to apprehend these qualities as they appear in actual history we must have some sense for and love of them. They that are pure in heart, they shall see God; they who love righteousness, who seek with lowliness for purity and goodness, they will find in Christ a God they can see and trust.
The lessons of the Incarnation are obvious. First, from it we are to take our idea of God. Sometimes we feel as if in attributing to God all good we were dealing merely with fancies of our own which could not be justified by fact. In the Incarnation we see what God has actually done. Here we have, not a fancy, not a hope, not a vague expectation, not a promise, but accomplished fact, as solid and unchangeable as our own past life. This God whom we have often shunned, and felt to be in our way and an obstacle, whom we have suspected of tyranny and thought little of injuring and disobeying, has through compassion and sympathy with us broken through all impossibilities, and contrived to take the sinners place. He, the ever blessed God, accountable for no evil and sole cause of all good, accepted the whole of our condition, lived as a creature, Himself bare our sicknesses, all that is hardest in life, all that is bitterest and loneliest in death, in His own experience combining all the agonies of sinning and suffering men, and all the ineffable sorrows wherewith God looks upon sin and suffering. All this He did, not for the sake of showing us how much better a thing the Divine nature is than the human, but because His nature impelled Him to do it; because He could not bear to be solitary in His blessedness, to know in Himself the joy of holiness and love while His creatures were missing this joy and making themselves incapable of all good.
Our first thought of God, then, must ever be that which the Incarnation suggests: that the God with whom alone and in all things we have to do is not One who is alienated from us, or who has no sympathy with us, or who is absorbed in interests very different from ours, and to which we must be sacrificed; but that He is One who sacrifices Himself for us, who makes all things but justice and right bend to serve us, who forgives our misapprehensions, our coldness, our unspeakable folly, and makes common cause with us in all that concerns our welfare. As while on earth He endured the contradiction of sinners, and waited till they came to a better mind, so does He still, with Divine patience, wait till we recognise Him as our Friend, and humbly own Him as our God. He waits till we learn that to be God is not to be a mighty King enthroned above all the assaults of His creatures, but that to be God is to have more love than all besides; to be able to make greater sacrifices for the good of all; to have an infinite capacity to humble Himself, to put Himself out of sight, and to consider our good. This is the God we have in Christ; our Judge becoming our atoning Victim, our God becoming our Father, the Infinite One coming with all His helpfulness into the most intimate relations with us; is this not a God to whom we can trust ourselves, and whom we can love and serve? If this is the real nature of God, if we may always expect such faithfulness and help from God, if to be God be to be all this, as full of love in the future as He has shown Himself in the past, then may not existence yet be that perfect joy our instincts crave, and towards which we are slowly and doubtfully finding our way through all the darkness, and strains, and shocks that are needed to sift what is spiritual in us from what is unworthy?
The second lesson the Incarnation teaches regards our own duty. Everywhere among the first disciples was this lesson learned and inculcated. Let this mind, says Paul, be in you which was also in Christ Jesus. Christ suffered for us, says Peter, leaving us an example. If God so loved us, we ought also to love one another is the very spirit of John. Look steadily at the Incarnation, at the love which made Christ take our place and identify Himself with us; consider the new breath of life that this one act has breathed into human life, ennobling the world and showing us how deep and lovely are the possibilities that lie in human nature; and new thoughts of your own conduct will lay hold of your mind. Come to this great central fire, and your cold, hard nature will be melted; try in some sort to weigh this Divine love and accept it as your own, as that which embraces and cares for and carries you on to all good, and you will insensibly be imbued with its spirit. You will feel that no loss could be so great as to lose the possession and exercise of this love in your own heart. Great as are the gifts it bestows, you begin to see that the greatest of them all is that it transforms you into its own likeness, and teaches you yourself to love in the same sort. Understanding our security and our joyful prospect as saved by the care of God, and as provided for by a love of perfect intelligence and absolute resource; humbled and softened and melted by the free spending upon us of so Divine and complete a grace, our heart overflows with sympathy. We cannot receive Christs love without communicating it. It imparts a glow to the heart, which must be felt by all that comes in contact with the heart.
And as Christs love became incarnate, not spending itself in any one great display, apart from the needs of men, but manifesting itself in all the routine and incident of a human life; never wearying through the monotonous toil of His artisan-life, never provoked into forgetfulness in His boyhood; so must our love derived from Him be incarnated; not spent in one display, but animating our whole life in the flesh, and finding expression for itself in all that our earthly condition brings us into contact with. The thoughts we think and the actions we do are mainly concerned with other people. We are living in families, or we are related as employer and employed, or we are thrown together by the hundred necessities of life; in all these connections we are to be guided by the spirit which prompted Christ to become incarnate. Our chance of doing good in the world depends upon this. Our review of life at the close will be satisfactory or the reverse in proportion as we have or have not been in fact animated by the spirit of the Incarnation. We must learn to bear one anothers burdens, and the Incarnation shows us that we can do so only in so far as we identify ourselves with others and live for them. Christ helped us by coming down to our condition and living our life. This is the guide to all help we can give. If anything can reclaim the lowest class in our population, it is by men of godly life living among them; not living among them in comforts unattainable by them, but living in all points as they live, save that they live without sin. Christ had no money to give, no knowledge of science to impart; He lived a sympathetic and godly life, regardless of Himself. Few can follow Him, but let us never lose sight of His method. The poor are not the only class that need help. It is our dependence on money as the medium of charity that has begotten that feeling. It is easy to give money; and so we discharge our obligation, and feel as if we had done all. It is not money that even the poorest have most need of; and it is not money at all, but sympathy, which all classes need-that true sympathy which gives us insight into their condition, and prompts us to bear their burdens, whatever these are. There are many men on earth who are mere hindrances to better men; who cannot manage their own affairs or play their own part, but are continually entangled and in difficulties. They are a drag on society, requiring the help of more serviceable men, and preventing such men from enjoying the fruit of their own labour. There are, again, men who are not of our kind, men whose tastes are not ours. There are men who seem pursued by misfortune, and men who by their own sin keep themselves continually in the mire. There are, in short, various classes of persons with whom we are day by day tempted to have no more to do whatever; we are exasperated by the discomfort they occasion us; the anxiety and vexation and expenditure of time, feeling, and labour constantly renewed so long as we are in connection with them. Why should we be held down by unworthy people? Why should we have the ease and joy taken out of our life by the ceaseless demands made upon us by wicked, careless, incapable, ungrateful people? Why must we still be patient, still postponing our own interests to theirs? Simply because this is the method by which the salvation of the world is actually accomplished; simply because we ourselves thus tax the patience of Christ, and because we feel that the love we depend upon and believe in as the salvation of the world we must ourselves endeavour to show. Recognising how Christ has humbled Himself to bear the burden of shame and misery we have laid upon Him, we cannot refuse to bear one anothers burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
[1] See also Gen_16:13; Gen_18:22; Exo_3:6; Exo_23:20; Jdg_13:22.
[2] For the need of intermediaries, see Plato, Symposium, pp. 202-3: God mingles not with men; but there are spiritual powers which interpret and convey to God the prayers and sacrifices of men, and to men the commands and rewards of God. These powers span the chasm which divides them, and these spirits or intermediate powers are many and divine. See also Philo (Quod Deus Immut., xiii.): God is not comprehensible by the intellect. We know, indeed, that He is, but beyond the fact of His existence we know nothing. The Word reveals God; see Philo (De post. Caini, vi.) The wise man, longing to apprehend God, and travelling along the path of wisdom and knowledge, first of all meets with the Divine words, and with them abides as a guest.
Chapter 2
RECEPTION CHRIST MET WITH.
Joh_1:1-18.
In describing the Word of God, John mentions two attributes of His by which His relation to men becomes apparent: All things were made by Him, and the life was the light of men. By whom were all things made? what is the originating force which has produced the world? how are we to account for the existence, the harmony, and the progress of the universe?-these are questions which must always be put. Everywhere in nature force and intelligence appear; the supply of life and power is unfailing, and the unconscious planets are as regular and harmonious in their action as the creatures that are endowed with conscious intelligence and the power of self-guidance. That the whole universe is one does not admit of a doubt. Far as the astronomer can search into infinite space, he finds the same laws and one plan, and no evidence of another hand or another mind. To what is this unity to be referred? John here affirms that the intelligence and power which underlie all things belong to the Word of God: without Him was not anything made which was made.
In Him was life. In this Divine Being, who was in the beginning before all things, there was that which gives existence to all else. And the life was the light of men. That life which appears in the harmony and progress of inanimate nature, and in the wonderfully manifold and yet related forms of animal existence, appears in man as light-intellectual and moral light, reason and conscience. All the endowment possessed by man as a moral being, capable of self-determination and of choosing what is morally good, springs from the one fountain of life which exists in the Word of God.
It is in the light of this close relationship of the Word to the world and to men that John views the reception He met with when He became flesh and dwelt among us. This reception forms the great tragedy of human history. In Agamemnon returning to his palace after ten years absence, and falling by the hand of his unfaithful spouse, we have the event which is tragical par excellence in pagan history. But what is that outrage when compared with the theocratic tragedy? The God invoked by the nation appears in His temple, and is crucified by His own worshippers. To John it seemed as if the relationship borne by the Word to those who rejected Him was the tragical element in the rejection.
Three different aspects of this relationship are mentioned, that the blindness of the rejecters may more distinctly be seen. First, he says, although the very light that was in man was derived from the Word, and it was by His endowment they had any power lo recognise what was illuminating and helpful to their spiritual nature, they yet shut their eyes to the source of light when presented in the Word Himself. The life was the light of men.... And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness apprehended it not. This is the general statement of the universal experience of the Eternal Word, and it is illustrated in His incarnate experience summarily related in verses 10 and 11 (Joh_1:10-11). Again: He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. So little had men understood the source of their own being, and so little had they learned to know the significance and purpose of their existence, that when their Creator came they did not recognise Him. And thirdly, even the narrow and carefully-trained circle of the Jews failed to recognise Him; He came unto His own-to everything which had pointedly and of set purpose spoken of Him, and could not have existed but to teach His character-and His own received Him not.
1. The light shineth in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not. As yet John has said nothing of the Incarnation, and is speaking of the Word in His eternal or pre-incarnate state. And one thing he desires to proclaim regarding the Word is, that although it is from Him every man has such light as he has, yet this light is commonly rendered useless, and is not cherished. As it is from the Word, from Gods uttered will, that all men have life, so it is from the same source that all the light which is in reason and in conscience is derived. Before the Word appeared in the world, and shone out as the true light (Joh_1:9), He was in all rational creatures as their life and light, imparting to men a sense of right and wrong, and shining in their heart with some of the brightness of a Divine presence. This sense of a connection with God and eternity, and this moral faculty, although cherished by some, were commonly not comprehended. Evil deeds have been suffered to darken conscience, and it fails to admit the true light.
2. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. When our Lord came to earth the heathen world was mainly represented by the Roman Empire, and one of the earliest events of His life on earth was His enrolment as a subject of that empire. If we had been invited before His coming to imagine what would be the result upon this empire of His appearance, we should probably have expected something very different from that which actually happened. The real Sovereign is to appear; the Being who made all that is, is to come and visit His possessions. Will not a thrill of glad expectancy run through the world? Will not men eagerly cover up whatever may offend Him, and eagerly attempt, with such scant materials as existed, to make preparations for His worthy reception? The one Being who can make no mistakes, and who can rectify the mistakes of a worn-out, entangled world, is to come for the express purpose of delivering it from all ill: will not men gladly yield the reins to Him, and gladly second Him in all His enterprise? Will it not be a time of universal concord and brotherhood, all men joining to pay homage to their common God? He was in the world, and the world was made by Him-that is the true, bare, unvarnished statement of the fact. There He was, the Creator Himself, that mysterious Being who had hitherto kept Himself so hidden and remote while yet so influential and supreme; the wonderful and unsearchable Source and Fountain out of which had proceeded all that men saw, themselves included,-there at last He was in the world Himself had made, apparent to the eyes of men, and intelligible to their understandings; a real person whom they could know as an individual, whom they could love, who could receive and return their expressions of affection and trust. He was in the world, and the world knew Him not.
Indeed, it would not have been easy for the world to show a more entire ignorance of God than while He was upon earth in human form. There was at that time abundance of activity and intelligent apprehension of the external wants of men and nations. There was a ceaseless running to and fro of the couriers of the empire, a fine system of communications spread over the whole known world like a network, so that what transpired in the most remote corner was at once known at the centre. Rome was intelligent to the utmost circumference through all its dominions; as if a nervous system radiated through the whole of it, touch but the extremity in one of the remotest colonies and the touch is felt at the brain and heart of the whole.[3] The rising of a British tribe, the discovery of some unheard-of bird or beast, the birth of a calf with two heads-every scrap of gossip found its way to Rome.[4] But the entrance of the Creator into the world was an event of such insignificance that not even this finely sympathetic system took any note of it. The great Roman world remained in absolute unconsciousness of the vicinity of God: they registered His birth, took account of Him as one to be taxed, but were as little aware as the oxen with whom He shared His first sleeping-place, that this was God; they saw Him with the same stupid, unconscious, bovine stare.[5]
3. But in this great world of men there was an inner and specially trained circle, which John here designates His own. For although the world might be called His own, as made and upheld by him, yet it seems more likely that this verse is not a mere repetition of the preceding, but is intended to mark a deeper degree of insensibility on the part of Christs rejecters. Not only had all men been made in Gods image, so that they might have been expected to recognise Christ as the image of the Father; but one nation had been specially instructed in the knowledge of God, and was proud of having His dwelling-place in its midst. If other men were blind to Gods glory, the Jews at least might have been expected to welcome Christ when He came. Their temple and all that was done in it, their law, their prophets, their institutions, their history and their daily life, all spoke to them of God, and reminded them that God dwelt among them and would come to His own. Though all the world should shut its doors against Christ, surely the gates of the Temple, His own house, would be thrown open to Him. For what else did it exist?
Our Lord Himself, in the parable of the Wicked Husbandmen, makes even a heavier accusation against the Jews, intimating, as He there does, that they rejected Him not because they did not recognise Him, but because they did. This is the Heir. Come, let us kill Him, that the inheritance may be ours. In any case their guilt is great. They had been definitely and repeatedly admonished to expect some great manifestation of God; they looked for the Christ to come, and immediately before His appearance they had been strikingly awakened to prepare for His coming. But what was their actual state when Christ came? Again and again it has been pointed out that their whole thoughts were given to the schemes which usually distract conquered nations. They were tossing in unhelpful and inefficacious sedition, resenting or paying hollow homage to the rule of the foreigner, looking uneasily for deliverance, and becoming the dupes of every fanatic or schemer that cried, Lo here! or Lo there! Their power of discerning a present God and a spiritual Deliverer was almost as completely gone as that of the heathen, and they tested the Divine Saviour by external methods which any clever charlatan could have satisfied. The God they believed in and sought was not the God revealed by Christ. They existed for Christs sake, that among them He might find a home on earth, and through them be made known to all; they believed in a Christ that was to come, but when He came the throne they raised Him to was the cross. And the suspicion that perhaps they were wrong has preyed on the Jewish mind ever since, and has often pricked them on to a fierce hatred of the Christian name, while sometimes it has taken almost the form of penitence, as in the prayer of Rabbi Ben Ezra,-
Thou! if Thou wast He, who at mid-watch came,By the starlight, naming a dubious name!And if, too heavy with sleep-too rashWith fear-O Thou, if that martyr-gashFell on Thee coming to take Thine own,And we gave the Cross, when we owed the Throne,-Thou art the Judge.
It is the detailed history of this rejection which John presents in his Gospel. He tells the story of Christs miracles, and the jealousy they excited; of His authoritative teaching and the opposition it aroused; of His unveiling His Divine nature, His mercy, His power to give life, His prerogative of judgment, His humble self-sacrifice, and of the misunderstanding which ran parallel to this manifestation. He tells how the leaders strove to entangle Him and find Him at fault; how they took up stones to stone Him; how they schemed and plotted, and at length compassed His crucifixion. The patience with which He met this contradiction of sinners was a sufficient revelation of His Divine nature. Though rudely received, though met on all hands with suspicion, coldness, and hostility, He did not abandon the world in indignation. He never forgot that He came, not to judge the world, not to deal with us on our merits, but to save the world from its sin and its blindness. For the sake of the few who received Him He bore with the many who rejected Him.
For some did receive Him. John could say for many, along with himself, We beheld His glory, and recognised that it was Divine glory, such as none but an Only-begotten in the image of His Father could manifest. This glory dawned upon believing men, and gradually encompassed them in the brightness and beauty of a Divine revelation, by the appearance among them of the Incarnate Word, full of grace and truth (Joh_1:14). Not the works of wonder which He did, not the authority with which He laid the angry waves and commanded the powers of evil, but the grace and truth which underlay all His works, shone into their hearts as Divine glory. They had previously known God through the law given by Moses (Joh_1:17); but coming as it did through law, this knowledge was coloured by its medium, and through it Gods countenance seemed stern. In the face of Jesus Christ they saw the Father, they saw grace, an eye of tender compassion and lips of love and helpfulness. In the law they felt that they were seeing through a dimmed glass darkly; they became weary of symbols and of forms in which often they saw but flitting shadows. What must it have been for such men to live with the manifested God; to have Him dwelling among them, and in Him to handle and see (1Jn_1:1) the truth, the reality to which all symbol had pointed? The law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.[6]
And to those who acknowledge in their hearts that this is Divine glory which is seen in Christ, the glory of the Only-begotten of the Father, He gives Himself with all His fulness. As many as received Him, to them gave He the right to become children of God. This is the immediate result of the acceptance of Christ as the Revealer of the Father. In Him we see what true glory is and what true sonship is; and as we behold the glory of the Only-begotten, sent to declare the Father to us, we acknowledge the unseen Father, and His Spirit brings us into the relationship of children. That which is in God passes into us, and we share in the life of God; and this through Christ. He is full of grace and truth. In all He is and does, grace and truth overflowingly manifest themselves. And of His fulness have all we received, and grace upon grace.[7] John read this off his own experience and that of those for whom he could confidently speak. What they had seen and valued in Christ became their own character. The inexhaustible fulness of grace in Christ renewed in them grace according to their need. They lived upon Him. It was His life which maintained life in them. By communion with Him they were formed in His likeness.
The presentation of Christ to men now divides them into two classes, as at the first. There are always those who accept and those who reject Him. His contemporaries showed, for the most part, a complete ignorance of what might be expected of God, a native inability to understand spiritual greatness, and to relish it when presented to them. And yet Christs claims were made with such an air of authority and truth, and His whole character and bearing were so consistent, that they were half persuaded He was all He said. It is chiefly because we have not a perfect sympathy with goodness, and do not know its value, that we do not at once and universally acknowledge Christ. There is in men an instinct that tells them what blessings Christ will secure to them, and they decline connection with Him because they are conscious that their ways are not His ways, nor their hopes His hopes. The very presentation to men of the possibility of becoming perfectly pure reveals what at heart they are. By the judgment each man passes on Christ he passes judgment on himself.
Let us stir ourselves to a clearer decision by remembering that He is presented to us as to His contemporaries. Time was when any one going into the synagogue of Nazareth would have seen Him, and might have spoken with Him. But the particular thirty years during which this manifestation of God on earth lasted makes no material difference to the thing itself. The Incarnation was to be some time, and it is as real having occurred then as if it were occurring now. It occurred in its fit time; but its bearing on us is not dependent on the time of its occurrence. If it had been accomplished in our day, what should we have thought of it? Would it have been nothing to us to see God, to hear Him, perhaps to have had His eye turned upon us with personal observation, with pity, with remonstrance? Would it have been nothing to us to see Him taking the sinners place, scourged, mocked, crucified? Is it conceivable that in presence of such a manifestation of God we should have been indifferent? Would not our whole nature have burned with shame that we and our fellow-men should have brought our God to this? And are we to suffer the mere fact of Christs being incarnate in a past age and not in our own, to alter our attitude towards Him, and blind us to the reality? Of more importance than anything that is now happening in our own life is this Incarnation of the Only-begotten of the Father.
[3] See Isaac Taylors Restoration of Belief.
[4] See Plinys Letters to Trajan, 23, 98.
[5] Cp. Fabers Bethlehem.
[6] The first introduction in the Gospel of the name of Jesus Christ.
[7] This expression means a succession of graces, higher grace ever taking the place of lower.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
B. W. Johnson 1891 · Public Domain On v1 1–3. In the beginning was the Word, etc. The…
1–3. In the beginning was the Word, etc. The first fourteen verses are introductory. In order to set at rest all controversy the Divine nature of Jesus, John glances, in the first three verses, back to the beginning, recorded in Genesis, and affirms: (1) That he who was afterwards manifest as the Christ existed before creation began; (2) that he was present with God; (3) that he was divine; (4) that he was the Word; (5) that by or through him were all things made that were made (verse 3). The first chapter of Genesis helps us to understand its meaning. God said, “Let there be light,” “Let there be a firmament,” “Let the earth bring forth,” etc., and it was done. God exhibits his creative power through the Word, and manifests his will through the Word. There are mysteries belonging to the divine nature and to the relation between the Son and the Father that we have to wait for eternity to solve. They are too deep for human solution, but this is clear: that God creates and speaks to man through the Word. As we clothe our thoughts in words, God reveals his will by the Word, and when that Word is clothed in flesh, as the Teacher of men, we recognize it as Jesus Christ.
B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On v1 Joh_1:1. In the beginning, etc.—ἐν ἀρχῇ. The בְּרֵאשִׁית etc.,…
EXPLANATORY AND CRITICAL NOTES
Joh_1:1. In the beginning, etc.—ἐν ἀρχῇ. The בְּרֵאשִׁית etc., of Genesis 1 denotes the beginning of that movement of the divine creative energy from which sprang the visible universe. The Evangelist’s words take us beyond this definite point into the immeasurable eternity. In the beginning the Word was. The Logos was not then called into being. He existed “before all worlds” (Joh_17:5; Joh_17:24), i.e. before time, which measures the visible universe, had begun. As eternity has neither beginning nor end the Word is eternally existent (for the meaning of the term Logos see Introduction, p. 10, and notes below).
Read full note →
Joh_1:2. The same.—οὗτος. This [Word], etc. The distinct personal existence of the Word is more definitely asserted and emphasised to show that He was “anterior to the fact of creation of which He is the agent” (Joh_1:3).
Joh_1:3. All things, etc.—For the contents of πάντα see Col_1:16. Made.—I.e. became. “Creation is a ‘becoming’ in contrast with the ‘being’ emphasised before” (Westcott). Without Him.—The entire community between God and the Word is here declared (Godet); and see Joh_15:5.
Joh_1:4. In Him was life.—For the universe. The “fulness” of life dwells in Him, and He is the source of all life physical and spiritual. He is light through life. Life comes to men through Christ; and the result of that life in renewed hearts is light—the light of goodness, truth, holiness.
Joh_1:5. The light shineth, etc.—The Word was, ere the fall, the light of man, not only potentially, but actually. After the fall darkness covered the moral world. And now again at the Incarnation the light anew rises in power. The conflict evident in all history between light and darkness was now to end in the victory of light. Comprehended.—I.e. seized or laid hold of in a hostile sense; but perhaps what is here meant is a passive hostility—did not appropriate, i.e. comprehend or receive; did not permit the light to penetrate its massive bulwarks.
Joh_1:6. There was a man, etc.—ἐγένετο, there “became,” appeared. Notice the contrast between a man and the Word. The Word was; that is essential being. The man “became”; his being is derived. John.—i.e. the grace of God (Luk_1:13-14). He was well known, and therefore his testimony was of great force. The Evangelist called him by this name before the title of Baptist had become general (Halcombe, see Introduction).
Joh_1:7. Through him.—I.e. through his preaching. The Evangelist does not tell the subject of John’s preaching in the same terms as the Synoptists; but repentance is implied in believing, i.e. in saving faith.
Joh_1:8. He was not that light, etc.—Many were disposed to believe that John was the Messiah (Joh_1:19-20; Luk_3:15). It is supposed by some that there may have been those in Ephesus and its vicinity who still believed in John’s baptism only (Act_19:3), and that it was with those in view that the evangelist penned these words; but they seem rather simply to emphasise further the distinction between the Logos and the man. “John was a light which was enlightened, but had not the light in itself” (Aug. in Wordsworth’s Greek Testament).
Joh_1:10. He was in the world, etc.—The Logos had ever been in the world (Joh_1:3-4), for by Him all things consist (Col_1:17). But He was now especially in it when the Baptist testified of Him, and when “the world knew Him not.” The world means the inhabited world, the material earth with its inhabitants blinded by sin.
Joh_1:11. His own (τὰ ἴδια) things.—T eated by and for Him (Col_1:16); but perhaps better His own home (Psa_132:14, etc.), i.e. the land of Israel; and “His own (οἱ ἴδιοι, i.e. the chosen people who inherited the land of promise) received Him not,” though they should have done so gladly, and as His Church will do in the end (Rev_21:2).
Joh_1:12. The term name must here be taken in the sense in which it is frequently used in Scripture. The name expressed the power of the divine nature of Christ.
Joh_1:13. Not of blood (see Joh_8:33; Joh_8:39; Joh_8:41-42).—Pride of descent from Abraham gave no claim to entrance into the kingdom of God. The will of the flesh.—i.e. of the lower animal nature and its desires. Nor of the will of man (man = ἀνδρός).—Perhaps the meaning here i the divinely implanted desire for offspring (Psa_127:3), which is a higher motive than the former. But in every view of it “that which is born of the flesh is flesh.” The new life comes from God. True children of God are born “from above” (Joh_3:3).
Joh_1:14. The Word became flesh, etc.—He did not assume a mere appearance of man, as the Docetæ urged; nor did the Logos take to Himself only a body and not also a human soul, as Apollinarius and others held; nor was the Word simply united with the perfect man Jesus, as Nestorius maintained. He became flesh; He did not cease to be the Word, but He made the human nature which He assumed (“a true body and a reasonable soul”) one with Himself, in one person. So that thenceforward He was the God-man, Emmanuel. The Word and humanity were one (Rev_19:11-16). And thus He dwelt (tabernacled) among us.—“Christ pitched not His tent in any particular person already existing, but in us, i.e. in our nature” (Bishop Wordsworth’s Greek Testament). We beheld His glory.—As the glory of God was manifested in the tabernacle in the wilderness, so it was exhibited in all its brightness in that tent in which the Word tabernacled here. “The σκηνὴ (tabernacle) of our humanity became the Shechinah of Deity” (1Jn_1:1-2). As of an only begotten (born) son.—μονογενής, only son or child (Col_1:15), eternally standing in this relation to the Father. His relation to the Father is unique and unparalleled (Westcott), of the Father, or from with the Father, pointing to the manifestation of the divine glory of that sonship as beheld by men here. Grace and truth.—The same character which is ascribed to Jehovah in the Old Testament is here applied to Christ (Exo_34:6). He expressed the fulness of the Father’s love, and as the Truth He revealed the Father’s will and way most fully to men.
Joh_1:15. John beareth witness of Him and hath cried.—The first verb is present, the last is perfect. His preaching was past when this prologue was written; but it was still powerful as a witness to Christ. The Baptist being dead yet spake.
Joh_1:16. Fulness.—πλήρωμα (see Col_2:9). “The plenitude, the full measure of all the divine powers and graces which were concentrated in Christ, the incarnate Word” (Westcott).
Joh_1:17. The law, etc.—“The law was given (Heb_3:5) by the servant, and made men guilty. The grace which came by the King freed them from guilt” (Aug. in Wordsworth’s Greek Testament).
Joh_1:18. No man hath ever yet seen, etc.—But there will in the end to the “pure in heart” be granted a divine vision (Mat_5:8). The only begotten Son, etc.—Or, as the best MSS. (א, B, L, etc.), God. But this does not change the meaning of the passage. The Logos alone has declared and interpreted God to men (Mat_11:27). In the bosom.—He alone has that filial intercourse with God which marks Him out as the only begotten. Thus He alone fully knows the divine mind and will, and can declare them to men.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Joh_1:1-18
The revelation of the eternal Word, its influence and its end.
[The prologue to the Fourth Gospel treats of the eternity and divinity of Christ, the Word, as the end of divine revelation, and of His reception by men. This opening or introductory section sets forth the aim and intention of the Fourth Gospel, viz. to proclaim and testify to Christ as the Son of God (Joh_20:30-31). It may be questioned whether this Gospel as it stands is the product of an earlier or later apostolic age (vide Introduction). It may, however, be reasonably considered as the setting forth by the apostle John, toward the end of his life, in systematic form, of what had been constantly taught by him, with this prologue prefixed to meet and disarm Gnostic opinions that were pressing in on the Church. The prologue declares that though not understood by the world and rejected by “His own,” yet Christ was the divine Son, the long-promised Messiah.]
As Christ came to Israel He comes to us. The end of His coming is “life through faith in His name.” We as the men of John’s day have to answer the question, “What think ye of Christ?”
I. Who is He that comes to us for acceptance with such lofty claims?—
1. He is the eternal Word—thus called because He reveals God and the hidden things of God (Eph_3:9; Rev_6:1), and in Himself declares the beauty of the divine nature, since He is “the brightness of His glory,” etc. (Heb_1:3).
2. He is eternal, for He was in the beginning the only begotten Son, “the firstborn before all creation” (Col_1:15). He did not become the Son of God. He was not created. He was. He existed with God, not in God, but with Him, the Man who is God’s “fellow” (Zec_13:7). He was not merely an attribute or a power of God, but a divine person co-equal with God from all eternity; for “the same was in the beginning with God” (Joh_1:2). And as a divine Person His position is the highest, cannot be higher, for He was God; so exalted is the Being here revealed. And when this truth has been grasped we are prepared for the further declaration that this exalted Being is—
3. The Creator of the universe, of all created things (Joh_1:3). He revealed God in creation. With the Father and the Holy Spirit He is the creator and upholder of all existences—not only of the ὕλη (hyle), i.e. material existences, but of all things, “the things in the heavens and the things on the earth,” etc. (Col_1:16). In Him are the sources of all beauty and order, all power and wisdom, all riches and fulness. He is the source of all; and thus when His people rest on Him they know no want, for His fulness is infinite. And as the upholder of all things, in whom all things subsist, He is—
4. The source and spring of life for men, for He is the life absolutely (Joh_11:25), life essentially, which He communicates to men, which takes its rise in the divine fulness of life, and which has its continuance in communion with God. By Christ men escape from spiritual corruption. He gives life in reconciliation, sanctification, glorification—eternal life. Whoso abides not in Him abides in death.
5. And this life brings light. “The human soul on whose consciousness God arises, and into which the divine life enters, becomes thus enlightened. This enlightened soul then sees itself and the world in light, i.e. in God” (Petri). Christ is essentially the light for men. From the hour when the first promise of restoration fell on the ears of fallen men, down through patriarch and prophet until His manifestation in time; and since His ascension, through His truth He has proved Himself to be the light of men. And despite the darkness which cannot comprehend it (Joh_1:5). His light is shining toward the perfect day. Then the last and most wonderful step in the manifestation of Himself is—
6. “The Word was made flesh” (Joh_1:14), and men beheld His glory. It was no merely supernatural or superhuman manifestation that He made to men. “God was manifest in the flesh” (1Ti_3:16). Christ the eternal Son took on Himself the nature of man. The manifestation was not confined to a mode in which men could not comprehend it. In love to men He came in human form to dwell among them, and to make clear to them the truth of truths. And in His coming He brought blessing. He was full of grace and truth; in Him there was fulness of divine blessing for men. Such was He who was thus gloriously revealed, and to whom the heaven-sent forerunner bare witness as the true light, etc. (Joh_1:9).
II. How did men receive Him?—
1. “He was in the world,” etc. (Joh_1:10). The darkened world did not comprehend Him. The world here means the lost race of men, for the material world did recognise its Creator and obeyed Him. But men have strayed from the light. The love of God, by which we chiefly know God, does not exist in the heart of the natural man. Though most sad, yet this is not exceeding wonderful. But it is more than sad to consider that—
2. “He came unto His own,” etc. (Joh_1:11). He came to those who were descendants of Abraham, who looked for the Star of Jacob, the Son of David (Num_24:17; Isa_11:1). Yet though He was the seed of David according to the flesh (Act_2:30), “sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mat_15:24), His own, shut up in the darkness of formalism and traditionalism, did not receive Him, as this Gospel specially shows, although they should have been attracted to Him and bound by double ties of loyalty and love (Isa_1:2-3). Though prepared by prophecy and promise, and especially warned and called to repentance, in view of His manifestation among men, by the forerunner, they turned away. This means more than the world’s want of knowledge. That was, indeed, the manifestation of the pitiable blindness of man’s fallen nature. Here we have the deeper blindness of unbelief and spiritual pride—the rejection of the guidance of the Spirit, who through the Word would have enlightened them. What a depth of judgment lies in the words, “His own received Him not”!
3. All did not reject. “To as many as received Him,” etc. (Joh_1:12). Thus there were some who believed in His name—in Him as the only begotten Son. They were not bound by the material Messianic conceptions of the unbelieving Jews. And to all such He gave “power to become children of God.” Christ is God’s Son by nature. Men by nature are “the children of wrath” (Eph_2:3). But united to Christ by faith they become His brethren, and in living union with Him are one with the Father. The Spirit of the Son is imparted to them, dwells in them, so that they cry, “Abba, Father” (Rom_8:11; Rom_8:15).
4. Christendom has been highly favoured—far more so than was Judaism. What shall be the result of not receiving Him now after all the proofs of His divine power and glory? (Heb_10:28-29). Let us receive Him with reverence, in view of what He is—with faith in His revealed word and finished work—with longing, feeling our need of all grace. Let us increase in union with Him, participating in His life, radiant with His light, growing through the fulness of His grace.
III. Christ is manifested as the end of divine revelation.—
1. The law was a partial and dim revelation of God’s mind and will. The law was given by Moses. It was an external economy given through a human lawgiver, who passed away. “The law was sent by a servant; grace and truth came by the Son.” The connection of Moses with the law was temporary; and the law, as a preparatory economy, was “a shadow of good things to come” (Heb_10:1). Grace and truth, like the Son, are for ever. These gifts come with Him, as part of Himself; they are received with Him, bestowed by Him in their fulness on those who receive Him. And in this coming among men—
2. He revealed the Father. “No man hath seen God,” etc. (Joh_1:18). Even Moses was vouchsafed only a partial revelation of the divine glory (Exo_33:18-23). No man can see God in His own essential glory (1Ti_6:16). The partial revelation given to the holy men of old was given through the grace of Christ, and they rejoiced to think of the fuller revelation that was to be made (Joh_8:56). Christ alone fully declares the Father to those who believe in Him (Mat_11:27). And the centre, the crown of this revelation is that of the Father, i.e. of eternal love (1Jn_4:8). “That they may know that Thou hast loved them, as Thou hast loved Me” (Joh_17:23)—this is the end of revelation.
Joh_1:1-4; Joh_1:14. “The Word was God.”—None of the gospel writers touch deeper chords of the eternal mysteries than the Evangelist John. He was doubtless, in the divine order, best fitted for conveying to men those deeper truths. “The disciple whom Jesus loved,” he perhaps understood better and sympathised more deeply with his Master than the other disciples. Hence he was likened to the eagle by ancient Church writers, as best able of all the Evangelists to look fixedly on the glory of the Sun of righteousness. His flight indeed is so lofty and prolonged that sometimes men can hardly follow him, even those gifted with keen spiritual vision. In this introductory portion of the prologue to his Gospel the Evangelist emphasises the Godhead of the Redeemer. The theme in all its fulness is far beyond finite, human comprehension. Men can advance only to the threshold of the divine mystery here revealed. There are two great facts meet us.
I. The eternity and divinity of the Word.—“In the beginning was the Word,” etc.
1. The imperfection of human language and the limitations of human thought make it impossible for even this most highly gifted and inspired writer to unfold fully the divine mysteries. But so far as careful and exact expression of thought can compass it, the divinity and eternity of Christ are here set forth. In these words the Evangelist passes beyond the limits of time and space into the eternities—into the presence of “the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy” (Isa_57:15). And there is revealed the existence in the Godhead of certain relations. In the beginning, and therefore in eternity, before all created existences were called into being, there existed, with God [or “in relation with God” (Godet)], One here called the Word. This divine Person, or hypostasis, though distinct, was yet in perfect unity with the divine Father, and “was God” [where Θεὸς without the article, “used as an attribute, simply expresses the notion of kind. It is an adjective which, while maintaining the personal distinction between God and the Logos, ascribes to the latter all the attributes of the divine Essence” (Godet)]. There was perfect unity between them, not only in Being, but in the revelation of the divine in the world.
2. The term “word” may be taken to mean generally “the expression of hidden thought,” etc. But it is more. It is the expression of our being, our true selves, when it is genuine and not feigned. So THE ETERNAL WORD is the expression not only of the thoughts, etc., but also of the Being of God. He is distinguished from God the Father, yet they are one. He is eternal, like the Father, and thus is before all things (Pro_8:22-28). And as words when sincere reveal men’s thought and their true being, so Christ, THE WORD, reveals the true nature of the Father, and His thoughts toward men; for “He is the brightness of God’s glory,” etc. (Heb_1:3). Thus He is the way to the Father, whilst still one with Him, as He claimed to be (Mat_11:27).
3. This divine relationship is of such a nature that it may be described as like the relationship between father and son. The thought in us is what is hidden. The expression in speech or action or character of our thought is the revelation of ourselves. So the Father, “dwelling in light that no man can approach unto,” etc. (1Ti_6:16), is revealed by the Son to men in His incarnation, of which many think there were premonitory tokens in His appearing as the Jehovah-Angel (Gen_22:11); the Prince of the host of the Lord (Jos_5:13-15); the Angel of the covenant (Mal_3:1). He was predicted as the Son (Isa_9:6); as Jehovah Himself (Jer_23:6; Zec_2:8); as He whose outgoings are from eternity (Mic_5:2). And as the Revealer of God He has been the light of men in all ages,—in the law written in men’s consciences, and given with ordinances to Israel; in the prophetic word; in His special dealings with Israel, and His general dealings with men; in the dim starlight of heathendom, as in the glimmering dawn in Israel.
4. He is also the life of men as the creative Word (1Co_8:6); and because this power continues “in Him all things consist.” A word implies a corresponding thought. That which is revealed in Jesus is God. He is not the Father; but as the Son He is eternally what He is with and through the Father.
II. In the eternal Godhead of Jesus the Word there is proclaimed to us:
1. The eternity of divine love. “Thou lovedst Me,” etc. (Joh_17:24). And therefore as “the lamb slain from the foundation of the world” He was the centre and channel to man of that heavenly love that never failed. Thus His redeeming power was not restricted to the ages following His atoning work on earth, but looked backward to the ages past. His coming in time and all it implied was a necessary part of that work which has not ceased since Eden’s fall, etc.
2. This great truth also is a cause of rejoicing to us in the present. This rejoicing comes in the individual Christian’s happy experience, in the general spread of righteousness, in the evidence of the power of His gospel to raise men higher and nearer to God. It is the foundation of the Christian’s confident hope of the ultimate victory of Christ over sin and death, of the high honour and lofty destiny of humanity through Christ’s “not taking on Him the nature of angels, but the seed of Abraham” (Heb_2:16).
3. And there is hope for the eternal future for humanity in this great fact. He who is the eternal Word, “the same yesterday,” etc. (Heb_13:8), who so cared for sinful men that He died for them, who by His gospel has advanced and continues to elevate the whole race, will not in the eternal future fail those who trust in Him. “Heaven and earth shall pass away,” but His promises will not fail. No power can prevail against Him, and He can and will give freely all things to those who are His (1Co_3:22). Therefore
“All hail the power of Jesu’s name,” etc.
Joh_1:3. Christ the creator.—These verses may be compared to the massive foundation courses of the structure of gospel history. They are laid deep and broad in eternity; they proclaim in truth that divine Rock on which our faith may rest secure, whatever storms may blow, whatever foes assail. Apart from this eternal foundation, humanity can rear no firm and abiding, spiritual and moral structures for the soul’s refuge amid the tempests that will arise. The structures reared on the shifting sands of merely human opinion have fallen and will fall. The building reared on this foundation will stand the test of the day of trial. In these simple phrases two grand truths present themselves for consideration, i.e. that Jesus Christ, the eternal Word of God, is the active agent in creation, and that by Him all things consist. Thus the sustaining and upholding of the created universe are part of His work—on Him it depends for its continuance. All things were created by Him (the original creative act was His), and without or apart from Him was not anything made that hath been made, i.e. the continued existence of created things depends on Him (see Dr. A. Maclaren, in loc.). We consider Christ as the agent in creation.
I. Christ was before creation.—
1. We are wont to think of the Redeemer more especially in reference to His redemptive work, and to leave out of sight His divine, eternal existence, which gives to His redemptive work its unique and incomparable value.
2. This foundation truth is revealed to us in Scripture—that Jesus Christ existed before all worlds. As the Son of the eternal Father, eternally derived from the Father, He is of the same substance, “equal in power and glory.”
3. Christ is expressly regarded as pre-existent by the New Testament writers. “He is the image of the invisible God,” wrote the apostle; and the Evangelist-apostle, in words in which he seems to struggle to give utterance to the grand truth, declares that the Word was God. Our Lord Himself claimed this eternal existence in the memorable words, “Before Abraham was, I am.”
4. In such declarations we are led beyond the bounds of time and space, before those shining orbs were swung in the abyss by the word of creative power. In the fathomless depths of eternity, in seeking to penetrate which thought and even imagination are powerless, Christ existed, i.e. with the Father, as the eternal Word.
5. There is community of nature between these divine Persons. The Son is not merely to be regarded as some attribute or power of the divine nature—not merely possessing some scintilla of the divine nature, as angels, or even man; but He is the complete reflection or image of the divine Father; He is the complete expression of the divine thought toward what is without; and also of the divine love, not alone toward what is without, but as that object in which God’s love found not only its expression but its satisfaction. “For only God is sufficient for God—the eternal Son for the eternal Father.”
II. Christ is the eternal manifestation of God.—
1. He is not merely the outward revelation of the Father, but He is so because He is eternally in and with the Father. All the fulness of the Godhead exists in Him. “It pleased the Father that in Him all fulness should dwell.” All the power, all the wisdom, and all the glory of the divine Father are communicated to the Son, residing in and issuing forth from Him with the same fulness.
2. The divine Word stands in this relation of unity with the Father, not beside Him as if He were another, equal to the first simply, but with Him in His eternal glory, so that all that the Father has the Son has, not from Himself, but eternally in and from the Father. “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way,” etc. (Pro_8:22).
3. The Word, however, has this further relationship toward what is without, if we may so speak, as the manifestation of God. “He is the Son as the brightness of the divine glory,” etc. (Hebrews 1), as “the image of the invisible God” (Col_1:15). He manifests the divine wisdom in creation, the divine love in providence and redemption.
4. And it is to this expression of the divine love going forth through the divine Son and Word that all things owe their being. As thought becomes visible, so to speak, through the spoken word, so that thought of the divine love and wisdom was expressed by the Son in works of love and wisdom.
“Love is the root of creation; God’s essence worlds without number
Lie in His bosom like children; He made them for this purpose only—
Only to love and to be loved again. He breathed forth His Spirit
Into the slumbering dust; and upright standing, it laid its
Hand on its heart, and felt it was warm with a flame out of heaven.”—Longfellow.
5. Christ the Lord is one with the Father; but He is also to be distinguished from the Father as receiving His fulness from Him and revealing and manifesting it within the bounds of space and time.
III. Christ manifests the divine glory in creation.—
1. We are wont to think and speak of Christ’s first advent, meaning thereby His appearing as the incarnate Son, and of His second advent in reference to His coming again to “make all things new.” But it must never be forgotten that there was what might be called the original and prior advent of the divine Word in creation.
2. “All things were made by Him”; “By Him God made the worlds” (Heb_1:2); “In Him were all things created” (Col_1:16). He is the centre into which the creative energy is poured in all its fulness by the eternal Father. “There is but one God, the Father, in whom are all things.” But Christ is the expression of the divine thought, and thus of the divine wisdom. He is the Son in full accord with the divine will; and as the manifestation of that will, working by love, “He made the worlds.” Thus “there is to us one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him” (1Co_8:6).
3. All created things therefore exist in and through Him. “But He Himself draws everything from the Father, and refers everything to the Father.” Thus has been manifested to created intelligences the glory of God. We see and know and adore His power and wisdom and love, His essential glory, in those works which are His works done by and through the eternal Son, in whom His divine fulness dwells.
We may learn here:
1. The essential and eternal glory of the Saviour. We are not to regard Him merely from the side of His incarnation, although that is His crowning glory. We should remember also who and what He is by nature, so that our adoration and service may be reverent as well as loving.
2. To rejoice that this world was made by Him whose nature and name is Love, and who pronounced all things “very good.”
Joh_1:3, last clause, and 4, first clause. Christ the source of the world’s life and the world’s upholder.—Christ reveals God in creation not only by the original creative act, so that all existences in the created universe bear the impress of His wisdom and power as the manifestation of the Father; He also communicates to the world those vital forces in virtue of which it continues to exist. The continued existence and order of all created things depend on Him.
I. Christ is the source of continued life for the world.—
1. “In Him was life,” etc. “In Him all things consist’ (hold and stand together). It is not only spiritual life we owe to Him, but life in all its grades. In the created universe physical as well as spiritual life depends on Him.
2. This also was included in that infinite fulness which it pleased the Father should dwell in Him. The continuance of all created things depends on Him. Without Him we can do nothing, and we are nothing (Joh_15:5).
3. Thus we can in some measure realise how much in accord with His nature it was that He (even when incarnate and with His glory veiled) should be able to make the material universe supply Him with the means of physical life (Joh_6:1-13), and that He should be able to bid back the power of death and restore to life those who were in the power of the last enemy (Joh_11:43-44). For when He appeared in the world as the visible manifestation of the invisible God He came unto His own (things) (Joh_1:11), τὰ ἴδια, which He created and sustains.
II. Christ orders and controls the universe created by Him.—
1. He is not a demiurge, who, having created an imperfect world, also controls it imperfectly, or leaves it uncontrolled (Heb_1:3). He has all power and might, and is able to order and direct the universe He has framed. And even though for a time He laid aside the heavenly glory and tabernacled among men, He showed His power over the forces of nature, etc.
2. “And now the Father hath highly exalted Him,” etc. “He hath put all things under His feet” (1Co_15:27). All rule, all authority and power, shall be subject unto Him. “All power is committed to Him in heaven and in earth.” “All things are delivered to Me of My Father.”
3. And this is true not only of physical nature, but of the spiritual and moral worlds. He reigns and rules in them also as King of kings; and He is guiding and controlling all things for an appointed end, for
“that great divine event
Toward which the whole creation moves.”
III. Christ’s rule in the universe brings joy and hope to men.—
1. He is the manifestation of God’s love and care for man; and whilst eternal Love, “the same yesterday, to-day,” etc., is on the throne of universal power, then all things shall be, must be well. Righteousness shall in the end prevail.
2. This hope we need in the midst of so much that is dark and terrible in the world and the history of the race. When the wicked seem to prosper and go unpunished, etc., still even the wrath of man shall praise Him; and He can make even the sorrows and trials of life redound to the good of His people. All things shall work together for their good, etc.
3. It brings, therefore, joy and hope to God’s people—to them only—to know that, however untoward the course of history may seem, however full of tribulation to themselves the experiences of life, Christ, who loved men and gave Himself for them in accordance with the Father’s will and desire, reigns in love on the throne of the universe. So they may cry exultingly with the poet,—
“God’s in His heaven. All’s right with the world” (Browning), and
“His purposes will ripen fast, unfolding every hour” (Cowper), etc.
Joh_1:4-5. Christ the life as the light of men.—In Scripture God and His working in the world are often symbolised by light and its effects. Indeed, from the first word of power (Gen_1:2) to the final description of the new heavens and earth (Revelation 21), the working of the divine energy in the universe is very frequently symbolised by light. The divine life and light are constantly linked together. Wherever the divine life is in reality, there also is the divine light; and wherever that light shines, there we know is life, spiritual and eternal. Thus it could not have been otherwise that, when the eternal Son came to the world, He came as the life and light of men. As the sent of God, bearing His image (Heb_1:3), He could not have given a clearer revelation of the divine nature.
I. This was the revelation for which humanity longed.—For this they prayed all down the ages. They needed a quickening life which would help them to throw off the mortal and moral malady which had brought their whole being under the dominion of death. They needed light, not only that they might know themselves and the meaning of the present, but that they might have some assurance for the future. For this the race longed—light to illumine the way in which they should go, life to quicken them to walk therein (Psa_43:3; Psa_119:37).
II. But are not man’s deepest needs forgiveness and freedom from sin?—Did not Jesus come “to save His people from their sins”? (Mat_1:21). Yes. But this is only another aspect of the same great truth. Sin is the cause of the darkness; nay, is that darkness that “covers the earth,” and the gross darkness that covers the people (Isa_60:2). Sin is the moral and mortal malady that is destroying the race. Therefore Christ, the true and only light, comes to disperse the darkness. Christ the life comes to save the perishing. This He does by imparting His life and light to men. Thus they become centres of the same? and thus ever more surely the darkness passes and the true light shines, the dominion of death is restricted and driven back.
III. Spiritual life and light are correlative.—
1. We cannot imagine the world of animated being existing without the great centre of the material world’s light, the sun.—In creation the first movement which led to the birth of order and beauty was the creation of light: “The ethereal first of things, quintessence pure” (Milton). When it vibrated in the chaotic elements, as the effect and accompaniment of the living, creative Spirit, it contained the promise and potency of the order and beauty which vanquished chaos and darkness. And in reference to this, Christ the Word is the light of the world (Joh_1:3; Pro_2:10-22, etc.).
2. So too is He the light of the moral world.—Humanity, by fatal choice, had become morally and spiritually dark—like a dark, sunless land. No perfectly healthy spiritual life could exist naturally in those fields of time in human nature—no bloom and fragrance of the higher virtues and graces of character could be expected—no fruit of higher service could be looked for. Not that all men at all times, during the long course of history until Christ came, were entirely in this dark state spiritually. Here and there among all tribes and families, in every period of earth’s history, some there were who saw the light, even though dimly and imperfectly. But those often solitary examples only served to emphasise more the intensity of the surrounding darkness. From the dawn of history we may trace the process of unfolding of the divine life in the intellectual and moral life of humanity. Although this life was never utterly destroyed by sin, it was yet enfeebled and darkened. Men lived in a dim moral and intellectual twilight, in which they erred from the heavenward path, as in the gloomy reaches of some vast, primeval forest, through which they vainly struggled often toward the light. Often they wandered further from the path to perish in the gloom. What a confused tangle, as of a gigantic, impenetrable undergrowth, has been the moral history of men! How few clearings were there where a glimpse of sun or star could be obtained! Through what thickets of ignorance, error, and moral obliquity have they had to press ere they could gain the light of freedom, truth, righteousness! But wherever the light of God, the Spirit of Christ, came, the darkness fled.
3. In one race this was conspicuous.—They gained a vantage-ground, through divine grace, from which the paths of truth and righteousness could in part be traced. But it is since Jesus, the light of the world, came to earth, that men have been guided more readily from the tangled mazes of ignorance and sin into the paths of truth and rectitude. This is not the statement of a theological dogma merely. It is the testimony of the annals of our race. It is an indisputable fact that wherever Christ’s Spirit comes with power, there in a marked degree intellectual life quickens and expands and a higher moral order reigns.
IV. But these effects arise ultimately from a change in the spiritual nature of men.—
1. It is there that the deepest darkness has reigned, and there emphatically that Christ is the light of every man. Through the working of His Spirit alone, quickening to a new and higher life, can man attain to true life and light. Hear one of the ancients: “By the conclusions of reason we cannot learn the will of the gods.” Thus spoke Socrates; and his great disciple also said: “If the gods themselves do not reveal the heavenly, you will search the universe in vain for it.” Thus the wisest among the heathen spoke words that amply confirmed the apostle’s saying: “The world by wisdom knew not God.”
2. As a consequence of this darkness all spiritual life was paralysed.—In Israel the moon of revelation of type and ceremony gave a pale, prophetic light. But among the heathen darkness as to God’s will and way reigned supreme. Now here certainly Christ is the light of men. Not only by His teaching but by His life he manifested the divine will and made known the Father to men. And with this revelation a new love comes into men’s hearts. Heat rays accompany the light rays. The nature that lay frozen in the spiritual darkness thaws beneath this combined influence. The heart that was hard and selfish is softened and transformed. The light brings a quickening power. During the long winter of the arctic circle, when only a fleeting aurora lights up the gloom, nature lies frozen and lifeless. But in summer, when the sun rises not to set for many days, the frost unlooses its hold, and under the combined influence of light and heat rays vegetation advances rapidly, quickened into sudden vigorous life—emblem of the nature of man when it is turned toward Christ, the life and light of men! The records of history and the continual testimony of experience declare that Christ is “the true light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.”
Joh_1:6-7. The forerunner.—Here we have delineated the true character of John the Baptist, and his chief function as the forerunner of our Lord. He was a witness for Christ, and came for that end.
Consider the witness of John the Baptist to Christ, and the testimony of Christ to His forerunner.
I. The witness of John the Baptist to Jesus Christ.—This forerunner sent from God had all the characteristics of a perfect witness.
1. He was a faithful and disinterested witness;
2. A witness fully instructed and enlightened;
3. A faithful and irreproachable witness;
4. A zealous and ardent witness;
5. A constant and steadfast witness.
II. The testimony of Christ regarding John.—The Saviour of the world honoured His forerunner, and bore witness concerning:
1. The greatness of his personality: “Among those born of woman,” etc.
2. The dignity of his ministry: “What went ye out to see? a prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet,” etc.
3. The excellency of his preaching: he was “a burning and a shining light.”
4. The efficacy of his baptism: Jesus cometh unto John to be baptised of him.
5. The holiness of his life: “What went ye out to see? a reed shaken with the wind? a man clothed in soft raiment?”
Lesson.—Let us seek to live a holy life, so that Jesus Christ may confess us one day before His Father; and let us fear lest He may have to witness against us in view of the contradiction He may find between our life and conduct and that of John the Baptist.—Bourdaloue.
Joh_1:12-13. The divine sonship of believers.—The great races of heathen antiquity loved to trace their descent from the gods, and the father of gods and men, through a long line of demigods and heroes. This was no doubt a reminiscence dimmed and blurred of the great truth that man is made in the divine image. Far otherwise is it with a large section of scientific and literary thinkers of this age. They are seeking strenuously to prove that man is of the earth earthy. But materialism means death to human progress, and gives the lie to the feelings and aspirations of men. Therefore even leading materialists are fain to take refuge in agnostic theories or even spiritualistic puerilities. These theories of materialistic evolution are exercising a widespread influence. Even in the Church are found men who seek to reduce religion also into a product of the dust. But there have not been wanting others who have taken up arms against such attacks, even many who have given no special allegiance to the Church. Many of our greatest modern thinkers uphold the truth that men are offspring of the Eternal.
I. Men by nature are the offspring of God.—
1. God is “the Father of our spirits.”—Objections have been urged against this truth. It is said the only relationship of men to God is that of subjects to their sovereign ruler, creatures to their creator. But can they not bear the other relation also? Can it not be so among men, and shall the Creator be less free than the creature? True, it is not specifically in the material part of our being that we are God’s offspring. His image is reflected in the conscious, reasoning intelligence—in the heart or moral nature—in that conscience by which His law is authoritatively revealed for our guidance; whilst the signs of His fatherly love and care are all around us, and a bountiful provision is accorded to us far above what is bestowed on all other living creatures in the world. Divine revelation upholds this truth also (Mal_2:10; Isa_63:16; 1Co_8:6).
2. This truth is not negatived by the fact that God deals retributively with those who despise His government and break His laws.—Many a ruler has had so to deal with a law-breaking child. God’s spiritual children by creation have rebelled against His righteous government, and have banished themselves, as it were, from the divine presence—have alienated themselves from God, and laid themselves open to the penalty which inevitably follows as a consequence of the breaking of divine law.
3. But even though they are fallen and alienated, no longer able to call God Father, yet He shows a paternal interest in them, proves that He cares for them with a father’s love.—For has He not devised a way by which His law may be vindicated and His rebellious children reconciled? Surely the fact of His doing this is an indisputable proof of fatherly love—above all, when it is considered in what manner that tender love and compassion were manifested, etc. When this is considered, the prophet’s words will become luminous—“Thou art our Father, O Lord, our Redeemer,” etc.
II. But the text speaks evidently of another sonship than the relationship all men bear to God by nature. The true Light of men is represented as giving power to those who believe on Him to become sons of God.
1. Why was this needful? i.e. if men were already sons of God. They have become estranged from God through sin, from their heavenly Father’s fellowship—have lost the privileges and repudiated the obligations of sonship. They do not regard God with filial reverence and affection and confidence. The gifts of His providence are still bestowed on them; but they have no claim to, and naturally no desire for, the inheritance of the saints. But God’s love is not turned from them. He is ready to receive them if they will return. This is impossible in their state of alienation; they could have no taste for the life of God’s children, could not keep the laws and rules of the Father’s house, or be fitted for the communion of saints. Of themselves they cannot return. Sin has choked the springs of wise and higher affection.
“Sin only is it that enslaveth him,
And maketh him unlike the Good Supreme.”
Dante, “Par.,” vii. 79.
2. But what is impossible with men is not so with God.—In no other action was God’s fatherly love to men more manifest than in His method of redeeming men (Joh_3:16; 1Jn_4:9).
“Therefore it God behoved in His own way
To bring man back into the perfect path.”
Dante, “Par.,” vii. 31–34.
“To as many as recognised Him” (as the true light), etc. Men must recognise Christ as their Saviour, must awaken to a sense of their lost and ruined state, and look to Him as the way of return to God. To such He gives power, etc., i.e. not only pardon, freedom from guilt of sin, peace (to many these alone seem necessary), but also a new spiritual life, in which they break the fetters of evil and step once more into that spiritual liberty and communion with God for which they were created. This is the way of return to this high dignity—not by descent as children of Abraham, or as born in the Christian Church, or by any man-made plans or means (Joh_1:13); but by recognising Christ as the only begotten Son, and by the power of His love, through the grace and truth of His Spirit, being transformed into His likeness, do men attain the end of their creation and become again children of God (Eph_2:13; Gal_4:6).
III. This is the grand purpose and aim of the gospel.—This restoration of men reveals in higher measure than could otherwise have been done God’s unspeakable love to fallen men. “Behold what manner of love,” etc. (1Jn_3:1). What, in comparison of this, is the state of princes or the pomp of kings? And of what shall they be thought worthy—what shall be the end of those who, by continuing in a state of sin and alienation, not only rebel against God’s rightful authority as Creator, etc., but despise and think lightly of His wondrous love? Oh think, impenitent ones, what it is ye are rejecting to your own eternal loss! Children of God in Christ Jesus, remember your high privileges and duties! To you infinite Goodness promises every good and perfect gift: help in time of need; chastening when discipline is necessary; ever-growing communion through the Spirit indwelling, and in the end the assured hope of the blessed inheritance. Such are your privileges; and your duty may here be summed up in one word: “Walk as children of God, as children of the light and of the day.”
“Like as a wheel is equally revolved,
So let your will and your desire be moved
By the love which moves the sun and other stars.”
Dante, “Par.,” xxxiii. 143.
Joh_1:12-13. Children of God.—It would be impossible to analyse all that is contained in this astonishing and grand statement. It will suffice for edification, and prove a stimulus in the way of duty, to consider a few of the conceptions called up by such words. Eternity will not exhaust their meaning. Consider:—
I. The greatness of the thought brought before us.—
1. In pondering it we seem to be like explorers standing on the borders of a vast undiscovered territory: mighty rivers, great mountains, vast plains rise to their wondering gaze.
2. But what are all such wonders compared with the marvellous vista opened up in these words in time and eternity? “Children of God”—who can comprehend its fulness, who can tell its greatness and glory? The astronomer gazes with awe and wonder on the sublime spectacle of the starry heavens, and gets glimpses of the glory of the universe.
“Then felt I like, some watcher of the skies
When a new planet swims into his ken;
Or like stout Cortez when with eagle eyes
He stared at the Pacific—and all his men
Look’d at each other with a wild surmise—
Silent, upon a peak in Darien.”—John Keats.
But here there are glimpses given of truths more astonishing and glorious than those of astronomy.
3. The Psalmist had some conception of these truths when he wrote: “What is man that Thou art mindful of him?” etc. (Psa_8:4). But the Evangelist sees more deeply through Christ into the mystery of divine goodness and love when he writes: “As many as received Him,” etc.
II. May men become children of God?—
1. At the present time the tendency seems to be to show that man is nothing more than the offspring of the dust—a higher kind of beast, but all the same simply a lineal descendant of the beasts that perish. It is not man’s future which concerns so many nowadays, but his past.
2. Whatever truth may lie at the basis of modern development-theories it has not yet been definitely and indubitably stated. It does not really matter much whether man physically was made by a direct act of the Almighty, or evolved from lower forms. All that can be said is that the theory is still a theory merely.
3. The main question is, What is man’s present and future? Is he a “magnetic mockery, wholly brain,” or is there within him that which tells of his relation to a higher sphere? Is there not within him a spirit which is his true self, and which may be brought into close relation with Him who is the source of all true life, moral and spiritual?
4. Men know their weakness and sinfulness so well that many stand abashed before this lofty height to which they are called to attain—to be children of God, or, as the apostle said “partakers of the divine nature.” Many seem to think it might be possible for an Enoch, etc., who look down so serenely from the lofty height of their character, to achieve this; but not ordinary men. But they were “men of like passions with ourselves”—with the same temptations, etc. And to us as to them the command is issued, “Be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect.”
III. How can men attain to this height?—
1. What is the nature of the divine Being? He is “wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.” Because He is so He is the eternal and unchangeable Jehovah. And it is by becoming like Him, by being made partakers of the divine nature (2Pe_1:4), that men become His children.
2. But how shall we who cleave to the dust be able to build up within us this lofty character? Without some inner spring it would be impossible. The text tells us “as many as received Him, to them gave He power.” The receiving of Christ brings men into permanent union with the source of divine spiritual life. They are then born not of merely earthly elements. The reception of Christ is followed by the communication of a new principle, divine and heavenly, from which the heavenly character grows.
3. And the constraining force from within, which flows from this new life and which contains all its characteristics, is the power of love. It is the foundation principle of the divine nature. God is love. “Every one that loveth is born of God.” It is the love of God reconciling sinners to Himself that made it possible for men through redemption to become His children; and it is the mighty constraining power of this love within that gives them the power to live and walk as His children.
4. The power of a pure affection among men to constrain and bless cannot be estimated. And thus love to God working within, quickened by the Spirit of all grace, helps men to remove those obstructions that hinder their divine fellowship. When loving Him they realise His mercy, love, goodness, etc., in some measure; they will not continue to harbour what God abhors—sin, to remove which the Redeemer suffered and died. The love of Christ leads men to imitate Him, to empty their hearts of self, to take up the cross and follow Him. And as all the attributes of the divine nature inhere, so to speak, in this principle of love, so when the love of Christ constrains men it is that they should become holy, etc., as He is—i.e. children of God in Him.
IV. The condition of attaining.—
1. It is not in ourselves, but in Christ. We must know Him and receive Him in faith. The Jews as a people did not receive Him. To those who did He gave the right—which comes from God through union with His Son. They are adopted as spiritual children, babes in Christ, and thenceforward grow in the divine likeness (2Pe_1:3-4). They are even here members of God’s great spiritual family—“of the household of God” (Eph_2:19).
2. They seek through His grace to escape the corruption that is in the world through lust—to advance daily in the knowledge of Christ.
3. There is an easy gospel preached by too many. The New Testament reveals only two courses of life. In the one men rise by grace through victory over self to become children of God. The end of this course is eternal blessedness and joy. In the other men fall ever further away from God, the source of all true life and light. The end of this course is darkness and death. Those who receive and follow the Saviour shall be like Him. Those who live for this passing, perishing world, and are filled with the world’s spirit and life, cannot be called “children of God” (1Jn_2:15-17).
Joh_1:14. The Word made flesh.—No one can for one moment doubt that this refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. Observe:—
1. His peculiar denomination, “The Word.”—John is the only one of the sacred writers who speaks of Him under this name; but this does not render it less worthy of regard, for “he wrote as he was moved by the Holy Ghost.” Three things seem to be derived from John’s use of the title.
(1) It is intended to mark a person. Nothing can be more forced than the meaning that it here means the wisdom of God. How could the wisdom of God be made flesh, etc., and be called the Only Begotten, etc.?
(2) The term marks previous existence. This is evident from the phrase The Word was made flesh, etc.
(3) The term is designed to mark a divine person. The name given to God is expressly given to the “Word.” Creation is ascribed to Him. This could not have been affirmed of a mere creature, or even of a super-angelic being. John here declares that He was God; and that He was the source of all life and existence.
2. Christ’s incarnation.—The Word was made flesh—i.e. He became man, although not ceasing to be God. As He was God before, so He could not cease to be God after He took on Him our nature; for He took not on Him, etc. (Heb_2:16). Hence the Scriptures ascribe many things to Him which will not apply to His divine nature or agree with His human nature separately. “Unto us a Child is given” does not refer to Him as God. “And His name shall be called Wonderful” does not refer to Him as man. There is neither contradiction nor impossibility in the incarnation of the Son of God; but it is a mystery, and will perhaps ever remain so. It is thus that the Deity is brought down to our apprehension—that He becomes our example, is able to sympathise—thus to suffer, bleed, die for us, etc.—W. Jay.
Joh_1:14. The end of Christ’s humiliation.—The apostles preached “Christ.” The only object that can give peace to the soul is “Christ and Him crucified.” To know Him is life. The first truth taught here is the humiliation of the Son. It is laid down in two parts.
I. The humiliation of the Son of God consisted in His being made flesh.—
1. What is not meant.
(1) It is not meant that He really took a body without a soul. As He dwelt among us He had also a loving human soul (Joh_12:27).
(2) It was not a sinful body. “He offered Himself without spot to God.” The one thing in which He differed from men was sin (Heb_4:15). His humanity was holy.
2. What is meant. He, the Word, became one with a holy human soul, and with a body with our infirmities, such as thirst, pain, etc. Why was He made flesh? (a) That He might obey the law of God in the same nature that had broken the law. He was made under the law that He might obey it, and under the curse of the law that He might endure it. It is the first of these that is brought forward here. He came that He might obey the law and do more honour to it than if it had never been broken. This is one reason why He remained so long on the earth—to show that the law is good. (b) He was made flesh that He might die, and bear the law’s curse (Heb_2:3; Heb_2:14). If He had remained in the bosom of the Father He could not have suffered. Therefore, in order to die He became flesh. (c) He became flesh that He might have sympathy with men (Heb_2:17). None but those who have felt as we have can have compassion and sympathy (Exo_23:9). So God says to Christ, You know the heart of a man.
3. The second part of His humiliation. He dwelt among us. “Tabernacled among us as in a tent.” His life was one of poverty—He had not where to lay His head, etc.
II. The glory that burst through His humiliation.—We beheld His glory, etc. Angels saw it. The doctors in the temple were astonished at His words. At the marriage of Cana of Galilee, etc., it was seen. What is it? The glory of the divine perfections, divine wisdom, divine love, etc.
1. The glory of the divine wisdom was shining through Him.—This was seen not so much in His miracles, etc., as in the plan of redemption—the scheme He accomplished when He said, “It is finished.”
2. The glory of the divine love.—His very appearance in the manger at Bethlehem was a display of this love. When the sinner is brought to peace, when the soul says of Christ, “Here will I rest”—here is the glory of the divine love. Have we seen it?
3. The glory of the provision laid up in Christ.—“Full of grace and truth.” Some may say, If Christ be so glorious I cannot come to Him; I can only say with Peter, “Depart from me,” etc. How can I come? There is but one answer: He is full of grace and truth. He is full of grace for them who deserve wrath. How could the publicans and sinners sit beside Him in Levi’s house? “He was full of grace.” How suitable a Saviour! He is full of truth. “The law given by Moses,” etc. The law was a shadow; Christ is the substance. All that is in Christ is truth. The pardon He gives is a true pardon. The peace He gives is true peace. Come to Him. There are these two reasons why all should come:
(1) He is full of grace;
(2) He is full of truth. You need a divine Saviour, and yet you need one full of grace. There is none but Christ answers to this description. He is full of grace, though full of glory. Will you not let Him save you?—McCheyne.
Joh_1:16. Christ’s fulness of grace and truth.—The fulness of Christ here spoken of is the fulness of the divine attributes dwelling in Him, manifesting itself in that glory, full of grace and truth, which men beheld. And it pleased the Father that this “fulness” should be in Him as the Redeemer, so that men united to Him might freely receive of it; and that the Church of His redeemed might become “the fulness of Him that filleth all in all.”
I. In Christ’s divine fulness there is provision for man’s need.—
1. God saw our need of all things—our “emptiness and woe”—our need of light on the path of life, of guidance and direction in the way of duty, of comfort in view of death, of peace in view of sin.
2. And Christ has filled up all these needs of ours. He is the Way, the Truth, the Life. He is the Light of the world. When He speaks Heavenly Wisdom speaks. Dwelling in the bosom of the Father, He has perfectly revealed the divine will. He brings peace through His atonement, and thus meets our utter need of salvation and grace. And He was able to effect this because in Him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
II. This provision is unfailing and inexhaustible.—
1. Christ is the same yesterday, etc. (Heb_13:8). The streams of grace and truth are ever full and overflowing from that perennial fountain.
2. “All we have received,” etc. To the Church during all these centuries grace has followed in the train of grace.
3. Have any ever found this fountain to fail when they have come in faith and longing? Has not each blessing received prepared the way for another (Mat_13:12)? Every measure of grace gained by the faithful disciple fits him for receiving a fuller measure (2Pe_3:18).
4. From the eternal fulness of the river of grace all may drink without diminishing one drop of its full tide. And then for millions now and in eternity it shall flow.
Joh_1:17. The law and grace—Sinai and Calvary.—In these words there is brought before us the preparatory and the final, the incomplete and the perfect revelation of God’s will—the temporary, typical, and the eternally abiding manifestation of His righteousness, mercy, and love. “The law was given by Moses.” It was a truly grand manifestation of the righteousness and holiness of God. It pointed out clearly the way to Himself. “Without holiness,” without conformity to that moral order revealed on Sinai, “no man shall see the Lord.” And if this revelation had stood alone it would have been, so far as men are concerned, a revelation of despair. “By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified” (Rom_3:20). To those who sought by this way alone access to God there was opposed an impassable barrier—the barrier of moral inability. “If there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law” (Gal_3:21). But even the law itself, on its ceremonial side, showed its inability to give life, and pointed the faithful to the promise both concealed and revealed in it. The law led men, by showing them their inability to attain to its standard, directly to the promise, whilst the promise pointed and led them to Christ. And in Him that ability to attain is found. He does not give a mediate and partial revelation of God’s mind and will, as did Moses. He Himself is the embodiment and manifestation of the Father’s nature, of His love toward men; and thus also He is the revealer of that blessed truth, in part revealed, in part hidden, in law and promise. To-day then we stand in view of the two mountain peaks of divine revelation. On the one hand rises Sinai, stern and forbidding, filling the sinner with awe. Yet to the faithful, relying on the promise, even at Sinai hope shines amid the darkness, telling that the God who thus has revealed Himself has done so for men’s weal, and points them to that higher mountain—morally higher—rising beyond, wherein Christ grace and truth meet, where righteousness and peace are reconciled (Psa_85:10).
Let us gaze to-day fixedly at those two peaks of divine revelation, Sinai and Calvary, so that we may be led to rest more trustingly under the cross of Him who suffered on Calvary—“Jesus, the mediator of the New Testament.”
I.[1] On Sinai we behold the forceful lawgiver publishing an inexorable law; on Calvary the suffering Redeemer manifesting the fulness of divine grace.—
1. How vast is the difference between the two scenes presented to our view! The law was given on Sinai under conditions of awful solemnity befitting its nature: the thick cloud covering the mount, with lightning flash and thunder roll; the trumpet sounding louder and louder as the stern proclamation was given that the people should not draw near (Exo_19:16-20). It was a fitting accompaniment to the delivery of a law that revealed the divine holiness and truth, the divine justice and judgment, awful in their unswerving onward march to those who stand unprotected and unreconciled opposing them. For to sinful men the law was no proclamation of peace and life. As a revelation of the righteous character and will of God, as a formulation of those statutes written on men’s hearts by the Holy One, and by men violated all along the course of their history, it showed forth the divine glory, and pointed to the summit toward which men must strive if they would escape the penalty of the broken law. But although it was given to Moses to proclaim this divinely revealed law, he could not implant in the hearts of his people the spirit of obedience; he could not impart, or only dimly and imperfectly, the secret of that motive power which leads men to obey. The divine Sovereignty loomed conspicuous behind the thou shalts and thou shalt nots of the positive commands. The work of Moses, the stern lawgiver and leader, endowed with power to proclaim the divine will, to threaten and punish the disobedient, was a necessary work. In order to do God’s will men must first know it, have it proclaimed to them in its purity and fulness. God cannot be truly known, and men’s relation to Him, until the awfulness of His purity, and the horror and condemnation of sin, are seen in the light of His law. And men still need this revelation. It is still a light thing with many to “commit these abominations” that “fill the land with violence” (Eze_8:17) and bring the divine judgments upon men. Thus to the end Moses and the law will bring to men “the knowledge of sin.”
[1] Divisions after Gerok.
2. But should we wish this to be all? Could we bear that yoke which even the chosen people were unable to bear? Could it bring us peace to listen to Moses alone, as many would actually have us do? No. “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse” (Gal_3:10). And therefore we must turn to that fuller revelation of the mind of God given on Calvary. It is another voice that speaks to us from that holy mount, another and yet the same. For whilst there we still hear echoes of the voice that of old brought dread to Israel; and see in that crucified and thorn-crowned form, as in a mirror, the awful penalty of sin—
“Sins not His own His spotless soul
With bitter anguish tore.”
Yet we hear still more clearly in that same voice the accents of love and mercy, and see in the suffering Redeemer “the mediator of a new covenant,” etc. (Heb_8:6).
II. Sinai speaks of judgment and death; Calvary of righteousness and life.
1. There is something congruous and harmonious between the natural aspect of “the mount of the Lord,” where the law was proclaimed to Israel, and the meaning of the law itself in its reference to man.—The mountain top is a scene of desolate and solitary grandeur—giant cliffs of granite rising in sublime loneliness into the blue of heaven. But at the mountain foot stretches a small, but comparatively fertile plain, whilst here and there among the wadies, where springs gush forth, are patches of verdure and fertile spaces. So on the summit of the moral Sinai sits the divine Lawgiver in awful solitude. None of human kind by himself may venture to approach—can approach—that solitary height. And yet to those who, in times long gone, heard in the intervals behind the thunder tones of the divine Majesty the “still, small voice” of divine pity, compassion, and mercy, there were even at the base of Sinai fertile reaches, where they might dwell in safety, discerning in faith that the promise was above the law, which cannot annul the promise (Gal_3:17).
Sinai still speaks to men as to Israel of old of condemnation and death. The Mosaic economy is expressly called by St. Paul “the ministration of condemnation.” Thus condemnation, judgment, is the end of the law. And is it not so still? It was emblematic of what the law would be and is to men of all time that at its delivery the summit of the mountain “was altogether on a smoke,” that a thunderstorm enwrapped it, and that the earth trembled and quaked. Well might earth tremble with her sons when it is remembered what the issues were that depended on that day’s revelation—blessing or curse, life or death (Deu_11:26-28; Deu_27:14-26; Deu_30:15).
And so to men now the mountain smokes, the thunders roll, the earth trembles when they seek anew a way to God by the law of Sinai; and they are compelled to add their Amen to the apostle’s word: “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them” (Gal_3:10). Which of us will dare to say with the young ruler, as the ten words are laid before us: “All these things have I kept from my youth up” in thought, word, and deed? (Mat_19:20; Job_9:3). There is none—no, not one—can stand before the Holy One when He reckons with us for His broken law. By way of the mount of the law there is no peace or safety for men—rather condemnation and death.
“Christian turned out of his way to go to Mr. Legality’s house for help; but, behold, when he was got now hard by the hill (Mount Sinai), it seemed so high, and also that the side of it that was next the wayside did hang so much over, that Christian was afraid to venture further, lest the hill should fall on his head: wherefore, there he stood still, and wotted not what to do. Also his burden now seemed heavier to him than while he was in his way. There came also flashes of fire out of the hill that made Christian afraid that he should be burnt; here, therefore, he did sweat and quake for fear.”—Pilgrim’s Progress.
By this way there is no attainment, no bringing to perfection—sometimes lofty purposes ruined, attempts at the higher life frustrated—until the soul despairing cries out like the apostle: “Oh wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” (Rom_7:24).
2. And it is here that those who desire deliverance will be led to look past and beyond Sinai, and in view of Calvary to exclaim: “I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Joh_1:25).—How different is the aspect of Calvary when compared with that of Sinai! In place of the towering, frowning, forbidding cliffs of the latter, the little hill of Calvary is insignificant. But in moral grandeur it far overtops Sinai’s most majestic peak. There are no elements of fear and terror there. It is true, that uplifted Victim bleeding and dying on the cross of shame speaks of judgment and righteousness—so also do the darkened heavens and trembling earth. But it is for Him who hangs there that these portents appear. It is He, bearing Himself the sin of the world, whom those ministers of divine wrath against sin, suffering and death, compel to drink the bitter cup to the dregs. But, beyond that, Calvary tells us of eternal love and eternal spiritual life. For He who hangs there is sent in love by Him who uttered His voice on Sinai; and He came willingly to do that to which Sinai pointed, but in which the law failed, and must fail. “What the law could not do,” etc. (Rom_8:3). Therefore the voice that speaks from Calvary is the voice of love. It does not bid men stand back, but rather calls them near. “Look unto Me,” etc. (Isa_45:22). “Ye are come to Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant,” etc. (Heb_12:24). Here on Calvary’s mount true righteousness blooms and fructifies for men. On Sinai’s granite top men cannot plant trees of righteousness; for them no flower and fruit of holiness can bloom there. But on Calvary a perennial fountain springs; there all the plants of righteousness may grow, and there fertility and beauty abound. “Blessed are they that hunger,” etc. (Mat_5:6). “Satisfied not through their own efforts, but by grace divine.” “O blessed office of the New Testament, which preaches righteousness, and yet proclaims redemption and life in the name of Jesus to all who seek salvation! Though I could bring water from the smitten rock like Moses, and though I could call fire from heaven like Elias, yet would I rather proclaim to a sinful, penitent heart, ‘Be of good cheer, thy sins are forgiven thee’; I would rather open heaven to a troubled human soul by preaching the eternal love of God, and the heavenly home of His children” (Gerok).
III. On Sinai there was ordained a temporary economy; on Calvary Christ is the mediator of a covenant which is enduring.—
1. At Sinai there is no abiding.—The Israelites paused near it for a time; and having received the law passed on to realise it in the concrete form of a separated and consecrated people and nation. For many a century they strove to realise what the law pointed to and required. “But the law made nothing perfect.” The rites and sacrifices of the old covenant, when observed and offered according to the letter only as means of salvation, and without reference to their hidden typical, spiritual meaning, were worse than useless (Isa_1:13-15). And even the moral law, when regarded merely as an objective standard to which the outward life and conversation were to be conformed, became a galling yoke, an unspeakable burden, The law, in its outward, objective form, was passing and temporary. It is “our schoolmaster—to bring us to Christ” (Gal_3:24). Its rites and ordinances passed away when Christ appeared and completed His atoning work. They were but shadows, that was the reality. Its moral precepts could not pass away, for they are the eternal reflection of the all-perfect character of God. To the believer, however, they are no longer an objective law, but a subjective standard, whereby aided by divine grace we may test and regulate our lives.
2. Thus the temporary economy passed away to give place to the abiding Covenant of Calvary.—“Jesus was worthy of more honour than Moses, inasmuch as He who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.” Moses was faithful as a servant over the House of God; but Christ as a Son over His own House abideth ever (Heb_3:3; Heb_3:5-6). “Christ alone brings to men the grace of life in communion with God; and truth, which is the beautiful reflection of the divine holiness. For Christ alone is eternally full of grace and truth as the only begotten Son” (Besser). Thus the new covenant which He makes is unchanging as His own eternal nature. He, as God, is “the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever.” The preparatory testament passes; but the gospel remains. The offerings and sacrifices of the legal covenant are rendered nugatory by that “blood of sprinkling which speaketh better things than that of Abel.” But the moral precepts of the old law remain as our criterion of life and attainment. And it is thus by Sinai that most earnest souls are startled at the view of their own weakness and sinfulness, and led to Calvary for redeeming grace and spiritual strength.
HOMILETIC NOTES
Joh_1:3-4. The only begotten Son of God is called “the Word” because:
1. He reveals what is hidden;
2. Manifests what is unseen;
3. Actively and creatively expresses the divine thought. He speaks and it is done, commands and it stands fast. “All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made.” With what the heart is filled the mouth runs over. That with which the heart of God is filled is locked up in the Word, who is with God and was God.
The Word was with God and was God.—The Evangelist here warns us against and keeps us from:
1. A Judaistic numbing idea of the solitariness of the divine nature in the phrase the Word was with God; and
2. From a heathenish polytheistic idea when we further read and realise that the Word was God.
3. Without blasphemy, therefore, or the deification of man, do we in Christian baptism baptise in the name of Christ, as the name of the Son equal with the Father, as we baptise in the name of the Father and of the Holy Ghost.—From Kögel.
The starting-point of St. John.—Instead of opening his narrative at the human birth of our Lord, or at the commencement of His ministry, St. John places himself in thought at the starting-point (as we should conceive it) of all time. Nay rather, it would seem that if בראשׁית at the beginning of Genesis signifies the initial moment of time itself, ἐν ἀρχῇ rises absolute conception of that which is anterior to, or rather independent of, time. Then, when time was not, or at a point to which man cannot apply his finite conception of time, there was—the Logos or Word. When as yet nothing had been made, He was. What was the Logos? Such a term, in a position of such moment, when so much depends on our rightly understanding it, has a moral no less than an intellectual claim upon us, of the highest order. We are bound to try to understand it, just as certainly as we are bound to obey the command to love our enemies. No man who carries his morality into the sphere of religious thought can affect or afford to maintain that the fundamental idea in the writings of St. John is a scholastic conceit, with which practical Christians need not concern themselves. And, indeed, St. John’s doctrine of the Logos denotes at the very least something intimately and everlastingly present with God, something as internal to the Being of God as thought is to the soul of man. In truth, the divine Logos is God reflected in His own eternal thought; in the Logos, God is His own object. This infinite Thought, the reflection and counterpart of God, subsisting in God as a Being or Hypostasis, and having a tendency to self-communication—such is the Logos. The Logos is the Thought of God, not intermittent and precarious like human thought, but subsisting with the intensity of a personal form. The very expression seems to court the argument of Athenagoras, that since God could never have been ἄλογος, the Logos must have been not created but eternal. It suggests the further inference that since reason is man’s noblest faculty, the uncreated Logos must be at least equal with God. In any case it might have been asked why the term was used at all, if these obvious inferences were not to be deduced from it; but, as a matter of fact, they are not mere inferences, since they are warranted by the express language of St. John. St. John says that the Word was “in the beginning.” The question then arises: What was His relation to the self-existent Being? He was not merely παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ, along with God, but πρὸς τὸν Θεόν. This last preposition expresses, beyond the fact of co-existence or immanence, the more significant fact of perpetuated intercommunion. The face of the everlasting Word, if we may dare so to express ourselves, was ever directed towards the face of the everlasting Father. But was the Logos then an independent being, existing externally to the one God? To conceive of an independent being, anterior to creation, would be an error at issue with the first truth of monotheism; and therefore Θεὸς ἧν ὁ Λόγος. The Word is not merely a divine Being, but He is in the absolute sense God. Thus from His eternal existence we ascend first to His distinct Personality, and then to the full truth of His substantial Godhead. Yet the Logos necessarily suggests to our minds the further idea of communicativeness; the Logos is speech as well as thought. And of His actual self-communication St. John mentions two phases or stages: the first creation, the second revelation. The Word unveils Himself to the soul through the mediation of objects of sense in the physical world, and He also unveils Himself immediately. Accordingly St. John says that “all things were made” by the Word, and that the Word who creates is also the revealer: “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory.” He possesses δόξα, that is in St. John the totality of the divine attributes. This “glory” is not merely something belonging to His essential nature, since He allows us to behold it through His veil of flesh.—Canon Liddon.
Joh_1:5. The world a dark place.—In paradise, before sin entered the world, spiritual darkness was unknown. But when sin entered it was like a cloud shutting out the light of God’s love, of His law, His will, His way. The world—the world of men—became truly a dark place.
I. But the light shone in the darkness.—
1. In the promises;
2. In the law;
3. In prophecy. Christ is the radiant centre of the Old Testament Revelation 4. And even among the heathen there were witnesses of the divine presence, glimmerings of divine light (Act_14:17; Act_18:27).
II. The darkness comprehended it not.—The world of men apart from God is darkness (Isa_60:2).
1. One chief reason why the darkness cannot comprehend the light is that unrighteousness reigns in men’s hearts. “He that doeth truth cometh to the light”; whilst those who do evil “hate the light” (Joh_3:20).
2. The entrance of light disturbs—shows what is noisome and unlovely in the moral world, causes pain and dissatisfaction. Men, therefore, do not desire naturally that light should penetrate the darkness. It is the love of darkness that prevents the light shining in on men.
Joh_1:6; Joh_1:8. “There was a man sent from God,” etc.—
1. “John was not that light.” He was but the aurora—the dawn, the herald of the sun-rising.
2. He was not the Word, but was a voice proclaiming the Word.
3. He was not the Way through the wilderness, but a guide to lead men to faith. Is it not the glory of the office of preacher, that the servant of the Word should speak all given to him by God, in order to lead men to Christ, and not to put himself forward?—After Kögel.
The true light.—τὸ φῶς, τὸ ἀηλθινόν: the true light. The epithet ἀληθινὸν is not true in contrast to false, but true in contrast to that which is derived or subordinate. The Greek has two words to express these ideas, ἀληθὴς and ἀληθινός, corresponding to verax and verus in Latin; but the English language has only one word, and we are obliged to express both ideas by the word true. In the preceding verse it is said of the Baptist: “He was not the light, but came that he might bear witness of the light”; and then follow the words: “the true light was He who came into the world.” The Baptist, in one sense, was the true light. He was, as our Lord Himself says, “a bright and shining light” (Joh_5:35): ἀληθής, true, as opposed to false. But, in another sense, he was not the true light: ἀληθινός, true, as opposed to that which is subordinate and derived. Christ was as the sun, the original source of light; the Baptist was as the moon, deriving all its light from the sun. Ἀληθινὸς is a favourite term with St. John. It occurs twenty-eight times in the New Testament, and twenty-three of these occur in the writings of St. John—nine in the Gospel, four in his First Epistle, and ten in the Apocalypse. Thus our Lord declares Himself to be the true bread (ὁ ἀρτὸς ὁ ἀληθινός), which came down from heaven (Joh_6:32), not implying that the manna was not also the bread which came down from heaven; but that He was the original, of which the manna was only the type and emblem. So here Christ is the true Light, the archetype, the origin of all lights; all other lights are derived from Him as their source. As Archbishop Trench observes: “The eternal Word is declared to be τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν, not denying thereby that the Baptist was also a burning and a shining light, or that the faithful are lights in the world, but only claiming for a Greater than all, to be ‘the light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.’ In the words of our own great poet:—
“ ‘Our little systems have their day,
They have their day and cease to be;
They are but broken lights of Thee,
And Thou, O Lord, art more than they,’ ”
ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον: coming into the world.—Here consists the difficulty in the exegesis of the passage. In the original the language is ambiguous, and grammatically admits of two different translations; and hence the true meaning is to be determined by other than grammatical considerations. There are two distinct series of interpretations:
1. Ἐρχόμενον may be taken in the accusative, agreeing with πάντα ἄνθρωπον, its nearest antecedent.
2. It may be taken in the nominative neuter, agreeing with τὸ φῶς. Adopting the first interpretation, we have the translation, “The true Light was, or was existing, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” This is the meaning preferred by Meyer, one of the greatest of modern exegetes, and was generally adopted by the early expositors. It is the meaning given in the Authorised Version. The great objection to it is that the words “that cometh into the world” are superfluous, as they are already implied in every man. To this Meyer replies, “There is such a thing as a solemn redundance, and we have here an epic fulness of words.” But such as “that cometh into the world” is never used in Scripture of ordinary birth, whereas it is frequently employed of the Incarnation—Christ’s coming into the world. In St. John’s Gospel it occurs seven times.…
Christ is the light of men: He is the source of all spiritual light to the saints both under the Old and under the New Testament dispensation; He is the source of all devout thoughts and all holy aspirations among the heathen; He is the voice of God speaking in the conscience of men. He is the Sun of righteousness shining in the midst of the darkness. All truth, all righteousness, all holiness, proceed from Him. He is not merely the Head of His body, the Church, but the King of the souls of men. He is the Spirit of all history. He regulates the events of the world. He rules and disposes all the affairs of men. Everything that happens is predetermined by Christ. He holds in His hands the destinies of the nations, and renders all things conducive to the accomplishment of His purposes. He is made Head of all things for the good of His Church. It is this living Christ in the world and in the soul that explains Christianity, and is the reason of its success and diffusion. If it were not for Christ, the world and the Church would both perish. In Christ all things consist. There is a sense in which it is true that Christ is in every man. In Him is life, and the life is the light of men—the true Light that lighteth every man.—Dr. J. Paton Gloag in “The Thinker,” December 1893.
Joh_1:13. “Not of blood,” etc.—And we, with all our literary fame and technical activity, with our pride in our religious reformation, cannot say we deserve to be called sons of God. To whom much is given, of them much will be required.… God’s children, as the name implies, must be born of God. As James writes (Joh_1:18), “Of His own will begat He us,” etc. Pride drives men to better their position. Jesus must give them the power, however, to change their condition. Who among us desire to be God’s children, and pray that they may be so? Who among us solemnly resolve, “I will arise and go to my Father”? Who among us are yielding themselves to be encouraged and strengthened by Him who has said, “No man cometh unto the Father but by Me”?—Kögel.
Joh_1:1-14. Three advent questions arising from this subject:
1. Do we diligently read the Scriptures?—One ought to read on one’s knees the Gospel of John, which, as it has been well said, has the simplicity not of a child, but of a seraph. When, many years ago, there was published in France a so-called Life of Christ—a sceptical, superficial work, which was much read in our own city—one of the greatest of German historians said, “A single line of the Gospel of John will prostrate that image of clay in the dust.” And it cannot be forgotten by me how the two Dutchmen—the physician Dr. Abraham Capadose, and the poet Isaac da Costa, both Jews originally, and both baptised in one day in Leyden—told me what an influential part in their conversion was due to reading the introduction of St. John’s Gospel, with its attractive power in the union of simplicity and majesty. Untouched by the novelties of the day, etc., the Gospel of John will continue to be read. “For God’s ways are not our ways,” etc.; and the natural man understands not the things of the Spirit of God. The heart will harden, the people become shallow, when they will not study the thoughts of God. Rather follow the Psalmist (Psa_119:17-18).
2. Do we rest on God’s eternal counsel of love?—Jesus saw the wrath of foes enkindling, and He said, looking toward the gates of eternity, “Before Abraham was, I am.” He saw the cup, the cross, and stood fast as He prayed, “Father, glorify Me,” etc. (Joh_17:5). The more restlessly and inconstantly the waves of the world roll, so much the more blessedly will the child of God be sensible of the anchor which “reaches unto that within the veil.” … See what St. Paul wrote in Rom_8:29. These promises rest, as he shows, on the preexistence of the Son of God—His divinity. On this rests His prophetic office; the atonement, in His office as great high priest; the right to His kingly title; the effect of His resurrection; His right of possession of the souls of men; His power for final judgment.
3. Have we received Jesus?—Not as a burdensome lodger, not as an occasional guest, coming and going on Sundays and feast-days, but as our legitimate Lord, our best friend, truest counsellor, most gracious advocate, and almighty intercessor? Or, alas! shall the complaint of Him who was homeless on earth rise against us, “The foxes have holes,” etc.? He who is the Alpha and Omega … does He not still come unto His own? Do we bring Him our children, give Him our hearts, defend Him against a faithless world? Will we be saved through Him, and through Him alone?—Abridged from Dr. R. Kögel.
ILLUSTRATIONS
Joh_1:1. The “Word.”—Without noticing even in outline any of the learned inquiries and discussions as to where the evangelist found this name, and in what sense he meant it, it is enough to say that it was already in use at the time he wrote, and probably long before. In particular it had been woven into elaborate religious speculations by the Jews living in Alexandria. Just as our modern scientific culture, or the scientific spirit, as it is called, is exerting a wide influence in the domain of religious thought to-day, so did Greek philosophy, particularly that of Plato, among these Jews. Taking the writings of the Old Testament as the divine source of spiritual knowledge, and rejecting mere verbal literalism of interpretation, they endeavoured to give philosophic expression to the truths they apprehended, and to build them into a philosophic system. Under such conditions the doctrines of the Word (the Logos) took shape in the school represented by Philo, and no doubt soon became widely known. There is no ground, however, for supposing that the evangelist borrowed the name from Philo; it was in far wider and older use, having its origin as far back as the first chapter of Genesis, which I have no doubt was vividly present in his mind as he wrote, “And God said,” “and God made”: so it runs throughout that chapter, preparing for the utterance of the Psalmist, “By the Word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth.” A word is a thought or emotion or volition expressed in sound, and abiding where it is lodged after the sound has passed away. You put yourself into your word, if it is a true word—your own mind, your own heart, your own will. In telling us that the Word was in the beginning, does the Evangelist then simply mean that God spake and called things into being by the word of His power? and that it was not “holy light” (as Milton sings), but voice or sound, that was the “offspring of heaven firstborn”? And is the voice of God here personified, as His “wisdom” is personified in the Book of Proverbs? Shall we say that God’s word in the beginning called the heavens and the earth into existence—that it afterwards came forth, generation after generation, to the children of men through the prophets—that in the fulness of time it came forth as a living and holy humanity—that God’s final word to men is a Man, even the Man Christ Jesus, who is the truth of God, the wisdom of God, and the power of God? We might be inclined to answer, Yes, it is but a strongly figurative way of telling us this, were it not that the marks of personality are so numerous and decisive, not merely in separate expressions, but in the whole scope of the paragraph. The English Version is right in naming the Word He, and not It; He, the person—not It, the voice.—Dr. John Culross.
Joh_1:3-4. Not only is Jesus Christ the creator of nature, but He holds it together.—By Him all things consist, and so of all the unconscious forces of the world He is Lord; and those who wrote over the grave of one killed on the Riffelhorn the words, “It is I; be not afraid,” understood in whose hands are all the powers of the universe that seem so blind and unreined. But putting it more generally, Jesus Christ is the Lord of providence—the true King with plenary power. It is He who rules over the evolution of events and the disclosing of the epochs in the world’s history. “There is much to confirm the thought which has visited all in hours of gloom—that history is nothing more than a shifting phantasmagoria of passions and desires. Sometimes men seem to be flung together, a rude and chaotic mass of creatures, who fight and howl over each other, and die, and are laid in the hopelessness of a beast’s grave. Sometimes history seems no more than a series of petty stage-plays, without connection and leading to no issue. But even sceptical thinkers admit the organic unity of all history. Only to many each event is but a link in the long chain of the harmony of the universe; to such the organic development of history will mean the unbroken sweep of natural law, without one breath of the creative spirit from on high; while to a higher school of thought the one purpose of history is the purpose of everlasting love worked out in and through human personality by a personal redeeming God” (Dr. Robertson Smith). We see above it all the throne where the King sits, who holds all things in His hand, and guides them according to the purposes of changeless love. The true exposition and idea of history are to be found in the kingdom of redemption.—Dr. W. Robertson Nicoll.
Joh_1:5. The joy of light.—The pleasant, welcome, benignant, and gladdening natural light of the world is almost universally considered an image of similar spiritual conditions, and signifies, therefore happiness, prosperity, peace, joy, health, and blessedness. The opposites of light—night, darkness, obscurity, which are to us unpleasant, unwelcome, frightful, and terrible—are indications of an entirely contrary and highly repulsive condition. Hence they include the ideas of unhappiness, injury, dispeace, sin, wickedness, pain, sorrow, and misery. With especial frequency do we meet with this great opposition between light and darkness in the Johannine writings.—Lisco.
Joh_1:12. The grandeur of man’s being.—Many of the leaders of men have most strenuously opposed the degrading materialism of the age, and the degradation of man to a level with perishing things. Such men as Richter, Lotze, Ulrici, Tennyson, Carlyle, have done so. No one more convincingly than the last, in this century, has preached the truths of the grandeur of man’s being and destiny. “The essence of our being, the mystery in us that calls itself ‘I’—ah! what words have we for such things?—is a breath of heaven: the highest Being reveals Himself in man.… We are the miracle of miracles—the great inscrutable mystery of God. We cannot understand it, we know not how to speak of it; but we may feel and know, if we like, that it is verily so” (Carlyle).
Joh_1:12. Man differentiated from other existences.—Unprejudiced science also, cultivated by men who have not been dazzled by the glamour of empirical, scientific, “explain-all” nostrums, does not deny that there has been in man from the beginning that which differentiates and separates him from all other living and material existences within our ken. Geology finds no indubitable trace of man before the current epoch of the world’s material history, when seas and lands received their present conformation, and were peopled by those genera and species which, with few exceptions, now exist. And when man does appear it is with a new power—the power of intellect (underived from merely material existences and forces), bringing in its train changes and innovations, of anything like which the long preceding ages knew nothing (vide A. R. Wallace, etc.). In short, in opposition to all ghastly materialistic fancies, however famous the names of those who uphold them, unprejudiced science and philosophy alike confirm Scripture in bolding that “there is a spirit in man: and the breath of the Almighty giveth them understanding” (Job_32:8).
Joh_1:12. Better born.—A human analogy may help toward an understanding of this truth. In the slums of a great city there may sometimes be met, floating about on the malodorous tide which sweeps through those melancholy straits, one who, amid his rags and wretchedness, gives tokens that he is not a native of those dreary coasts. His speech, even when interlarded with the blasphemy and brutality of slumdom, betrays him. Something indefinite in manner and appearance—under all his swagger and bravado, under the rags and grime of the city’s purlieus—proclaims him as having been socially at one time of another sphere. As inquiries are made those suspicions are confirmed. The wretched waif was at one time in a high social sphere. He has perhaps noble blood in his veins. He was well educated. In his drunken fits he may quote Greek and Latin to enjoy the wonderment of a lodging-house crowd. Dissipation in various forms has brought him to the low level where he now lies. Is he fit for his former position? Could he in his rags and wretchedness live in his former noble home with parents and friends? Were he admitted even, would it bring any true pleasure to him any more than to them? Suppose a father’s love did descend to those depths, and bore away the prodigal to his home, clothed him, and gave him as far as possible the outward appearance of a gentleman, could there be any happiness to either whilst the old passions and habits still ruled the heart of the son, leading to many an outbreak and shameful scene? No. The man must first reform—break away from his debasing habits and associates—become a new man. Then he might, would, be received again into the old home as a son, doubly dear because rescued from a living death, and reinstated in the inheritance from which for the time he had been reluctantly cut off. Now, so far as a human analogy will serve, this shows us how men have lost that divine sonship, which was theirs originally, and how they can return by the way opened up by Christ. Surely a terrible thought for human kind it would be were there no hope for men beyond. Awful indeed it would be were all our strivings, all our advances in thought and knowledge to end for us at the cold grave’s brink! that men of one generation should leave for those who follow them wider ideas of the grandeur and possibilities of life, making the cup of existence more sweet, only that it may be dashed from their lips for ever at the gates of death!
Joh_1:12-13. Spiritual relationships.—Fellowship in the Spirit brings compensation for what is sweetest on earth—for the bonds of human love and friendship. It is truly a bitter loss and deprivation, which lasts through life, when a child is deprived of a mother’s love and a father’s care. But, nevertheless, faith gives superabounding compensations; and there is no orphan child, however poor and forsaken, whom we cannot point heavenwards and say: There thou hast a Father, the true Father of all who are called children in heaven and earth; there watches over thee more than a mother’s love, the love of Him who says, Though a mother should forget her child, yet will I not forget thee. It is truly a sorrowful position in which a bereaved wife weeps for the husband of her youth, the friend of her heart, the stay of her weakness. But blessed is she when she can stay herself on the best and heavenly Friend, the most faithful Counsellor, the Lord Jesus Christ. Many a lonely heart may with sadness regard a neighbour around whom joyful children are blooming, who gladden the evening of life. But knowest thou not that thou mayest beget spiritual children when thou dost edify immortal souls by word and walk, dost win hearts for God and His kingdom, just as a Paul or a John in their letters called those won by them their dear children? It is truly a bitter experience to stand alone in the world without friend or intimate. But it is sweet when a man realises that be is a member of the great fellowship of saints, bound up in the Spirit with all those who love the Lord, and can say: Whoever in the wide world does the will of God and believes in Christ, the same is my brother and sister and mother. It is truly sad when friend after friend is carried away from us by death; but there is also a most blessed comfort to be able to rejoice in hope of the shining company of blessed spirits in the heavenly Jerusalem above, of the innumerable company of angels, the Church of the firstborn and of the spirits of just men made perfect, of the vision of God and of Jesus the mediator of the New Testament. Yes; these are friendships which weigh thousandfold more than any earthly friendship. There fails not also of joy by which in the kingdom of God the joy of human fellowship is made up for. In place of the voice of father and mother there is the Word of God; in place of converse with a human friend, the converse of the heart with God, prayer; in place of an earthly dwelling of one’s own, the House of God, where one is best at home; in place of earthly pleasure this meat, to do the will of the Father in heaven; in place of human friendship this blessedness, to belong wholly to the Lord; in place of worldly cares for one’s self and one’s own, the peace of a soul satisfied with God. For earthly deprivation is given heavenly hope; and in the evening of life this comfort—I have fought a good fight; and beyond, the hope of the white robe of those who have come out of great tribulation, and the crown of the victor, and the fellowship of all the children of God. O Lord, take from us all, if it must be so, on earth; but only send us Thyself, and the blessed fellowship of Thy Spirit, and thine eternal, heavenly kingdom.—Translated from Karl Gerok.
Joh_1:14. God manifest in the flesh.—The eternal Son of God divested Himself of His glory, took upon Him the form of a servant, was found in the likeness of man, was found in fashion as a man—the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. This is manifestly the great mystery which this Christmas season has anew proclaimed to us. And when we besides behold our Saviour on His earthly pilgrimage from the manger to the sepulchre, growing up in the cottage at Nazareth, teaching in the company of His disciples, eating at the table of the publican, sleeping in the ship on the lake, weeping at the grave of Lazarus, shuddering on the ground in Gethsemane, bleeding on the cross on Golgotha, ever and always we may realise for the comfort of our weak flesh and blood, “God is made manifest in the flesh.” In our poor flesh and blood the eternal goodness has clothed itself. How gently and confidingly does the eternal divine Majesty look on us out of those human eyes! how simply and graciously does eternal Wisdom speak to us from those human lips! how tenderly and sweetly are the divine love and pity stretched forth to thee in the human hand of our Lord Jesus Christ! We rejoice and are touched when we read in the lives of great men how they were men like ourselves, had human feelings, had laboured and suffered,—when we read how Alexander the Great, once on a difficult march in a waterless desert, poured out the water brought to him by a soldier in his helmet, the only drops that could be obtained in a wide circle, because the king would not taste it before the most ordinary soldier in the army; or how Charlemagne went on all his life wearing simple linen garments, while his courtiers paraded their silks and sables; Low the good King Henry IV. was once surprised by a foreign ambassador sitting on the floor of his room playing with his children; or how the warlike Luther, when during the day he had boldly joined issue with king and pope, world and devil, in preaching and writing, sat together with wife and child in the evening like a good father of the household, and sang to the accompaniment of his lute. But all such human traits of great men, what are they in comparison with the condescension of the King of kings, who went about on earth in the form of a servant—in comparison with the gentleness with which the holy Son of God encountered sinners—in comparison with the deprivations He endured from the cradle to the cross—in comparison with the humble coverings in which He concealed His glory, from the swaddling-bands in which they enswathed the infant, to the grave-clothes which they wound round His body! God is manifested in the flesh. Therefore let all flesh rejoice. Yes, through this great Brother how is our flesh and blood ennobled, through this dear Guest how has this poor earth been honoured! The garment which a famous man has worn, were it ever so poor and threadbare, men will regard after the lapse of centuries as a precious heritage. Behold, O man, Christ has also worn that dress thou wearest—that dress of flesh and blood: must not then this body become holy to you, even to the fingers on your hand, at the thought, My Redeemer has worn this garment also? The house in which a great man has first seen the light of this world or has dwelt long years, or has drawn his last breath, is regarded after centuries as a holy place. A golden inscription above the door makes it known to the traveller, and from far-off lands men make pilgrimages to visit it. Behold, O man, this world which was for three-and-thirty years the dwelling-house of the holy Son of God. Here on the ground on which thou dost walk, here under the heavens that shine down on you, He was born, He walked, He suffered, He died. Must not then this world be dear to thee and worthy of honour, in spite of its penury, with all its sins and sorrows, at the thought: My Saviour was also pleased to be here, saw also all this, went through it all?—Translated from Karl Gerok.
Joh_1:14. “Full of grace and truth.”—To be full of grace and truth was indeed a glory. It was the meeting of two things which in the souls of men are antagonistic to one another. There are souls which easily bestow grace, which find it not hard to forgive, but they have often a dim perception of the majesty of that truth which has been violated. There are souls which have a clear perception of the majesty of truth and a deep sense of the sin that swerves from it, but they are often inexorable in their justice and unable to pardon; they have more truth than grace. Here there is a perfect blending of extremes—fulness of grace united to fulness of truth. There is a forgiveness which is valueless, because there is no sense of wrong; there is a sense of wrong which is forbidding, because there is no power of forgiveness. Here perfect forgiveness is joined with perfect perception. The glory of Christ’s love is that it comes not from darkness, but from light; He forgave the sinner because He bore the sin. Never was His forgiveness so complete as when He bore His fullest witness to the awful truth. When did He cry, “Father, forgive them: they know not what they do”? Was it when He began to think lightly of a violated law? Nay, it was when the violated law was pressing upon His soul, and the reproach of sin was breaking His heart. His love was born of His pity, and His pity was born of His purity. He felt that we had already lost what He called our souls. He saw us blind in a world of light, deaf in a world of music, cold in a world of warmth, heartless in a world of love, dead in a world of life, and He lifted up His eyes and cried: Father, I am clouded in their darkness, give them light; I am wounded in their sorrow, give them joy; I am pierced in their coldness, give them warmth; I am crucified in their death, give them life eternal. O Son of man, that was Thine hour of glory. There, as in tints of blended rainbow, met colours that before had been disjoined—righteousness and peace, justice and forgiveness, penalty and pardon, the sentence of death and the message of life. Heaven and earth met together, judgment and mercy embraced each other, in the fulness of Thy glory. The hour of sin’s condemnation was the hour of a world’s redemption. Grace and truth stood side by side.—Dr. George Matheson.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
William B. Godbey 1900 · Public Domain On v1 You observe, thus far, not a word has been…
JOHN’S GOSPEL
You observe, thus far, not a word has been said about John’s Gospel. Matthew, Mark, and Luke all wrote historically. Consequently, they go much together, most felicitously corroborating one another. Matthew wrote for the Jews, fifteen years after the ascension of our Lord; Luke, for the Greeks, twenty-five years after the ascension; and Mark, for the Romans, thirty years after the ascension. John wrote for the Christians, not so much historically as doctrinally, experimentally, and spiritually, about sixty-five years after the ascension of our Lord. A.D. 95, Domitian, the Roman emperor, had John thrown into a caldron of boiling oil at Rome, to make soap of him. In the providence of God, his work wasn’t done. Consequently he did not saponify, but enjoyed the hot bath, floundering round and shouting “Hallelujah!” Then the emperor had him taken out, and banished to the Isle of Patmos, in the Agean Sea. I sailed by it the other day in my detour from the Holy Land. At that time it was so infected with malaria as to be uninhabitable, and was used by the Roman emperors as a place of banishment for the worst criminals. His custodians arriving with him late Saturday afternoon, and throwing him out on the bleak rocks of that desolate shore, hastened away, leaving him alone, with the bones of his predecessors bleaching in the moonlight on those barren heights. The man of God prays all night. Next morning, which was Sunday (Revelation 1), the glorified Savior comes down from heaven amid lightning, thunders, and splendid corruscations, bringing heaven with Him; throws open the door, and invites His beloved apostle to look in, contemplate the wonders of the latter day, and write them to the people.
Read full note →
John spent the last years of his long and eventful life at Ephesus, the metropolis of Asia Minor, where history keeps track of him till A.D. 101, when, losing sight of him, we have no record of his death, Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, who lived in the second century, and John Wesley, as well as many others, believing that he was translated to heaven alive, like Enoch and Elijah.
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST
Joh 1:1-5. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” “Word” means revelation. The incarnation of Christ is the greatest revelation of God ever made to man. Hence, Word here simply means the Incarnate God. “The same was in the beginning with God.” Hence, you see that the Son, like the Father, is uncreated, never having had a beginning, and can never have an end. “All things were made by Him, and without Him there was nothing that was made.” You see from this, not only the co-eternity of the Son with the Father, but that He actually created all things; i.e., the Divinity becomes creative in the Second Person. (Colossians 1)
“In Him was life, and the life was the light of men; and the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not.”
Darkness is the concomitant of death, and light that of life.
William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Sermon Bible 1900 · Public Domain On v1 Why is it that, as you turn the page…
Joh 1:1
Why is it that, as you turn the page from St. Luke to St. John you seem to pass into another climate—nay, I might almost say, into another atmosphere? The answer is at least twofold. It is, first, that there was so much to tell, facts and teachings of so much deeper meaning than those which the first three Evangelists had had to bring before you. It is, secondly, that, in the growth of thought respecting the Christ-life and the Christ-nature, there had now grown up the full demand for the full answers to the numberless questions which St. John—and St. John alone—sets at rest.
Read full note →
I. It is curious to notice how, in each of the three Gospels, Matthew, Luke, and John, it is the genealogy which strikes the keynote; and how the keynote dominates their contents. In St. Matthew, the genealogy carries you up to Abraham, and the whole Gospel exhibits the Jewish Messiah. In St. Luke, the genealogy goes up to Adam, and you have throughout the Gospel the Saviour of mankind the compassionate Brother of the race. In St. John, the genealogy is carried back to all eternity: it tells you of a Divine eternal existence with God—not a separated existence, but with God; and of work done and functions fulfilled in that eternal existence—creation, life, light; and of a certain mysterious contradiction on the part of darkness to the Light. St. John’s prologue is no mere collection of theological dogmas stuck on to the beginning of his Gospel; it is rather this—that St. John exhibits the earthly Christ-life, as the prolongation into mundane existence of what had been going on in the unseen from everlasting. This is clearly St. John’s idea, and you see it reflected throughout his selection of facts and discourses. The special aspects on which St. John dwells in his picture of the Christ-life, are those which exhibit Him as being still with God as well as with men.
II. Thus it is St. John, who is so careful to tell us why Christ was made flesh and dwelt among us. It is St. John, who is so careful to exhibit the death of the Lord as a voluntary surrender—pleasing to the Father—freely rendered on His own part, and pleasing because thus freely rendered. Accept St. John’s view, accept his picture of the visible Christ-life as the visible half of a duplex whole, and the puzzle vanishes; the Gospel which deals with the deepest mysteries becomes in truth the Gospel of explanation.
A. R. Ashwell, Oxford and Cambridge Journal, Feb. 10th, 1876.
Christ the Eternal Word.
I. "In the beginning was the Word." "In the beginning—viz., of all things; farther back than the mind can conceive. For, form in your mind any image you will, however far back beyond the present state of things, of a definite point and a condition existing, and the beginning is beyond that. The expression is a simple one, but it baffles thought. We have here asserted, not that at some very remote period the world began to be, but that beyond the very remotest period which the mind can conceive, the Word was, was existing, not then brought into being, but then having His being and consequently, for such is the expression in which we take refuge when baffled by these things which stretch beyond the range of our ideas, "being from everlasting."
II. This Word, then, thus being in the beginning, is said also by the Evangelist to have been "with God." That is not with, in the sense of together with, or besides; but with in the sense of abiding with, as when we say, "I have it with me," or "He is abiding with us—with God, so as to be in that place where God especially was present, so as to be at home with Him and inseparable from Him. It is thus that the Word was with God as His beloved in whom He was well-pleased.
III. The next and concluding clause of our text now follows by an easy sequence. That which was in the beginning—that which was in the beginning with God and inseparable from Him—what was it? Could it be a created being? If so, a certain definite moment must have witnessed its calling into being; and before that moment it was not, and thus could not be in the beginning. With creation necessarily began the incidents and limitations of time. Created being is the channel, so to speak, in which the stream of time flows on. But the Word "was" in the beginning, and is therefore uncreated. Again, the Word was "with God." Could a created being accompany the Almighty in the inhabitation of eternity? Could it be said of the Jealous One, who giveth not His glory to another, that even the loftiest of His angelic ministers was, or could be, "with Him"—His assessor, His companion, the sharer of His glory, the impress of His substance? We are thus, you see, led on to the next declaration of our text, "the Word was God:" was no created being, no angelic intelligence, but partook of the nature and essence of God, equal with the Father, as indeed the very term itself implies. So that the Father in the beginning was not more, nor the Son less, Divine; but both were co-equal, and co-eternal. The Lord Jesus, in His humiliation, was the same Divine Person as before the worlds began; clothed in the garb of flesh, but not a different person. And if at that time we find Him performing acts of distinct personality, addressing the Father, speaking of the Father, so must it have been setting aside merely the difference made by His humiliation, in the beginning, when He was with God and was God. The fulness of the Father’s glory was upon, shone forth from, was expressed by, Him. "All that the Father hath," He says, "is Mine." You cannot exalt, cannot reverence, you cannot adore, the Son of God too much. There is no such thing as exaggerating His Divine majesty and glory. The worship which we owe to the Father, the same precisely we owe to Him. He Himself describes the purpose of His course to be, "that all men may honour the Son, even as they honour the Father."
H. Alford, Quebec Chapel Sermons, vol. vi., p. 1.
References: Joh 1:1.—F. D. Maurice, The Gospel of St. John, p. 1; C. Kingsley, Village Sermons, p. 176; Ibid., Discipline and Other Sermons p. 212; Joh 1:1-14.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p.3 43; vol. v., p. 31; J. H. Hutchins, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxiii., p. 71. Joh 1:1-15.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 472. Joh 1:1-18.—Expositor, 1st series, vol. ii., pp. 49, 103. Joh 1:2.—Preacher’s Monthly, vol. x., p. 294.
Joh 1:3
Christ the Creator.
I. The Church in her creeds has borne unequivocal testimony to Christ as the Creator. When we say that the Son of God made the worlds, we do not speak as of an act of His, independent of and disconnected from the Father: for this, from the nature of the Son of God, is impossible. The creative work of the Son is the carrying out of the creative purpose of the Father, not as by a subordinate agent to whom it is said, "Do this, and he doeth it;" for the Son of God is co-eternal and co-equal with the Father, and acts in accord with Him as a Divine personal Agent, delighting to do His will, and to carry out His purpose.
II. Now let us come down to the Gospel narrative, and connect this high truth with the Lord’s humiliation. We are not enough accustomed to do this. We are apt to forget His glory and His majesty in the meanness of His earthly investiture. To us Christians, who believe in Him as the Creator of all things, it is matter of deep interest to watch every simplest word that falls from Him in allusion to Nature and her processes, to man and his capacities; knowing as we do that such words will be spoken not from the weak and imperfect store of knowledge which man possesses, but from those inexhaustible stores of Divine wisdom which first devised them and brought them into being.
III. Note the references and consequences of this great doctrine relatively to ourselves. "What think ye of Christ?" is the most important question which can be asked of us. "Tell them all things were made by Him." What, then, is the world to us Christians? What but a standing testimony to the power and love of our Redeemer? Wherever I turn is Christ; without Him was nothing made. The cold abstraction known by the name of "natural religion," which never converted a heart nor amended a life, no longer chills my thoughts as I meditate on creation; the religion of nature is to me the religion of grace. All science becomes lighted up by the Redeemer’s presence. The Spirit of Truth is no longer the mere right-deeming of men; but the living Spirit of Christ. His mighty and beneficent presence equally watches over all nature, and ought to be discerned by us in it. Creation is but a part of redemption; it is but the stage on which the Redeemer’s great love is outwardly manifested.
H. Alford, Quebec Chapel Sermons, vol. vi., p. 18.
References: Joh 1:3.—H. W. Beecher, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxviii., p. 36. Joh 1:3, Joh 1:4.—H. Wace, Expositor, 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 198.
Joh 1:4
God’s Self-revelation through Life.
I. This Scripture opens to us God’s living way of making Himself known on earth. The Bible is the record and interpretation of a way of creation and of life which leads from the promise of the beginning on and on, with a purpose never given up, and a goal never lost from sight, and against all human gravitation downward from its high intent, until it completes its course in that one sinless life through which God shines—the true Light, the Light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. God has been present as a living power in man’s life, as the educating and redemptive power in Israel, as the grace and truth of life in Jesus Christ who has declared Him. Such is God’s real self-revelation; His life in men’s life, His life in the Christ for our life. The written Gospel is, indeed, worthy of the God-Man. His spirit is in it. Nevertheless, our faith in the real and original revelation, in the Christ of the Gospels, does not depend upon absolute flawlessness in the reflecting glass. That is a question, in fact, for the critics. Let them examine and scrutinise every point in the whole Bible to their hearts’ content. We are not anxious to dispute concerning the composition of the mirrors; we are content to receive the light which, by its own radiance, proclaims its celestial source. In this light of life we can walk, rejoicing as children of the day.
II. This Scripture discloses God’s way of illuminating our lives. Christ entering into human life is its light. The Christ from God alone is equal to all human needs. He only touches human nature in all its chords; beats all life’s music out; lights up all our history. Christianity alone is the truth sufficient for the life of the whole world. Christ renews man at the centre, and then throughout the whole circumference of his powers and possibilities.
III. Only through lives in real sympathy with God in Christ are we to receive the light of the world. You cannot, by any possibility, know God in Christ simply by argument and much reasoning. Through life to knowledge is the Christian way. Go and follow Jesus in His way of ministry among men, if you would know His Father and your Father. As God has come home to man through the life of Christ, so we are to draw near unto God through the Christian life.
N. Smyth, The Reality of Faith, p. 17.
The Joy of Living.
I. All lives created of God are happy lives, for His own life, of which they are offspring, is happy, and the children are as the Parent. The "new birth," of which Christ made such frequent and solemn mention, is the waking up of dormant faculties. It is the resurrection of buried powers. That part of the nature which the Spirit quickens is the highest part. Now, when the soul which was dead is made alive, what follows? Growth, strength, power. Power, then, begins to come to the man—power like the faculty which has been revived—spiritual power, soul power. The man’s life becomes divine in its harmonies. A thousand notes in him sound to one key; discordance has gone out of him, as it goes out of an instrument when it is retuned by a skilful hand. God knows no age, and the life which comes out of Him is for ever youthful. The soul which is urged outward and upward by the germinating pressures of Divine moods never reaches its prime. For the life that we have, through our imitation of Christ, is eternal life; that is, its great central characteristic is everlastingness. The leaf of this growth shall never wither; for there is no frost in all the heavens to smite it. Even as Jesus said, "He that believeth in Me shall never die."
II. The joy of living is found in the pure and proper government of the life. Only that which is clean is sweet. The life of Christ, therefore, or growth into a life like to the life that Christ lived, is growth into joy. Heaven comes as harvests come; because the root-life and the stalk-life were perfect after their kind, and being perfect made the perfect consummation possible. Joy is the fruiting of long and patient waiting. We carry the bloom concealed in the sap of our lives, nor shall we flower out till we get just so tall, and have lived just so long. We carry all our heaven within us, before its expression breaks out of us, as a tree carries all its leaves and blossoms under its bark, until the sun coaxes it to let man see the beauty.
W. H. Murray, The Fruits of the Spirit, p. 386.
Joh 1:4-5
I. In Christ was life, and that life was the light of men. We consider these words as marking such a derivation to ourselves of that life, that immortality which was in the Word, as can never be affirmed of the inferior tribes of this creation. Undoubtedly these tribes draw their life from the Word, at whose command it was that earth and sea and air teemed with animated being. But there is all the difference between deriving life from the Word, and having that very life which is in the Word an enlivening, illuminating principle within ourselves. It is this which is asserted of men, and we hail the assertion as a fine testimony to the nature of the human soul. "The life was the light of men"—the light of men, that which enables them to walk in a wholly different region from that of the beasts that perish, which irradiates, as it were, the universe, so that they can penetrate its wonders and scan its boundaries, whilst all other creatures of the earth are limited to a single and insignificant province. Who shall marvel that man is declared to have been originally formed in the image of God, when it appears that even now he bears within himself a principle which may be characterised as the life of his Creator? The heaven is still hung with its glorious lamps, and reason still burns brightly, and intellect is not quenched, and immortality wears a brilliant colouring, all because the Word, which never had beginning, consented to be born—the Word, which never can end, consented to die.
II. The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not." Man, in whom the lamp is lit up, is a fallen and depraved thing, alienated from God, and with all his moral faculties weakened and perverted. Conscience is a light, the light of the eternal Word, but a light shining in a dark place, where the shadows thicken so fast, and the gloom is so dense, that the rays fail to produce any moral illumination. Men in every age have been guided to a knowledge of their Maker from a survey of His workmanship, and might have learned from the manifestations around them so much of the character of God, as would have preserved them from idolatry. These have fallen into most degraded superstitions, these have abandoned themselves to every kind of unrighteousness, not because left without a revelation,—the universe is witness against this,—but simply because "the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not." What, then, remains, seeing how possible it is to continue in darkness in the midst of light, but that we pray earnestly with the Psalmist, "Open Thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy law"?
H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 2,598.
References: Joh 1:4.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 245; Ibid., vol. iv., p. 272; W. H. Jackson, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxix., p. 60; Homilist, New series, vol. i., p. 61. Joh 1:4-9.—H. W. Beecher, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiii., p. 281.
Joh 1:5
In these few and simple words the great Evangelist describes the agency of Christ in the world. In Him, he tells us, was life; vital power for time and for eternity, able to quicken and invigorate man, and to set aside death. And that life was the light of men. Accordingly, when He appeared here on earth in our nature, this His enlightening power was signified and displayed at the very outset. The Gentiles came to the brightness of His rising.
I. It is in darkness that the light is, and ever has been, shining. Whether it be the world or the Church that we speak of, this is equally true; and it is a truth belonging of necessity to the glorious and lofty nature of Christ’s manifestation of Himself. His light wins its way—not by absolute and irresistible power, but by gradual and persuading love. Like Himself, it struggles with the cold-heartedness and contradiction of sinners. It is not the lightning, withering as it flashes; not the conflagration, wasting in its advance; but the quiet light that looks in the night from the far-off hillside, telling of peace and comfort and security; which the traveller may seek, but which he may also avoid. It is contented to overcome the darkness of man’s nature by turning it into light; by a sure and blessed transformation, not a mighty and sudden overpowering.
II. Though in darkness, the light still shineth. In Judæa, in Samaria, in Galilee, it was never quenched. Amidst the slow-heartedness and littleness of faith of the disciples it shone with undiminished brightness. Throughout the whole history of the Church it has been shining on. Dark we may be, and even at this day for the most part in obscurity, but we have the light among us. While we have been weak, Christ has been strong; while we have been indolent and fickle, He has never been weary. While we have been darkness, His blessed light has been ever shining against and through and in spite of our darkness. If we were not darkness, if the light had exhausted its power and wholly penetrated us, we might distrust it for the deeper trials which are to come—for the storms which have yet to blow, the floods which have yet to fall; we might fear for the day which shall be revealed, whether we should then be found light in the Lord; but now that we see daily more of our own unworthiness and ignorance and darkness, now that the light is hourly shining onwards toward the perfect day, let us have all confidence in its endurance, and its power and its sufficiency.
H. Alford, Quebec Chapel Sermons, vol. iii., p. 1.
Christ Hidden from the World.
I. Christ, the sinless Son of God, might be living now in the world as our next-door neighbour, and perhaps we not find it out. And this is a thought that should be dwelt on. In the ordinary condition of private life people look very like each other. And yet, though we have no right to judge others, but must leave this to God, it is very certain that a really holy man, a true saint, though he looks like other men, still has a sort of secret power in him to attract others to him who are like-minded, and to influence all who have anything in them like him. And thus it often becomes a test whether we are like-minded with the saints of God, whether they have influence over us. Alas! too often we shall find that we were close to them for a long time, had means of knowing them, and knew them not; and that is a heavy condemnation on us, indeed. Now this was singularly exemplified in our Saviour’s history, by how much He was so very holy. The holier a man is, the less he is understood by men of the world. All who have any spark of living faith will understand man in a measure, and the holier he is, they will, for the most part, be attracted the more; but those who serve the world will be blind to him, or scorn and dislike him, the holier he is.
II. We are very apt to wish we had been born in the days of Christ, and in this way we excuse our misconduct when conscience reproaches us. We say that had we had the advantage of being with Christ, we should have had stronger motives, stronger restraints against sin. I answer, that so far from our sinful habits being reformed by the presence of Christ, the chance is, that those same habits would have hindered us from recognising Him. Observe what a fearful light this casts upon our prospects in the next world. Sinners would walk close to the throne of God; they would stupidly gaze at it; they would touch it; they would meddle with the holiest things; they would go on intruding and prying, not meaning anything wrong by it, but with a sort of brute curiosity, till the avenging lightnings destroyed them,—all because they have no senses to guide them in the matter.
III. Christ is still on earth. He is a hidden Saviour, and may be approached (unless we are careful) without due reverence and fear. He is here in His Church, in His poor, in His ordinances. Let us pray Him ever to enlighten the eyes of our understanding, that we may belong to the heavenly host, not to this world. As the carnal-minded would not perceive Him, even in heaven, so the spiritual heart may approach Him, possess Him, see Him, even upon earth.
J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, 4th series, p. 239.
References: Joh 1:5.—Homiletic Magazine, vol. xiii., p. 298. Joh 1:6.— P. J. Turquand, Christian World Pulpit, vol. v., p. 173. Joh 1:8.—Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 243. Joh 1:9.—Ibid., p. 107; Ibid., vol. viii., p. 74; H. W. Price, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxvii., p. 347; G. Brooks, Outlines of Sermons, p. 268; G. Huntington, Sermons for Holy Seasons, p. 141; Church of England Pulpit, vol. iv., p. 309; Ibid., vol. xiv., pp. 158, 257. Joh 1:9-12.—H. W. Beecher, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxi., p. 298. Joh 1:10, Joh 1:11.—W. M. Statham, Ibid., vol. iii., p. 232. Joh 1:10-12.—Homilist, vol. i., p. 209.
Joh 1:11
Jewish Interpretation of Prophecy.
I. To the Jew, the argument from Messianic prophecy should be irresistible for these two reasons: (i.) That, book by book, prophecy by prophecy, verse by verse, his greatest and oldest rabbis, his Targums, his Talmud, his Midrashim, his mediæval commentaries, regarded as Messianic the very same passages, the very same Psalms, the very same chapters of Isaiah, as we do; (ii.) that, since their rejection of Jesus, the greatest Jewish teachers, in refusing to apply these prophecies to Him, have been reduced to utter confusedness, amounting often to absolute apostacy from the faith of their fathers.
II. The difference between us and the Jews is not only that we say "The Christ has come," and that they say "The Messiah will come,"—they differ from us fundamentally as to the idea and personality of the Messiah. On two points they take their stand: they will not admit a Suffering, they will not admit a Divine, Messiah. Here, then, we join close issue. (1) A Suffering Messiah! We appeal at once to the Scriptures, both theirs and ours. On their own principles of interpretation, both ancient and modern, we ask who was the rejected Corner-Stone; the Stone of stumbling to both houses of Israel; He against whom the heathen raged; He whose hands and feet they pierced; He for whose price they weighed thirty pieces of silver; the smitten Shepherd whose sheep were scattered; He who was wounded for our transgressions—the bruised, insulted, suffering Servant of the Lord, who poured out His own soul unto death? Of whom speaketh the prophet this? If the rabbis of today want to take their stand against a suffering Christ, they must commit many and many a passage, not only of their prophets, but also of their Talmud and their greatest rabbis to the winds or to the flames. (2) Then on that second point of such infinite importance, the Divinity of the Messiah, the argument is cumulative and far-reaching, both in theory and in history. We make, with no less confidence, our twofold appeal, first to the Scriptures, next to their own highest authorities. We appeal to Psalms ii., xlv., cii., and cxl.; to the Child in Isaiah whose prophetic name was Immanuel—God with us; to Him who was called the Mighty God; to the Man whom Jeremiah calls Jehovah Tsidkenu—the Lord our Righteousness; to Him who in Zechariah is the Fellow of the Lord of Hosts; to Him who should come in the clouds of heaven. We appeal further to the titles given to the Messiah Himself, again and again in the Midrashim; to the acknowledgments by the Talmud—as all proving that the Jews themselves were inevitably driven by their own Scriptures to believe in a more than human Mediator, and to the admission that He, of whom all their prophets prophesied, was more than David, more than Moses, more than Adam, more than man; that He was the Prince of the Presence who existed before the worlds, whose reign is to be eternal, and who should never die. But beyond all these considerations of literature and exegesis, we appeal to the sacred eternal instincts of humanity. The world needs for its Lord and Redeemer at once a Suffering man and a Divine man. Hercules, from the hour when he strangled serpents in his cradle to the hour he died on the Œtan pyre, was a suffering hero. The Buddha, from the moment that he recognised the awful reality of death and anguish, was a suffering prince. All the heroes, all the reformers, all the saints, have been suffering men. A king who had not suffered could not rule. Yes, and the world needs a Divine man. If Jesus were not the Son of God, were not the Lord from heaven, we should love, we should honour, Him; but He could be no Redeemer, no Intercessor. It is because Christ is God that "there crowns Him the topmost, ineffablest, uttermost crown."
F. W. Farrar, Oxford Review and Journal, Feb. 15th, 1883.
References: Joh 1:11.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xviii., No. 1055; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 47. Joh 1:11-13.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxi., No. 1212. Joh 1:12.—H. W. Beecher, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 229; Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xii., No. 669; vol. xxx., No. 1757; Ibid., Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxv., p. 39. Joh 1:12, Joh 1:13.—S. Martin, Ibid., vol. ii., p. 295; H. W. Beecher, Ibid., vol. xxiv., p. 57. Joh 1:12-14.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. v., p. 417. Joh 1:13.—Homiletic Magazine, vol. xv., p. 168.
Joh 1:14
(with Rev 7:15 and Rev 21:3)
The word rendered "dwelt" in these three passages is a peculiar one. It is only found in the New Testament—in this Gospel, and in the Book of the Revelation. The word literally means "to dwell in a tent"—or, if we may use such a word, "to tabernacle;" and there is, no doubt a reference to the Tabernacle in which the Divine Presence abode in the wilderness and in the land of Israel before the erection of the Temple. In all three passages, then, we may see allusion to that early symbolical dwelling of God with man.
I. Think, first, of the Tabernacle for earth. The Word was made flesh, and dwelt, as in a tent, among us. St. John would have us think that, in that lowly humanity, with its curtains and its coverings of flesh, there lay shrined in the inmost place the brightness of the light of the manifest glory of God. The manifestation of God in Christ is unique, as becomes Him who partakes of the nature of that God of whom He is the representative and the revealer. Like the Tabernacle, Christ is the dwelling-place of God, the place of revelation, the place of sacrifice, and the meeting-place of God and man.
II. We have the Tabernacle for the heavens. "He that sitteth on the throne shall spread His Tabernacle above them," as the word might be rendered. That is to say, He Himself shall build and be the tent in which they dwell; He Himself shall dwell with them in it; He Himself, in closer union than can be conceived of here, shall keep them company during that feast.
III. Look at that final vision which we have in these texts, which we may call the Tabernacle for the renewed earth. "Behold, the Tabernacle of God is with men, and He will tabernacle with them." The climax and the goal of all the Divine working, and the long processes of God’s love for, and discipline of, the world are to be this, that He and men shall abide together in unity and concord. That is God’s wish from the beginning. And at the close of all things, when the vision of this final chapter shall be fulfilled, God will say, settling Himself in the midst of a redeemed humanity, "Lo! here will I dwell; for I have desired it. This is My rest for ever." He will tabernacle with men, and they with Him.
A. Maclaren, Christian Commonwealth, Nov. 26th, 1885.
I. "The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us." This is St. John’s declaration. He does not invent a great many arguments to prove it; he simply says "so it was." This poor fisherman, who was once upon a time sitting in his father’s ship on the Lake of Galilee, mending his nets; this man who was infinitely humbler and less self-conceited now than he was then; says out boldly and without hesitation, "This everlasting Word, in whom was life and whose life was the light of men—this Word, who was with God and was God—was made flesh and dwelt among us." And he adds, "We beheld His glory—the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father." We are sure that in this poor man, thus entering into our feelings and circumstances, we beheld the living God. Not some unseen power, some angel or Divine creature who might have been sent down on a message of mercy to one little corner of the earth, or to us poor fishermen of Galilee; it is not such a being whom we saw hidden under this human form: we declare that we saw the glory of the Father, of Him who made heaven and earth and the sea, of Him who has been and is and is to be.
II. That a meek, humble man, who believed that nothing was so horrible as to trifle with God’s Name, should have spoken such words as these, so boldly and yet so calmly, with such a certainty that they were true, and that he could live and act upon them, this is wonderful. But yet, this might have been, and the world might have gone on as if no such sounds had ever been proclaimed in it. What is the case actually? These incredible words have been believed. The question was, Who is the Ruler of the world? The Apostles said, "This Jesus of Nazareth is its Ruler." Their word prevailed. The masters of the earth confessed that they were right, Here in England, at the other end of the world, the news was heard and received. Then the day which said, "The Word has been made flesh, and has dwelt among us," became the Queen Day of the year. All the joy of the year was felt to be stored up in it. Every man, woman, and child has a right to be merry upon it. This is the festival which makes us know, indeed, that we are members of one body: it binds together the life of Christ on earth with His life in heaven; it assures us that Christmas Day belongs not to time but to eternity.
F. D. Maurice, Christmas Day and Other Sermons, p. 1.
The Incarnation.
The Word was from the beginning the only-begotten Son of God. Before all worlds were created, while as yet time was not, He was in existence, in the bosom of the Eternal Father, God from God, and Light from Light, supremely blessed in knowing and being known of Him, and receiving all Divine perfections from Him, yet ever true with Him. who begat Him. The Son of God became the Son of Man: mortal, but not a sinner; heir of our infirmities, not of our guiltiness; the offspring of our old race, yet the beginning of the new creation of God.
I. God was in the Prophets, but not as He was in Christ. In like manner the Holy Ghost came on the Apostles at Pentecost and at other times; and so, again, the Jewish Temple was in one sense inhabited by the Presence of God, which came down upon it at Solomon’s prayer. This was a type of our Lord’s Manhood dwelt in by the Word of God as a Temple; still, with this essential difference—that the Jewish Temple was perishable; and again, the Divine Presence might recede from it. But even when Christ’s body was dead the Divine Nature was one with it; in like manner it was one with His soul in Paradise. Soul and body were really one with the Eternal Word—not one in name only—one never to be divided.
II. Again, the Gospel teaches us another mode in which man may be said to be united with Almighty God. It is the peculiar blessedness of the Christian, as St. Peter tells us, to be a partaker of the Divine Nature. But still, inexpressible as is this gift of Divine mercy, it were blasphemy not to say that the indwelling of the Father in the Son is infinitely above this, being quite different in kind; for He is not merely of a Divine Nature, Divine by participation of holiness and perfection, but Life and holiness itself, such as the Father is—the Co-eternal Son incarnate, God clothed with our nature, the Word made flesh.
III. And lastly, we read in the patriarchal history of various appearances of angels so remarkable that we can scarcely hesitate to suppose them to be gracious visions of the Eternal Son. Whether or no the temporary outward form which the Eternal had assumed was really an angel, or but an appearance existing only for the immediate purpose, still, anyhow, we could not with propriety say that our Lord took upon Him the nature of angels.
IV. Great is our Lord and great is His power, Jesus the Son of God, Son of Man. He raised human nature, for Man has redeemed us. Man is set above all creatures, as one with the Creator. Man shall judge man at the last day. So honoured is this earth that no stranger shall judge us. But He, our Fellow, who will sustain our interests, and has full sympathy in all our imperfections; He who has given us to share His own spiritual nature; He from whom we have drawn the life’s blood of our souls,—He, our Brother, will decide upon His brethren.
J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. ii., p. 26.
Christ the Healing of Mankind.
According to the revelation made to us of the character and kingdom of God, and of the nature and conditions of man, there appears no other way by which we could be saved but by the manifestation of God in the flesh.
I. For, although it is most true that God might, in His almighty power, destroy the sinful race of mankind, and create another all holy in its stead; or separate the taint of sin and the power of death from our nature, and abolish them altogether; yet, we must not forget that God is not power alone, but Holiness, Wisdom, and Justice. There are deeper necessities in the perfections of the Divine mind and the laws of the spiritual world, which are the expressions of these perfections, than we can penetrate. As man, who has fallen under the power of sin and death, is a moral and responsible creature; and as his fall from God was through the misdirected energies of his moral powers; so the restoration of man, it would seem, can only be effected through the same means and under the same conditions. And therefore it may be that the immutable justice of God’s kingdom demands no less than the atonement of a Person.
II. Again, sin and death had power in and over the personal nature of mankind. It was from this we had to be redeemed. And for this cause the Person who should undertake the salvation of mankind must assume to Himself our humanity—that is, the very nature which He was to heal and to save—and put Himself into personal relation to us.
III. As the burden of our humanity is too great for any of us to bear without falling, no created and finite being, either man or angel, could so assume it as to raise it from its fall, restore its imperfections, and sustain it in strength and mastery over the powers of sin. Our humanity needed to be hallowed and strengthened: if fleshly, to be again made spiritual; if mortal, to be raised above the power of death; if outcast from God, to be knitted to Him again. So closely, indeed, are we knit to Him, that St. Peter does not fear to say that we are made partakers of the Divine Nature. Therefore He must needs by Himself purge our sins. None but He that in the beginning said, "Let us make man in Our Image," could restore again to man the Image of God.
H. E. Manning, Sermons, vol. ii., p. 1.
The Holy Scriptures only can answer the question, Who was Jesus?
They tell us—
I. That He is God. (1) The peculiar name of Deity is given to Jesus. (2) Works which belong to God alone are declared to be performed by Jesus. (3) In the representations of Scripture, attributes which can only belong to God are ascribed to Jesus. (4) Honour and worship, equal to the honour and worship of, God are claimed for Jesus. (5) Jesus is distinctly affirmed to be God.
II. That He is Man. (1) Jesus Christ calls Himself, and was called, the Son of Man. (2) The records of His life prove Him to have been really Man. (3) God the Father acted toward Jesus as a Man; and Jesus recognised this fact.
S. Martin, Westminster Chapel Pulpit, 3rd series, p. 1.
References: Joh 1:14.—Homilist, 3rd series, vol. ii., p. 338; Ibid., vol. iv., p. 170; Ibid., vol. vi., p. 340; F. D. Maurice, The Gospel of St. John, p. 15; H. P. Liddon, Christmastide Sermons, p. 123; A. Barry, Cheltenham College Sermons, p. 306; S. A. Brooke, Christ in Modern Life, pp. 63, 75; W. Braden, Christian World Pulpit, vol. viii., p. 385; A. F. Joscelyne, Ibid., vol. xvii., p. 182; J. F. Haynes, Ibid., vol. xx., p. 198; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. vii., p. 22; Spurgeon’s Sermons, vol. vii., No. 414; Ibid., vol. xxxi., No. 1862. Joh 1:15.—Homiletic Magazine, vol. ix., p. 38.
Joh 1:16
From this passage some lessons of great importance come to us. As—
I. That we should not try to live in the past, or by means of the past. As distinct from the present, we should not try to get a living, present nourishment out of states and frames and feelings, all dead and gone. You would not go roaming the woods on a bright summer day to gather the withered leaves of last autumn. Let them be. Let them sink into the soil, and resolve themselves back to dust. Trust Nature to get all the good out of them that is in them now, and to send it up and put it forth once more in leaf or flower or corn. If you want leaves, look at the summer trees; how they wave in the light, and quiver, and gleam—millions of them! If you had all the leaves that were green last year, you could not out of them all make one green leaf today. So, if you had your old states at command, if you could find them and go into them, they would not be at all what you think them. They would not fit you now, and you would not be satisfied with them. Is there not the living grace of the living day?—a living Saviour, and a living quickening Spirit, to meet your living soul?
II. That, as Christian men, Christian communities, we ought to be much afraid of stagnation, of settling on our lees, hiding our Lord’s money, sinking into a base contentment with what comes by the least effort, instead of still endeavouring after all that is attainable of higher and better. We should be afraid if we have not always something new on hand. The reason some men die spiritually, or sink into a slumberous, bedridden state, that leaves them as useless to the world as if they were actually dead, is, that they do not devise and execute new things.
III. There are those who have never had grace at all in the true, full sense. You have only had sin. You can exchange it for grace. And then—farewell, sin! For grace shall "reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord."
A. Raleigh, The Little Sanctuary, p. 85.
Notice:—
I. The one ever full Source. The whole infinite majesty and inexhaustible resources of the Divine Nature were incorporated and insphered in that Incarnate Word from whom all men may draw. There are involved in that thought two ideas. One is, the unmistakable assertion of the whole fulness of the Divine Nature as being in the Incarnate Word; and the other is, that the whole fulness of the Divine Nature dwells in the Incarnate Word in order that men may get at it.
II. Consider, again, the many receivers from the one Source. "Of His fulness have all we received." The blessing that we receive may be stated in many different ways. You may say we get pardon, purity, hope, joy, the prospect of heaven, power for service; all these—and a hundred more designations by which we might call the one gift—all these are but the consequence of our having got the Christ within our hearts. He is like His own miracle: the thousands are gathered on the grass—they do all eat and are filled. As their necessities required the bread was multiplied, and at the last there was more left than there had seemed to be at the beginning. So, "of His fulness have all we received," and after a universe has drawn from it, for an eternity, the fulness is not turned into scantiness or emptiness.
III. Notice the continuous flow from the inexhaustible Source. "Grace for grace." The word "for" is a little singular; of course, it means instead of, in exchange for, and the Evangelist’s idea seems to be that, as one supply of grace is given and used, it is, as it were, given back to the Bestower, who substitutes for it a fresh and unused vessel, filled with new grace. He might have said grace upon grace, one supply being piled upon another. But his notion is, rather, one supply given in substitution for the other—"new lamps for old ones."
A. Maclaren, Christian Commonwealth, Dec. 10th, 1885.
I. The doctrines of Scripture concerning the Person of Jesus Christ reveal His fulness.
II. The poetry and metaphors employed by the sacred writers to describe Jesus Christ all exhibit His fulness.
III. The characteristics which His first followers most appreciated were His truth and grace, and these were manifested in fulness.
IV. The experience of all His disciples confirms the observation of His first followers.
S. Martin, Westminster Chapel Pulpit, 3rd series, p. 21.
References: Joh 1:16.—Preacher’s Monthly, vol. iv., p. 257; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 282; Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 27; Ibid., Sermons, vol. xv., No. 858; vol. vii., No. 415; vol. xx., No. 1,169.
Joh 1:17
I. We have here the special glory of the contents of the Gospel, heightened by the contrast with law. Law has no tenderness, no pity, no feeling. Tables of stone and a pen of iron are its fitting vehicles. Flashing lightnings and rolling thunders symbolise the fierce light which it casts upon men’s duty, and the terrors of its retribution. Inflexible and with no compassion, it tells us what we ought to be, but it does not tell us how to be it. And this is the opposite of all that comes to us in the Gospel. Law has no heart; the meaning of the Gospel is the unveiling of the heart of God. Law condemns; grace is love that bends down to an evildoer, and deals not on the footing of strict retribution with the infirmities and the sins of us poor weaklings. "The law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."
II. Look at the other contrast that is here, between giving and coming. What do we mean when we talk about a law being given? We simply mean that it is promulgated either in oral or in written words. It is, after all, no more than so many words. It is a verbal communication at the best. But grace and truth "came to be." They are realities; they are not words. They are not communicated by sentences; they are actual existences, and they spring into being—as far as man’s historical possession and experience of them are concerned—they spring into being in Jesus Christ, and through Him they belong to us all.
III. Look at the contrast that is drawn here between the persons of the founders. Moses was but a medium. His personality had nothing to do with his message. You may take away Moses, and the law stands all the same. But Christ is so interwoven with Christ’s message that you cannot rend the two apart. You cannot have the figure of Christ melt away, and the gift that Christ brought remain. If you put away Christ from Christianity, it collapses into dust and nothingness.
A. Maclaren, Christian Commonwealth, Dec. 17th, 1889.
References: Joh 1:17.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxi., No. 1862; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 558.
Joh 1:18
What the God-Man reveals of God and man.
I. The Man Christ Jesus came expressly to show us the Father. That is, He came to teach us that God is our Father, that whatever we see or can imagine of pure parental love holds good of Him. Now we have known parents who would suffer anything, make any sacrifice, endure any pain for the welfare of their children, who would correct their faults with an untiring patience, who would confront the most shameless ingratitude with a constant and forgiving love, who would even die to save them from harm. And this, said Christ, is what God is, and is like. He is our Father—your Father and Mine—His love is stronger than death and without a bound. Sin cannot alienate it; hatred cannot alienate it. And here is the proof. He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father. And while you are yet sinners, yet enemies, I lay down My life for you. Thus God, My Father and yours, reveals and commends His love for you.
II. But again. He who reveals God to us also reveals man, and God’s will concerning man. He calls Himself "the Son of Man," and that, according to the Hebrew usage of speech, means that He calls Himself "the Man"—the real, the perfect Man. Man as God conceived, and will yet make him to be. We may be, we are to become, such men as He was. That is precisely God’s intention concerning us. The world is to be redeemed, humanity is to be transfigured—so at least Christ the Interpreter of the Divine Will affirms; while in His own Person He shows us what that redemption and transfiguration involve. According to Him, the end which God has set before Him, and to which His Providence is conducting the story of time, is a regenerated race dwelling in a renovated world.
III. But what most of all gives these revelations power over us, more even than their very reasonableness, is the fact that Christ Jesus does not make them in words only, or in looks, but in Himself, in His own Person, character, life. He is not simply One who speaks of life, or One who teaches us how to live. He is our life—the Life indeed; for it is only as we become one with Him, who is one with God, that we truly live at all.
S. Cox, Sunday Magazine, 1886, p. 658.
References: Joh 1:18.—W. F. Moulton, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxv., p. 349; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. v., p. 338; Expositor, 1st series, vol. ix., p. 385; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. x., p. 216; Homilist, 3rd series, vol. x., p. 86; J. Caird, Sermons, pp. 101, 121; J. H. Thom, Laws of Heaven, vol. ii., p. 361.
Joh 1:19-39
The Ministry of John the Baptist.
From the ministry of John the Baptist we may learn—
I. That when Jesus is about to visit a community in His saving power, His coming is generally preceded by loud calls to repentance. It was the special mission of the Baptist to unfold the majesty of the Divine law, and to call men up to its unerring standard. In some form or other John the Baptist comes always to fore-herald Christ.
II. That when Jesus comes to a place in saving power, His presence is recognised by the descent of the Holy Ghost. John knew that Jesus was the coming Deliverer when he saw the Holy Ghost like a dove coming down upon Him and remaining with Him. Nor was this all: the Saviour Himself was—so far, at least, as His human nature was concerned—prepared for the ministry of service and of sacrifice by the reception of the Spirit.
III. That they who would experience Christ’s saving power must accept Him as a sacrifice for sin. When John saw Jesus he said: "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world," and as he was not only a Jew brought up under the Mosaic law, but a priest, or at least the son of a priest who officiated at the altar, this language in his lips could have but one meaning. It indicated that Jesus Christ was to be the great antetype of the lamb of sacrifice, and that what was only figurative in the case of the animal was real and true in his offering of Himself for human sin.
IV. Wherever Christ is present in His saving power, there will be a disposition among men to merge themselves in Him. John was quite willing to be put into the shade by Jesus. Nay, that is far from a right way of expressing it. His one desire was to give prominence to Christ, and to point Him out to others. And in this respect he was like minded with the Christian Apostles, for Paul’s ambition was that Christ should be magnified, no matter what became of him.
W. M. Taylor, Peter the Apostle, p. 7.
References: Joh 1:19, Joh 1:20.—R. Duckworth, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxii., p. 147. Joh 1:19, Joh 1:28.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 473; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 298.
Joh 1:23
I. I do not think we often question respecting the course and testimony of Christ’s forerunner—whereunto served it? We know that by it the Jewish people as a whole were not prepared to receive Jesus as their Saviour, for they rejected and crucified Him. And if it be alleged that they who rejected and crucified Him were the scribes and Pharisees who also rejected the baptism of John, the answer to this is, that the people themselves gave their voices for His crucifixion, that His course had disappointed and irritated them as well as their rulers, or they would not have listened to these latter rather than to Him. Still, even in this matter I cannot doubt that much was done by the testimony of John. At the very last, when the enmity of the scribes and Pharisees was at its highest, we find they dared not insinuate that the baptism of John was not from heaven but of men—because all the people held John for a prophet. Now what a vast advantage must it have given the early preachers of the Gospel to have had to do with a people who held John for a prophet, for John’s testimony to Jesus was a matter of notoriety.
II. We must not omit one purpose of God in raising up this remarkable forerunner to go before our Lord. He came "in the way of righteousness." He was to the scribes and Pharisees just one whom, if they had been in earnest at all, they would have hailed with eagerness and believed without hesitation He was full of the Old Testament spirit. His ascetic character, his stern morality, his utterance of his message in the well-known words of their prophets,—all this was exactly of a kind to please Jewish feelings and conciliate Jewish prejudices. Thus was additional evidence given to the fact that the rejection of Jesus by His own was not merely for any hostility that His own character and course excited in them, still less on account of His falling short of the announcements of their prophets, but because they were hardened in heart against God and indisposed to turn to Him at all.
III. But I must also believe that the mission of John the Baptist had purposes reaching beyond anything which, as matters of history or surmise, His course may then have accomplished. All that concerns Christ’s coming on earth has deep spiritual meaning. And so it was with the mission and career of John the Baptist. (1) First, as to the place of his ministry. He came, a voice in the wilderness; a solitary preacher in the vast and trackless desert. And so does God ever send His messengers to prepare His way before Him. When Christ would come to an individual, or to a family, or to a nation, He sends before Him these voices crying in the wilderness. (2) Again, the character of the Baptist’s message has a voice and meaning for us. "Every valley shall be exalted," etc. Before this glorious revelation shall be made, this levelling process must take place, both amongst mankind and within ourselves. In our own hearts these mountains of pride must be laid low which we have raised for ourselves, those low places must be filled up where we love to cleave to the dust in grovelling and worldly thoughts; the crookedness of our ways, half with God and half with the world and self, must be made straight, and the rough unevenness of inconsistent conduct made plain, before Christ can really have His throne in our hearts, dwelling and reigning there by His blessed Spirit. (3) One more lesson from the Baptist’s course seems to be set before us. "He must increase, but I must decrease." All that merely leads on to, all that stops short of Christ Himself shall wane and fade; while He shall shine on ever more and more glorious.
H. Alford, Quebec Chapel Sermons, vol. ii., p. 263.
References: Joh 1:23.—H. W. Burgoyne, Christian World Pulpit, vol. x., p. 193; A. C. Hall, Ibid., vol. xviii., p. 401. Joh 1:26.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 408; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. v., p. 32; J. Keble, Sermons, from Advent to Christmas Eve, p. p. 373.
Joh 1:29
(with Joh 20:31)
What is the most characteristic account of Christianity, by which its supporters may demand that its pretensions shall be tried? The Evangelist supplies us with a sufficient answer in the passages which I have joined together as the text. It is a system which aims at the remission of sins, through the means of faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, as a preparation for the life of eternity. It is a method designed by the Divine wisdom, and carried out through a supreme Divine sacrifice, to bring all men back under the moral standard of exalted purity, brightened by a heavenly hope; though its progress is retarded by the opposition of a great antagonistic force, which struggles to retain men under the bondage of its sensual power.
I. When Christianity was first proclaimed, the world was well-nigh lost in sin. The noblest cultivation, and the most perfect art, and a skill in law and government which has never been surpassed, were unhappily found to be compatible with a baseness of moral degradation, the very language of which, by God’s mercy, has now become obsolete and unknown. Now the Gospel revelation rests upon the principle that the removal of the weight and stain of moral evil was the first requisite for the restoration of a higher life; and that no cure could be found for the deeply-seated mischief, except through the renewed contact of God Himself with human nature—God Himself condescending to assume that nature, with the express purpose of winning back the world to purity and holiness. Christ came, not only to take up man’s nature, and to show forth the noblest example of its capacities, but, more than this, by a still more marvellous condescension, He came to die for our sins, that thus the Blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, might "purge our consciences from dead works, to serve the living God." This is the concise summary of the whole matter, and the Christian argument must always remain weak and defective if it ever swerves aside from preaching its most important practical results, in the remission of sin through faith in Christ.
II. We must not rest satisfied, then, with the negative position, that the power of sin has been destroyed. It was the further object of the work of Christ that a higher life might be created through faith in His Name. We must pass on from the removal of the hindrances by which man was fettered, to recognise the larger capabilities that were infused through the regenerate life. By the atonement of Christ the strength of sin was virtually broken; but the way was thereby opened for the development of nobler freedom. The new man was to be created afresh, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness; and thus he was to be brought back to that likeness of God’s Image, which he had all but lost, through long centuries of alienation and sin. Being made free from sin, he was now to become the servant of righteousness. There is not a single talent or endowment which may not be raised to a higher level, and invested with a nobler character, if it is cultivated in a religious temper for religious ends.
III. Our estimate of the measure in which this ideal is fulfilled must be formed from the completeness with which these various duties are acknowledged and provided for; completeness being a fair and reasonable test of any theory of life and conduct. If we turn to the motives which influence the will, we can find none so pure and lofty as those which are inspired by faith, through the prospect of eternity. If we judge by the extension of the intellectual horizon, revelation teaches us to embrace the spiritual as well as the material, within the range of our knowledge. And lastly, if we are questioned on the claims of science, the true religious temper would welcome to the full its great discoveries, and be thankful for the means with which it has reached the families of men, but it would assign them their true position in the range of nature, and demand an equal admission for the principles of religion and morality to the circle of recognised knowledge.
Archdeacon Hannah, Oxford and Cambridge Undergraduates’ Journal, May 19th, 1881.
References: Joh 1:29.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 84; Homilist, new series, vol. iii., p. 238; Ibid., 3rd series, vol. vi., p. 320; G. E. L. Cotton, Sermons to English Congregations in India, p. 249; F. D. Maurice, The Gospel of St. John, p. 28; W. R. Nicoll, The Lamb of God, pp. 3, 21; Spurgeon, My Sermon Notes: Gospels and Acts, p, 121; J. Natt, Posthumous Sermons, p. 1; J. Hamilton, Works, vol. vi., p. 100; J. Vaughan, Sermons, 3rd series, p. 209; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 548; Ibid., vol. v., p. 8; Ibid., vol. vi., p. 360; Ibid., vol. vii., p. 292. Joh 1:29-35.—Ibid., vol. x., p. 294; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. i., p. 9; W. Milligan, Expositor, 2nd series, vol. iv., p. 273. Joh 1:29-51.—A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 1. Joh 1:33.—Homiletic Magazine, vol. x., p. 99.
Joh 1:35-42
The First Disciples.
I. We see here the very first beginnings of the Christian Church. With what reverent interest may we meetly regard this simple record of the beginning of that great kingdom which has made every other feel its sway. It has affected the stability of empires, overthrown old idolatries, exploded philosophies, and, in spite of opposition, has outspread itself already into almost world-wide breadth. And it begins here—with the Divine quietness which is characteristic of God’s mightiest works. We have here no visible king, no rapt prophet, no scribe even to make record at the time of the event. The only scroll is the heart of the simple, the only writer the unseen Spirit of God.
II. We see not only the beginning of the Church, but also the beginning of first movements of personal religion. How does spiritual life begin in the individual heart? It begins when the person comes to Christ. The disciples all came; they were all received; and in that personal reception their higher life began.
III. We have here the Divine method of extending religion and of multiplying the number of disciples. There is a beautiful exemplification here of the law of personal influence. The whole passage is full of findings by Christ and by the disciples. It seems to be with a direct purpose that we have this minute mention of the finding of one disciple by another, of him who has not yet been with Jesus by him who has. It is as if the Holy Spirit would set before us conspicuously, at the very opening of the Christian Dispensation, one of the great laws by which the whole economy is to be replenished with new life, and extended to still wider bounds. True, this is not the only law of growth: the kingdom is to be extended many ways—by writing, by preaching, by quiet living, by suffering; but through all these it will be found, if we examine closely, that the personal element of religion permeates and lives. Whatever one possesses or attains in spiritual things he is bound, by the very law of the life he has received, to try and communicate to others who do not feel and possess as he does.
A. Raleigh, From Dawn to the Perfect Day, p. 250.
References: Joh 1:35, Joh 1:36.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. vi., p. 360. Joh 1:35-40.—Ibid., vol. i., p. 281. Joh 1:35-41.—Ibid., vol. vii., p. 275. Homilist, 3rd series, vol. vii., p. 22. Joh 1:36.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xviii., No. 1060.
Joh 1:37-39
The First Disciples—John and Andrew.
I. Look at the question of Christ to the whole world: What seek ye? As it stands, on the surface and in its primary application, it is the most natural of questions. Venturing to take the words in a somewhat wider application, let me suggest two or three directions in which they seem to point. (1) The question suggests to us this: the need of having a clear consciousness of what is our object in life. (2) These words are really a veiled and implied promise. Christ asks all such questions—not for His information, but for our strengthening. "What seek ye?" It is a blank cheque that He puts into their hands to fill up. It is the key of His treasure-house which He offers to all, with the assured confidence that if we open it we shall find all we need.
II. Now, how may we regard the second words which our Lord speaks as His merciful invitation to the world? "Come and see." (1) Christ is always glad when people resort to Him. (2) The revelation of the Master is also a very distinct call to a first-hand knowledge of Jesus Christ. (3) In this "Come and see" there is a distinct call to the personal act of faith.
III. Lastly, we have in these words a parable of the blessed experience which binds men’s hearts to Jesus for ever. (1) The impression of Christ’s own personality is the strongest force to make disciples. The character of Jesus Christ is, after all, the centre and the standing evidence, and the mightiest credentials of Christianity. (2) Once more, experience of the grace and sweetness of this Saviour binds men to Him as nothing else will. The deepest and sweetest and most precious part of His character and of His gifts can only be known on condition of possession of Him and them, and they can be possessed only on condition of holding fellowship with Him. I do not say to any man, Try, Trust, in order to be sure that Jesus Christ is worthy to be trusted; for by its very nature faith cannot be an experiment or provisional.
A. Maclaren, A Year’s Ministry, 2nd series, p. 127.
References: Joh 1:37.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xii., No. 702. Joh 1:37-39.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 411. Joh 1:37-51.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. x., No. 570; W. M. Taylor, Peter the Apostle, p. 21. Joh 1:38.—G. Brooks, Outlines of Sermons, p. 306. Joh 1:38, Joh 1:39.—H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, Waterside Mission Sermons, No. 3:1:39.—J. B. Heard, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xvii., p. 12; Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xi., No. 633.
Joh 1:40
The World’s Benefactors.
I. Little as Scripture tells us of St. Andrew, it affords us enough for a lesson, and that an important one. These are the facts before us. St. Andrew was the first convert among the Apostles; he was especially in our Lord’s confidence; thrice is he described as introducing others to Him; lastly, he is little known in history, while the place of dignity and the name of highest renown have been allotted to his brother Simon, whom he was the means of bringing to the knowledge of his Saviour. Our lesson, then, is this: that those men are not necessarily the most useful men in their generation, nor the most favoured of God, who make the most noise in the world, and who seem to be principals in the great changes and events recorded in history; and that, therefore, we must unlearn our admiration of the powerful and distinguished, our reliance on the opinions of society, our respect for the decisions of the learned or the multitude, and turn our eyes to private life, watching, in all we read or witness, for the true signs of God’s presence, the graces of personal holiness manifested in His elect, which, weak as they may seem to mankind, are mighty through God, and have an influence upon the course of His providence, and bring about great events in the world at large, when the wisdom and the strength of the natural man are of no avail.
II. Andrew is scarcely known except by name; and while Peter has ever held the place of honour all over the Church, yet Andrew brought Peter to Christ. God’s mysterious providence works beneath a veil, and to see Him who is the Truth and the Life, we must stoop underneath it, and so in our turn hide ourselves from the world. They who present themselves at kings’ courts pass on to the inner chambers, where the gaze of the rude multitude cannot pierce; and we, if we would see the King in His beauty, must be content to disappear from the things that are seen. Hid are the saints of God; if they are known to men, it is accidentally, in their temporal offices, as holding some high earthly station, and not as saints. St. Peter has a place in history, far more as a chief instrument of a strange revolution in human affairs, than in his true character, as a self-denying follower of his Lord, to whom truths were revealed which flesh and blood could not discern.
J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. ii., p. 1.
Joh 1:40-42
The First Disciples—Simon Peter.
In this incident we have two things mainly to consider—(1) the witness of the disciple; (2) the self-revelation of the Master.
I. The witness of the disciple. (1) Notice first the illustratration that we get here of how instinctive and natural the impulse is, when one has found Jesus Christ, to tell some one else about Him. Nobody said to Andrew, "Go and look for your brother." And yet, as soon as he had fairly realised the fact that this man standing before him was the Messiah, though the evening seems to have come, he hurries away to find his brother, and share with him the glad conviction. (2) He first findeth his own brother. The language of the text suggests that the Evangelist’s tendency to the suppression of himself hides away in this singular expression the fact that he, too, went to look for a brother. Home, then—those who are nearest to us—presents the natural channels for Christian work. (3) Notice the simple word which is the most powerful means of influencing most men. Andrew did not begin to argue with his brother. The mightiest argument that we can use, and the argument that we can all use, if we have got any religion in us at all, is that of Andrew, "We have found the Messias."
II. The self-revelation of the Master. It was the impression which Christ Himself made on Simon which completed the work begun by his brother. The look, which is described by an unusual word, was a penetrating gaze which regarded Peter with fixed attention. It must have been remarkable to have lived in John’s memory for all these years. Our Lord shows himself possessed of supernatural and thorough knowledge. (2) Another revelation of our Lord’s relation to His disciples is given in the fact of His changing Simon’s name. He thus takes absolute possession of him, and asserts His mastery over him. (3) That change of name implies Christ’s power and promise to bestow a new character and new functions and honours.
A. Maclaren, A Year’s Ministry, 2nd series, p. 141.
References: Joh 1:40.—J. Foster, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 390; G. Brooks, Outlines of Sermons, p. 422; J. Keble, Sermons for Saints’ Days, p. 11. Joh 1:40, Joh 1:41.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. vii., p. 279. Joh 1:40-42.—R. Maguire, Christian World Pulpit, vol. ii., p. 313; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. x., p. 303.
Joh 1:41-42
The First Home Mission.
I. We have here the spring of all true home mission work. Andrew had himself made acquaintance with the Lord Jesus Christ.
II. Note the object of the mission, "And he brought him to Jesus." In any mission work we undertake we should be satisfied with nothing less than this.
III. Note the place of this mission. It was in the most emphatic sense a home mission, and this has its lesson for us. In our zeal for the foreign heathen we are not to forget our own kinsfolk. (1) They have not the only claim upon us, but they have the first claim. (2) Even for our own sakes we must think of home. We cannot let masses of ignorance and sin and wretchedness foster and grow without bringing a blight on our own Christianity.
IV. Look at the time chosen for this first home mission. Andrew did not wait to speak to his brother till he had been made an Apostle, or even till he had become one of Christ’s regular disciples. He began at once. There is a lesson here for ministers. They must begin and continue in the spirit of Andrew, not counting hours, but watching opportunities and forgetting self in love to the souls of men and zeal for the glory of Christ.
V. Let us learn from the spirit of the first home mission, Andrew went to his brother, naturally, not from calculation, but because he had it in his heart. It is in this spirit we must go to our fellowmen, whether they be closely related or not.
VI. Look at the success of the first home mission. We cannot forget that it is to Andrew we owe Simon Peter and all that he did.
J. Ker, Sermons, 2nd series, p. 100.
Joh 1:42
Those words, strange perhaps as they might have sounded for the text of a sermon, must have sounded still stranger when Christ first spoke them to this man. It was a strange thing, indeed, to a man of the East, to whom a name always conveys significant associations, to a member of that Hebrew race with whose sacred literature the thought of change of name was always bound up with the thought of change of life, work, character, or mode of thought—a strange thing to say to a man the first time you met him. Nevertheless, I think they show if we think of them, one of those characteristics of Christ that we pass over constantly, but which nevertheless, are second to none in the estimate of what He is and was as a man—I mean that insight into human character which marked all His dealings with His friends and with His foes.
I. Peter was impulsive, and he had the faults of an eager temper. He was fickle, he was a man who, when the greatest was demanded of him, failed in a manner we can only describe as feeble, unmanly, and even ridiculous. And depend upon it Christ saw that as well—only, He saw what a man of the world would not see, and that is what lay behind; for Christ sees men not only as they are, but as they may be. Christ sees men not only in their actual being, but in their ideal being. Christ sees men not only as they have made themselves, but as He meant them to be.
II. Sympathy plus self-forgetfulness makes up insight, and in the Lord Jesus Christ it was not only sympathy combined with self-forgetfulness, but sympathy associated with an absolute want of taint of selfishness. And that is the reason why His words, why His whole life, are the teaching fit for all ages of the world and for all characters that men may bear. Notice two points of the multiform moral of the story. They are very simple—Trust God, Trust men. Trust God, for God trusts you, and in spite of all that you have done to betray Him, He still gives you cause to hope for future labour in His service, and cause to know that you have capacity to do something for your fellowmen and for Him. Trust Him, and learn to trust, from Christ’s dealings with Peter, learn to trust more fully your fellow men.
H. C. Shuttleworth, Family Churchman, Sep. 15th, 1886.
References: Joh 1:42.—J. G. Warren, Christian World Pulpit, vol. iii., p. 177; J. Keble, Sermons for Saints’ Days, p. 276; Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xv., No. 855; Homilist, vol. vi., p. 399.
Joh 1:43
The First Disciples—Philip.
Note:—
I. The revelation which is here given us of the seeking Christ. Everyone who reads this chapter with even the slightest attention must observe how seeking and finding are repeated over and over again. Christ will welcome and over-answer Andrew and John when they come seeking; He will turn round to them with a smile on His face, that converts the question, "What seek ye?" into an invitation, "Come and see." And when Andrew brings his brother to Him, He will go more than half-way to meet him. But when these are won there still remains another way, by which He will have disciples brought into His kingdom, and that is by Himself going out and laying His hand on the man and drawing him to His heart by the revelation of His love.
II. Consider the word of authority, which, spoken to the one man in our text, is really spoken to us all. Jesus "findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow Me." Your Shepherd comes to you and calls, Follow Me; your Captain and Commander comes to you and calls, Follow Me. In all the dreary wilderness, in all the difficult contingencies and conjunctions, in all the conflicts of life—this Man strides in front of us and proposes Himself to us as Guide, Example, Consoler, Friend, Companion—everything; and gathers up all duty, all blessedness, in the majestic and simple words, Follow Me.
III. Think, for a moment, about this silently and swiftly obedient disciple. Philip says nothing. He is silent—but he yields. All decisions are matters of an instant. Hesitation may be long, weighing and balancing may be a protracted process, but the decision is always a moment’s work, a knife edge. And there is no reason why anyone may not now, if he will, do as this man Philip did on the spot, and when Christ says, Follow Me, turn to Him and answer, "I will follow Thee whithersoever Thou goest."
A. Maclaren, A Year’s Ministry, 2nd series, p. 155.
Reference: Joh 1:43.—Preacher’s Monthly, vol. iii., p. 185.
Joh 1:45
In the closing verses of this chapter we have a narrative of the calling of some four or five of our Lord’s earliest disciples. It is interesting on many accounts, more particularly perhaps on this—that it distinctly points out the reason why these men attached themselves to the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth.
I. Had Jesus Christ come in His own Name, as did many of the revolutionary chieftains of the time—had He appeared as a merely political Christ—the Jews would gladly and thankfully have welcomed Him, even in spite of His Divine pretensions. But as it was, seeing that He disappointed their hopes, and practically disallowed the ideal which they had permitted themselves to set up, they turned upon Him in their fury, and cast Him out as a detected impostor. There is something remarkable, then, in the fact that these first disciples of Christ had a spiritual insight, so far superior to that of the rest of their fellow countrymen, that they could detect in Jesus of Nazareth what seemed to be hidden from the eyes of everybody else. Although not uneducated, and certainly not unintelligent men they had not, as we know, received the benefit of the highest culture of their day; and yet, while doctors and Sanhedrists, scribes and Pharisees, with all their learning, were blind to the glory of Jesus, these simple-minded Galilean fishermen were perfectly assured that it was He of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write.
II. Consider the reason why the Jews of the present day ought to believe that the Messiah has already come. (1) The time of the Messiah’s Advent is distinctly announced in the ancient Scriptures—and distinctly announced, we think—as occurring between the return of the nation from the Babylonish captivity and its subsequent destruction and scattering at the hands of the Romans. (2) Two different comings of Messiah, different in their characteristics and attributes, are spoken of in the writings of the prophets. The one coming is to a people living in their own land, having a city, having laws, having a national existence; the other coming is to a people scattered in all quarters of the earth, and needing to be brought back to the land given by Divine covenant to them and to their fathers.
G. Calthrop, Penny Pulpit, new series, No. 1,034.
Reference: Joh 1:45.—A. Edersheim, Church of England Pulpit, vol. xiii., p. 157.
Joh 1:45-49
The First Disciples—Nathanael.
I. Look first at the preparation—a soul brought to Christ by a brother. "Philip findeth Nathanael." Nathanael’s prejudice was but the giving voice to a fault that is as wide as humanity, and which we have every day of our lives to fight with, not only in regard of religious matters, but in regard of all others—namely, the habit of estimating people, and their work, and their wisdom, and their power, by the class to which they are supposed to belong. "Philip saith unto him, Come and see." He is not going to argue the question. He gives the only possible answer to it. "You ask me, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? Come and see whether it is a good thing or no; and if it is, and came out of Nazareth, well then, the question has answered itself." The quality of a thing cannot be settled by the origin of a thing.
II. The conversation between Christ and Nathanael, where we see a soul fastened to Christ by Himself. The omniscience of Christ, as manifested here, shows (1) how glad Christ is when He sees anything good, anything that He can praise, in any of us. (2) We have here our Lord’s omniscience set forth as cognisant of all our inward crises and struggles. In our hours of crisis, and in our monotonous uneventful moments; in the rush of the furious waters, when the stream of our lives is caught among rocks, and in the long, languid reaches of its smoothest flow; when we are fighting with our fears, or yearning for His light; or even when sitting dumb and stolid, like snow men, apathetic and frozen in our indifference—He sees us, and pities, and will help the need which He beholds.
III. One word more about this rapturous confession which crowns the whole: "Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God; Thou art the King of Israel." The joybells of the man’s heart are all a-ringing. It is no mere intellectual acknowledgment of Christ as Messiah. The difference between mere head-belief and heart-faith lies precisely in the presence of these elements of confidence, of enthusiastic loyalty, and absolute submission.
A. Maclaren, A Year’s Ministry, 2nd series, p. 169.
References: Joh 1:45-51.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvi., No. 921; Homilist, 3rd series, vol. vii., p. 22; Ibid., 4th series, vol. i., p. 240.
Joh 1:46
The Duties of Heavenly Citizenship towards Infidelity.
I. The heavenly citizen must first be deeply convinced of the truth of the proposition, Magna est veritas et prævalebit. In "contending earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints," his contention will be rather to persuade men than to defend God; not, Uzzah-like, to imagine that he will uphold that which is tottering. This reflection will free him from timidity as to any supposed conflict between science and revelation. "Without Him was not anything made that was made." The investigating faculty of man is the boring tool, whereby the glories of the living God are dug out of His mines, and in the reverent pursuit of natural science the thoughts of God become visible.
II. Those who know the secret of the Lord will lead the anxious doubter away from systems, controversies, and debates, into the presence of the Lord Himself. Philip of Bethsaida, in the history before us, illustrates the true method. He had found Jesus, had recognised in Him the Christ—God’s answer to the hunger and thirst of humanity; such a knowledge evidences its reality by its self-communicativeness. He rushes to his friend, without preface, argument or explanation; he says, "I have found the Christ." He knows what he has found; he can at least invite trial; he is not afraid to subject the blessed truth, which was flooding his whole being with its vivid light, to the most searching analysis, the closest investigation. "Philip saith unto him, Come and see." Here is the one absolute, irrefragable Christian evidence: the power of Jesus Christ to satisfy every human instinct, to fill the heart to overflowing, to save to the uttermost, to elevate the affections, to perfect the nature, to ennoble the character, of fallen man. Inasmuch as the best sermon is a life, our life should so witness that men should be compelled to acknowledge that "the life we live in the flesh we live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved us and gave Himself for us."
Canon Wilberforce, Christian Commonwealth, Oct. 29th, 1885.
References: Joh 1:46.—T. Islip, Christian World Pulpit, vol. x., p. 42; W. M. Arthur, Ibid., vol. xxxi., p. 316; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. viii., p. 351; J. Hamilton, Works, vol. vi., p. 453; F. D. Maurice, The Gospel of St. John, p. 43.
Joh 1:47
Guilelessness.
An even unvaried life is the lot of most men, in spite of occasional troubles or other accidents; and we are apt to despise it and get tired of it, and to long to see the world—or, at all events, we think such a life affords no great opportunity for religious obedience. Here we have the history of St. Bartholomew and the other Apostles to recall us to ourselves, and to assure us that we need not give up our usual manner of life in order to serve God; that the most humble and quiet station is acceptable to Him—nay, affords means for maturing the highest Christian character, even that of an Apostle. Bartholomew read the Scriptures and prayed to God, and thus was trained at length to give up his life for Christ when He demanded it.
I. Consider the particular praise which our Saviour gives him: "Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!" This is just the character which, through God’s grace, they may attain most fully who live out of the world in a private way. It is a most difficult and rare virtue to mean what we say, to love without dissimulation, to think no evil, to bear no grudge, to be free from selfishness, to be innocent and straightforward. This character of mind is something far above the generality of men; and when realised in due measure, one of the surest marks of Christ’s elect. Such men are cheerful and contented, for they desire but little and take pleasure in the least matters, having no wish for riches or distinction. The guileless man has a simple boldness and a princely heart; he overcomes dangers which others shrink from, merely because they are no dangers to him, and thus he often gains even worldly advantages by his straightforwardness which the most crafty persons cannot gain, though they risk their souls for them.
II. Nor is it only among the poor and lowly that this blessed character of mind is found to exist. Secular learning and dignity have doubtless a tendency to rob the heart of its brightness and purity; yet even in kings’ courts and the schools of philosophy Nathanaels may be discovered. Lastly, more is requisite from the Christian even than guilelessness such as Bartholomew’s. Innocence must be joined to prudence, discretion, self-command, gravity, patience, perseverance in welldoing; but innocence is the beginning.
J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. ii., p. 333.
References: Joh 1:47.—G. Brooks, Outlines of Sermons, p. 425; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. x., p. 270; Spurgeon, My Sermon Notes: Gospels and Acts, p. 124; W. G. Horder, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxvii., p. 152. Joh 1:48.—Homiletic Magazine, vol. vii., p. 271; Ibid., vol. x., p. 68; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. viii., p. 376; J. E. Vaux, Sermon Notes, 2nd series, 62.
Joh 1:50-51
We have here—
I. The dawn of faith. "Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, believest thou?"
II. The fact of experience from which faith begins is the dawning of a faith that must continually grow. Two things are necessary to the strengthening of belief. (1) Its evidence must be certain. (2) Its power must develop with advancing life.
E. L. Hull, Sermons, 2nd series, p. 167.
References: Joh 1:50, Joh 1:51.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxv., No. 1478; T. Gasquoine, Christian World Pulpit, vol. viii., p. 261. Joh 1:51.—J. Baldwin Brown, Ibid., vol. xix., p. 168; J. Keble, Sermons for Saints’ Days, p. 329; G. Moberly, Plain Sermons at Brighstone, p. 169; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ix., p. 283. Joh 1:51.—Expositor, 1st series, vol. iii., p. 134. Joh 2:1.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. v., p. 548; J. M. Neale, Sermons in a Religious House, vol. i., p. 229. Joh 2:1.—C. C. Bartholomew, Sermons Chiefly Practical, p. 27; H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, The Life of Duty, vol. i., p. 67. Joh 2:1, Joh 2:2.—A. P. Stanley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. v., p. 49; C. Kingsley, National Sermons, p. 312. Joh 2:1-11.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., pp. 53, 400; Ibid., vol. ii., p. 490. Joh 2:3-5.—Christian World Pulpit, vol. xv., p. 318. Joh 2:4.—Expositor, 1st series, vol. iv., p. 179; J. Keble, Sermons for Christmas and Epiphany, p. 407.
The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
F. W. Grant 1903 · Public Domain On v1 Subdivision 1. (Joh 1:1-18.)
Subdivision 1. (Joh 1:1-18.)
The Life the Light.
Read full note →
The Life as the Light of men is the theme of the first subdivision; the Word made flesh its full and glorious display. Creation as His work is a revelation also; but darkness having come in with sin, it is no longer a sufficient one. Hence the Word Himself enters the creation He has made, and God is manifest in a new glory among men.
But man is not naturally a seeker after God, unhappy only in not having found Him. No: he has turned his back upon Him, and must be born again, and that not of his own will, in order that he may receive the glorious revelation. The communication of eternal life in this is not openly declared as yet; but those who are born of God have now the title to become His children.
1. John begins "in the beginning." There is no article; and the indefinite form, as the whole connection shows, here carries us back to the most remote that can be imagined. Whenever anything else began, then "the Word was," -not "began." The Word had no beginning.
By the fact of this eternity of existence He is necessarily God: God only is the "Eternal;" but the apostle will not leave us to such an inference: "the Word was with God," he says, "and the Word was God," -a distinct Person in the unity of the Godhead.
"With God" here is literally "toward God"; and this affirms, along with distinctness of Person, the adherence of regard and affection to Him of this Being whose designation as "the Word" points Him out as giving expression to the mind of God. And this Personality and relationship are eternal likewise: the Word is not a development from God, even though a pre-creation one: for "He was in the beginning with God."
Thus a glimpse is permitted us into what is involved in a plurality of Persons in the Godhead. "God is love:" and are we to think of Him before creation as dwelling in a blank and utter solitude, alone, with no outflow for His love? no object towards which it could flow out? even now with no sufficient object worthy of Himself? And He, the Father, was He no Father then? and have His creatures alone given Him the reality of such a title? Nay, there was in the Godhead as such, as this passage already shows, an activity, a reception, an intercommunion of love: "the Word was with God," toward God. The Only-begotten Son was then in the bosom of the Father. That "bosom of the Father" is not a development, but a glorious, everlasting reality.
Now we are given to see in the Word the actual Creator. "All things came into being through Him"; and again the apostle is emphatic as to this: not even a single thing must be excepted, that ever came into being.
We can easily recognize something of the significance of such a statement; but do we recognize how far it will lead us? If the Word be, as should be plain, the One who utters out the mind of God, does this merely show us that creation is the embodiment of that mind? that God willed, and the Word performed? Or does it not, at least, prepare us to believe that creation as His work would be a revelation of His character, His thoughts and purposes? This latter is the only sufficient and worthy reason for the emphasis laid upon the fact that the Word was the Creator. The action of the Word, then, was the speech of God: who, if He speak, speaks not simply because He will, but because He has something to communicate. What is it He has to speak of -He who surely cannot speak an idle word? If we can trust such thoughts, how far will they carry us? far beyond the point at which "natural theology," so-called, leaves us. It will be a little thing then to find that it shows, as any manufactured article might do, that some Being made it, -by the marks of design in it that it had a Designer. Nay, we shall realize it as that which, -written as a universal language which has never suffered from the judgment of Babel -God has used to utter His parables of divine wisdom in every attentive ear. True, they are parables, and need care to interpret them, -need diligence of heart to use the care; but so would lead into the most fruitful exercise of heart and conscience, if by them we sought believingly to draw near to God.
How naturally upon every theme whatever, the Lord’s teaching fell into this form of parable, making the world vocal with divine monition and heavenly comfort! How naturally these analogies of spheres so different appeal to reason itself with the force of demonstration! How readily the Teacher above all teachers expects His disciples to apprehend such lessons, as if the key to all this symbolism were in their hands! "Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?" From Genesis to Revelation all Scripture teems with them: surely not applications of mere casual resemblances, but rather, real utterances of the Voice that speaks in them; and with which, if we are not familiar, it is to our shame that we are not.
But indeed, while in one of God’s two Books we own Christ to be the theme, the book of nature speaks to most, it is to be feared, as if there were no Christ in it; though "by Him and for Him were all things created."
And how thankful we have reason to be for this symbolical character of nature when we consider that from this lower sphere all our words for the higher are derived. Were the one not really (and therefore divinely) adapted to the other, how surely would this lead us astray! On the other hand to take them frankly as thus fitted to one another, how great a help should it be in the interpretation of spiritual things. But it must be confessed we are little practised in such explorations as this implies; even though Scripture and nature be allowed to be God’s two witnesses; which should agree and confirm each other in their witness therefore.
We proceed now to the spiritual sphere, what was in the Word, not made by Him: for "in Him was Life, and the Life was the light of men." Many indeed take life here in the most comprehensive way, "the Word being the Source of all life to the creature," but the latter clause of the verse, it is admitted, can only refer to spiritual life. And how could this be classed with that of plant or beast, for instance? or said to be in Him? He is the Author of it: in that sense, the Source, though it be not exactly the right word for it. Life in Him, the Eternal, is surely eternal life; and having shown sufficiently for his purpose here the relation of the Word to creation generally, John at once proceeds to his grand subject. Only the eternal life could be the light of men.
A real definition of life it is generally confessed we have not. It belongs, indeed, to those essential mysteries in which so much of our knowledge is rooted. Of natural life we can only gather from its phenomena certain general ideas, which still ought to help us, if the natural and spiritual are in such close correspondence as we have claimed for them. What then can we learn phenomenally of natural life?
Life, as we read it in nature, is a spring of ordered activity which controls and manifests itself in the inanimate to which it has communicated itself. The dead material is taken up by it, assimilated, and formed into living tissue, and then into organs which work under the control of a common plan and purpose. Take the plant for example, in which you have the life force simply, without the presence of soul or spirit to perplex the results. Here then the stamp of mind is put upon that in which mind is not. It is the witness of a Mind beyond itself which works through and controls it everywhere in harmonious obedience.
Life is thus naturally self-communicative, propagates itself, proceeds from nothing else but life. This is conceded by science today, as far as science can speak in such a matter. It is a thing not manufactured nor evolved, not working up from below, not the product of dead matter, but an imperial power ruling this, even while freely yielding itself to it, permeating and so lifting it into a higher sphere, according to the constant law of progress disclosed by the world as a divine product.
But life in nature is haunted by its shadow, death; life in the Word is a Life eternal, "that eternal life," says the epistle, "which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us." And how manifested? As life is always here, by self-communication to a lower nature, which could receive its impress and thus display a character beyond its own. "The Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us; and we beheld His glory: glory as of an Only-begotten with the Father, full of grace and truth." The mind and purposes of God were manifested in a humanity perfectly attuned to harmonious obedience to that will of God which was the one motive of His being in the world. Thus the Life was the light of men: the glory of Godhead was seen in perfect human righteousness: "As long as I am in the world," He says, "I am the light of the world." The Life is but the activity of His nature, (which is the divine nature,) which has taken up manhood in Him, to reveal itself thus, communicative and imperial.
2. But the next thing we hear of is darkness, and a darkness which the light as such cannot banish. It shines in it, but is not realized. This is the nature of spiritual darkness, which is not a mere absence of light, but in opposition to it. God is light; but man has his back upon God, and walks in his own shadow. He has not faith in God, and as he learned to distrust Him even in Eden, much more as out of Eden and under the consequences of his sin, which he puts to the discredit of his Maker. Thus everything is distorted, for God is the reason of all things, and if He be unknown, all things fall into confusion. Then we must do what we can for ourselves; self is all that is left us to believe in; a self which has lost all but the wreck of the image of God in which man was created.
Over all another shadow broods, of one "a liar from the beginning," and who has persuaded men to believe his lie. Under him darkness becomes a kingdom, and the power by which he reigns: "the god of this world blinds the minds of them that believe not, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them" (2Co 4:4).
In such a world was this glory now to be displayed. The inspired writer filled with his theme, does not pause to speak of how or how far in former times the light had shone for men: everything seems but contrast to the present revelation; which yet -such the world was -God cannot leave without calling special attention to it. Men must be roused to behold it, and by the voice of one nearer to them, as more upon their level, more intelligible to them, as echoing the voice of conscience in their hearts. Such indeed was the "man sent from God, whose name was John." But he is not yet heard in his testimony, as he will be presently. Simply the fact is given: God sent him, a witness to bear witness concerning the truth, that all might believe through him. What an assurance of a world far away from God, that the Light must have one to proclaim it, the Creator must have one to introduce Him into His own world; and then it is necessary to say, He was not that light," lest men should mistake the witness to Christ for the Christ he witnessed to!
The characteristic of the real light is given, that it is not local, but for all. Sunlike, men cannot hold it in Judea simply. The Baptist was "a burning and a shining light;" but not the day-Luminary, filling heaven and earth with splendor. This universal character, reprobated in its full reality by the narrow Jew, the Evangelist shows in its true glory. Did God create the Jew only? Thus "the world" is one of the prominent words in this Gospel: "God so loved," not Israel merely, but "the world." Zion on her hill-top might catch the first rays of the dawn: let her golden orb rise higher, and it will reach lower too.
Men are equalized after another fashion, and which will make needful either equal judgment or fullest grace. The Light finds everywhere darkness; and darkness which yields not to the Light as light. "He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not." Falsehood knows not truth, nor hatred love. But more: Israel had been specially prepared by centuries of special dealing for this very time; her own King, Messiah, Deliverer, at last had come to her, to fulfil all her promises: "He came unto His own, and His own received Him not." The education of a race, and in the divine school, failed; and failed in the very thing which all was designed for.
3. The purpose of God cannot be defeated. The need which it had to meet is now fully declared. Claim there can be none on man’s part. Israel is but as the Gentile, save that, with higher privilege, her guilt is greater. The Gospel of John begins where the other Gospels end, and with the Cross as the full revelation of man’s condition, as it has never before been revealed: for, if under the law the mind of the flesh is shown hopelessly insubject to the law of God, now it is seen to be "enmity against God." But thus there must be not only a work done for man, such as the other Gospels have fully declared, but also a divine work done in him, which John alone presents in its entirety. He alone speaks of the new birth, quickening, eternal life as a present possession in the soul, as well as of the gift of the Spirit, which gives it its full and "abundant" character. With him, first, the children of God by faith are recognized in their place as such, and the Lord in resurrection sends the message of His coming ascension to His "brethren."
We have now already the new birth and the new place announced, in which the will of God rises above the opposition of His fallen creature, and displays itself in a grace which draws near to Him the objects of His unsought love. "To as many as received Him, to them He gave authority to become children of God, -to those believing in His Name." This is, of course, the distinguishing mark of these, that in opposition to His own people Israel, who did not receive Christ, they received Him, thus distinguishing their faith from a mere conviction of the mind. Their belief was such as made them desire and accept Him. His Name -Jesus, the Saviour -becoming the discovery of One who met their divinely awakened need. To these He gave authority to take a place never before possessed by men in the reality of what is involved in it, as children of God by birth and nature. The sonship of the Old Testament was not founded upon this, and carried with it no assurance of salvation nor of spiritual life. God was a Father to Israel, who was thus His "son," His "first-born" (Exo 4:2; Jer 31:9). In the passage in Jeremiah it is "Ephraim is My first-born." In Mal 1:6 He asks, "If I be a Father, where is Mine honor?" In Mal 2:10, the sense in which He is called so is seen: "Have we not all one Father? has not one God created us?" And similarly in Isa 64:1-12: In the preceding chapter (Isa 63:16) they cry, "Thou art our Father, our Redeemer" (Goel, Kinsman-Redeemer"); but it is power that they seek to come in for them, as in Egypt. In all these cases, which are all that are in the prophets, the fatherly relationship, though assumed towards Israel in a special way, is founded upon creation.
With this title of first-born, therefore, which is given to Israel, is associated the thought of supremacy upon earth; and in the eighty-ninth psalm it is given to Messiah in the same way: "He shall cry unto Me, Thou art my Father. . . . Also I will make him My first-born, higher than the kings of the earth" (vers. 26, 27).
In both Psalms and Proverbs, God is compared to a father, and here the tenderest thoughts are expressed: "Like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear Him" (Psa 103:13). But here too, what we are by creation immediately comes in: "For He knoweth our frame; He remembereth that we are dust." Again in Proverbs (Pro 3:11-12), we find what the apostle has quoted in the epistle to the Hebrews; "My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of His correction: for whom the Lord loveth He correcteth, even as a father the son in whom he delighteth."
Conversely, the angels are sons of God (Job 1:6; Job 2:1; Job 38:7), most clearly in the same creative way, and as Paul quotes to the Athenians from one of the Greek poets that "we are His offspring" (Act 17:28). God is thus the "Father of spirits" (Heb 12:9), and the possession of a spiritual nature constitutes that image of God in which we are created; though, if man does not answer to the relationship, that relation cannot be acknowledged. Thus the Lord could say to the unbelieving Jews, "If God were your Father, ye would love Me . . . ye are of your father the devil" (Joh 8:42; Joh 8:44) -men such as the devil, and not God, had made them.
This is the Old Testament idea of children, which reaches out after the New Testament idea, but without being able to attain the blessedness of this, founded as it is upon a new creation, a new life and nature, where no fall can again mar what the sovereign grace of God has accomplished. Children of God there were, of course, from the beginning; but now for the first time they are given to take the place of children, owned as such because they have so believed on Christ’s name as to have received Him. What underlies this and justifies it is that they are the subjects of a true divine work. They are born again, not of blood -the way of natural birth; not of the will of the flesh, -man in his fallen condition; nor of the will of man -even when renewed; but of God, and God only.
Now the glory of the Light can be seen, the glory of the antitypical tabernacle, to which that of old pointed. Wisdom’s delights were of old with the children of men; when Christ was born, the angels celebrated it; but it is John, the disciple whom Jesus loved, who lay on His breast, and gathered there the full intelligence of his position, who has revealed to us this new manifestation. "The Word became flesh," he says, "and tabernacled among us; and we beheld His glory; the glory as of an Only-begotten with the Father, full of grace and truth."
God had from the beginning visited His people. With a redeemed people, though it were only the shadow of the later redemption, the witness of what was in His heart was given, and the Pillar of Cloud and Fire became the Leader of His people from the border of Egypt into the land. But all this only prepared the way for the full reality which now appeared: the Word, the personal Wisdom of God, became flesh. An expression is used which most completely declares the reality of manhood into which He entered. It was not some docetic form of it, but the verity of that which we know as such, and which most implies the weakness of the creature. And that He became flesh imports this manhood, not as something outside of or other than His true Self, but assumed into it. While yet this was not, nor could be, transmuted Deity, but the Tabernacle of Deity: the divine and human not being confused together, but united; the Word tabernacling among us by becoming flesh. The Glory beheld was of an Only-begotten with the Father: One in whom the divine nature was, not as what might be in some true sense communicable to the creature, but in a way unique, peculiar to Himself; not derived, therefore, from the Manhood He assumed, but His relationship in the Godhead; "with the Father" implying that communion in the Godhead, the necessary result of this.
The Glory was not hidden, as of old, but beheld -by those that had eyes for it. That which was even necessary goodness under the law, the barrier that kept men from intruding where they could not stand, ceased to be any longer: it was now in grace that God was revealed; grace which did not moreover hide the truth, but prepared the soul for its reception and endeared it evermore. The aspect of the truth was invitation, not repulsion; it preached of life and not of death.
The witness of John to the deity of Christ is appended to this. Strictly it is to His pre-existence; but the one involves the other. No angel could leave the sphere in which God created him, and the Arian view of Christ’s Person has no countenance in the Old Testament. So fully is this the case that in his first epistle John can say "come in flesh" as equivalent to declaring the divine-human Person. "He that cometh after me," says the Baptist, "has come to be before me:" He has come into a greater place. And no wonder! "for He was before me." And there, as it seems, the voice of the Church, by the lips of the evangelist, breaks in.* "And out of His fulness have we all received, and grace upon grace." It was grace that even at the second giving of the law could reveal along with this the Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin." But still that left the law, nay, even the more made it a "ministration of death" for man, as showing the awful reality of his condition. As long as man stands on the footing of his own responsibility before God, his state is hopeless; only Christ before God for him can suffice. And this alone is "grace upon grace," that which we receive from Him, -grace that is all grace, without mixture or limit.
{*There is a similar out-burst in praise and testimony at the commencement of another book of John, Revelation (Rev 1:5-7).}
Accordingly, the law is put in contrast with this: "the law was given through Moses;" the second tables were written, not by the "finger of God," but by the mediator’s hand. But the mediator himself could not behold face to face the glory of the Lord, -could see nothing but His "back parts:" could not see God and live. Still it remains, therefore, spite of all that was declared to him, that "no one hath seen God at any time." But the Only-begotten Son hath not only seen Him: as the Son of His love, in the Father’s bosom, He hath declared Him -told Him out. Thus "grace and truth came to be" for us "through Jesus Christ." It is a grace which is identified with truth, as the singular verb joined to the two nominatives shows. It is not, as when the law was given, grace based upon a supposed condition in man, -a condition found not to exist. This caused the inadequacy of law, with whatever limitation: man must be depended on in some way: but in fact, "wherein is he to be accounted of?" The law is helpless, therefore; while the fulness of grace in Christ supposes nothing in man, except a most real need to be met out of this fulness. Here, if there were failure, it would be Christ who failed; and that is impossible. Grace and truth exist together for us now in Christ; and God in righteousness and love is told out fully in the One Mediator, who in Person and work brings God and man together.
F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Alexander MacLaren 1905 · Public Domain On v1 Joh 1:1 - Joh 1:14.
John
THE WORD IN ETERNITY, IN THE WORLD, AND IN THE FLESH
Read full note →
Joh 1:1 - Joh 1:14.
The other Gospels begin with Bethlehem; John begins with ‘the bosom of the Father.’ Luke dates his narrative by Roman emperors and Jewish high-priests; John dates his ‘in the beginning.’ To attempt adequate exposition of these verses in our narrow limits is absurd; we can only note the salient points of this, the profoundest page in the New Testament.
The threefold utterance in Joh 1:1 carries us into the depths of eternity, before time or creatures were. Genesis and John both start from ‘the beginning,’ but, while Genesis works downwards from that point and tells what followed, John works upwards and tells what preceded-if we may use that term in speaking of what lies beyond time. Time and creatures came into being, and, when they began, the Word ‘was.’ Surely no form of speech could more emphatically declare absolute, uncreated being, outside the limits of time. Clearly, too, no interpretation of these words fathoms their depth, or makes worthy sense, which does not recognise that the Word is a person. The second clause of Joh 1:1 asserts the eternal communion of the Word with God. The preposition employed means accurately ‘towards,’ and expresses the thought that in the Word there was motion or tendency towards, and not merely association with, God. It points to reciprocal, conscious communion, and the active going out of love in the direction of God. The last clause asserts the community of essence, which is not inconsistent with distinction of persons, and makes the communion of active Love possible; for none could, in the depths of eternity, dwell with and perfectly love and be loved by God, except one who Himself was God.
Joh 1:1 stands apart as revealing the pretemporal and essential nature of the Word. In it the deep ocean of the divine nature is partially disclosed, though no created eye can either plunge to discern its depths or travel beyond our horizon to its boundless, shoreless extent. The remainder of the passage deals with the majestic march of the self-revealing Word through creation, and illumination of humanity, up to the climax in the Incarnation.
John repeats the substance of Joh 1:1 - Joh 1:2, apparently in order to identify the Agent of creation with the august person whom he has disclosed as filling eternity. By Him creation was effected, and, because He was what Joh 1:1 has declared Him to be, therefore was it effected by Him. Observe the three steps marked in three consecutive verses. ‘All things were made by Him’; literally ‘became,’ where the emergence into existence of created things is strongly contrasted with the divine ‘was’ of Joh 1:1. ‘Through Him’ declares that the Word is the agent of creation; ‘without Him’ {literally, ‘apart from Him’} declares that created things continue in existence because He communicates it to them. Man is the highest of these ‘all things,’ and Joh 1:4 sets forth the relation of the Word to Him, declaring that ‘life,’ in all the width and height of its possible meanings, inheres in Him, and is communicated by Him, with its distinguishing accompaniment, in human nature, of light, whether of reason or of conscience.
So far, John has been speaking as from the upper or divine side, but in Joh 1:5 he speaks from the under or human, and shows us how the self-revelation of the Word has, by some mysterious necessity, been conflict. The ‘darkness’ was not made by Him, but it is there, and the beams of the light have to contend with it. Something alien must have come in, some catastrophe have happened, that the light should have to stream into a region of darkness.
John takes ‘the Fall’ for granted, and in Joh 1:5 describes the whole condition of things, both within and beyond the region of special revelation. The shining of the light is continuous, but the darkness is obstinate. It is the tragedy and crime of the world that the darkness will not have the light. It is the long-suffering mercy of God that the light repelled is not extinguished, but shines meekly on.
Joh 1:6 - Joh 1:13 deal with the historical appearance of the Word. The Forerunner is introduced, as in the other Gospels; and, significantly enough, this Evangelist calls him only ‘John,’-omitting ‘the Baptist,’ as was very natural to him, the other John, who would feel less need for distinguishing the two than others did. The subordinate office of a witness to the light is declared positively and negatively, and the dignity of such a function is implied. To witness to the light, and to be the means of leading men to believe, was honour for any man.
The limited office of the Forerunner serves as contrast to the transcendent lustre of the true Light. The meaning of Joh 1:9 may be doubtful, but Joh 1:10 - Joh 1:11 clearly refer to the historical manifestation of the Word, and probably Joh 1:9 does so too. Possibly, however, it rather points to the inner revelation by the Word, which is the ‘light of men.’ In that case the phrase ‘that cometh into the world’ would refer to ‘every man,’ whereas it is more natural in this context to refer it to ‘the light,’ and to see in the verse a reference to the illumination of humanity consequent on the appearance of Jesus Christ. The use of ‘world’ and ‘came’ in Joh 1:10 - Joh 1:11 points in that direction. Joh 1:9 represents the Word as ‘coming’; Joh 1:10 regards Him as come-’He was in the world.’
Note the three clauses, so like, and yet so unlike the august three in Joh 1:1. Note the sad issue of the coming-’The world knew Him not.’ In that ‘world’ there was one place where He might have looked for recognition, one set of people who might have been expected to hail Him; but not only the wide world was blind {‘knew not’} , but the narrower circle of ‘His own’ fought against what they knew to be light {‘received not’} .
But the rejection was not universal, and John proceeds to develop the blessed consequences of receiving the light. For the first time he speaks the great word ‘believe.’ The act of faith is the condition or means of ‘receiving.’ It is the opening of the mental eye for the light to pour in. We possess Jesus in the measure of our faith. The object of faith is ‘His name,’ which means, not this or that collocation of letters by which He is designated, but His whole self-revelation. The result of such faith is ‘the right to become children of God,’ for through faith in the only-begotten Son we receive the communication of a divine life which makes us, too, sons. That new life, with its consequence of sonship, does not belong to human nature as received from parents, but is a gift of God mediated through faith in the Light who is the Word.
Joh 1:14 is not mere repetition of the preceding, but advances beyond it in that it declares the wonder of the way by which that divine Word did enter into the world. John here, as it were, draws back the curtain, and shows us the transcendent miracle of divine love, for which he has been preparing in all the preceding. Note that he has not named ‘the Word’ since Joh 1:1, but here he again uses the majestic expression to bring out strongly the contrast between the ante-temporal glory and the historical lowliness. These four words, ‘The Word became flesh,’ are the foundation of all our knowledge of God, of man, of the relations between them, the foundation of all our hopes, the guarantee of all our peace, the pledge of all blessedness. ‘He tabernacled among us.’ As the divine glory of old dwelt between the cherubim, so Jesus is among men the true Temple, wherein we see a truer glory than that radiant light which filled the closed chamber of the holy of holies. Rapturous remembrances rose before the Apostle as he wrote, ‘We beheld His glory’; and he has told us what he has beheld and seen with his eyes, that we also may have fellowship with him in beholding. The glory that shone from the Incarnate Word was no menacing or dazzling light. He and it were ‘full of grace and truth,’ perfect Love bending to inferiors and sinners, with hands full of gifts and a heart full of tenderness and the revelation of reality, both as regards God and man. His grace bestows all that our lowness needs, His truth teaches all that our ignorance requires. All our gifts and all our knowledge come from the Incarnate Word, in whom believing we are the children of God.
Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 The Divinity and Incarnation of the Word. Witness of…
The Divinity and Incarnation of the Word. Witness of John. The First Disciples
1-18. Preface, declaring (1) that the Word was God, (2) that He was made man, (3) that He revealed the Father.
Read full note →
This sublime preface is intended to commend 'the truth as it is in Jesus,' both to Jewish and Gentile minds. It describes our Lord's person and office by a term familiar to both, that of the Logos or Word of God. 'Logos' has two meanings in Greek: (1) reason or intelligence, as it exists inwardly in the mind, and (2) reason or intelligence, as it is expressed outwardly in speech. Both these meanings are to be understood when Christ is called 'the Word of God.' He is the inward Word of God, because He exists from all eternity 'in the bosom of the Father,' as much one with Him as reason is one with the reasoning mind. Nothing is so close to a man as his own thought. It is within him, and is in a very real sense himself. So nothing is so close to God as His own eternal Word. It is within Him, it is one with Him, and it is divine like Him (Joh_1:1-2, Joh_1:18). Christ is also God's outward Word. He expresses and explains and reveals to the world what God is. It was He who created the world (Joh_1:3), making its order and beauty an outward expression of God's hidden nature. In spite of the Fall, He remained in the world, revealing to sinful man, through reason, through conscience, and through prophecy, the nature of the Father. He was the True Light that shineth in darkness, and lighteth every man that cometh into the world (Joh_1:4.). In the fulness of time He revealed God still more perfectly, by becoming man, and living a perfect and sinless human life (Joh_1:14.). So perfectly did Christ's wonderful life reveal the innermost character of God, that though 'no man hath seen God at any time' (Joh_1:18), those who have seen Christ may be said in a very real sense to have seen the Father also (Joh_14:9). The human life of Christ not only reveals what God is, it also helps man to become like God. The incarnate Christ is 'full of grace and truth' (Joh_1:14, Joh_1:16-17), and gives believers the power to put away their sinful nature, and to be born again as sons of God (Joh_1:12-13).
(1) The Hebrew-speaking Jews were familiar with the idea that God reveals Himself to the world through His Memra, or Word, which they distinguished from Himself as His organ of revelation. The Targums of the OT. speak, not of Jehovah, but of the Memra of Jehovah, as being manifested to Abraham, Hagar, Isaac, Jacob, and to Moses at the bush. St. John's preface, therefore, proclaimed to the Hebrew,' That Memra of Jehovah, which appeared to the patriarchs and prophets, was no other than Christ before His Incarnation.' (2) The educated Greek-speaking Jews (Hellenists) were familiar with the writings of the Jewish philosopher, Philo of Alexandria (cirJohn 15 b.c-50 a.d.). He believed that God does not act upon the world directly, but mediately through his Logos or Reason. To the Hellenist, therefore, St. John's Gospel said, 'That Logos, through which you say God acts upon the world and reveals himself in it, is no other than Christ.' (3) Educated heathens also believed in a divine Logos or Reason, diffused through the world, and disposing all things in a rational order. First Heraclitus, then Plato, and finally the Stoics developed this doctrine, until, in the apostolic age, it was the explanation of the universe commonly accepted by educated persons. To the heathen, therefore, St. John's preface said, 'That divine Logos, which inspired, your philosophers, so far as they have spoken truly, and whose existence is admitted by all educated men, has finally manifested Himself in the life of Jesus of Nazareth. Read the account that follows of His wonderful life and sayings, and you will acknowledge that this is true.' St. John's doctrine of the Logos differs from the Jewish and the heathen doctrine mainly in these two points: (1) That the Logos is personal, and (2) that He became flesh.
1. In the beginning] not as in Gen_1:1, 'in the beginning of creation,' but 'in the beginning of eternity,' i.e. from all eternity: cp. Joh_8:58; Joh_17:5. Was the Word] i.e. the Word existed. 'The Word' as a title of our Lord is only found in the Johannine writings (Joh_1:24; 1Jn_1:1; Rev_19:13). On its meaning, see above. Was with God] lit. 'was directed towards God,' the attitude of loving and intimate intercourse: cp.' in the bosom of the Father' (Joh_1:18). Was God] i.e. was divine, and is therefore to be worshipped with the same worship as is due to the Father. Jesus is again called God in express terms in Joh_1:18 (RM) Joh_20:28; Joh_5:20; Rom_9:5; Tit_2:13; (RV) Act_20:28; Heb_1:8; 2Pe_1:1; (RV).
3. Made by Him] i.e. 'through' Him, as the Father's agent. That Christ is the creator of the universe is stated Col_1:16-17; 1Co_8:6; Heb_1:2; Heb_1:10; Rev_3:14, but not in any Gospel except this.
3, 4. The Word is not only the Creator of the world, but is also its Life; i.e. He sustains it in existence, supplies life to all living organisms, and guides all the operations of nature. To rational beings like men, He is also their Light, or Instructor. He was this even before His Incarnation, instructing them through reason, through conscience, and through prophecy. (For another punctuation see RV.)
5. This instruction by the Word was hindered by the Fall, which involved the world in moral and spiritual darkness. And the darkness comprehended (RV 'apprehended') it not] i.e. the people whose minds were darkened by sin did not understand or obey the instructions of the Word. Prejudice prevented them. Another translation is 'and the darkness overcame it not.'
6-8. Parenthesis: The mission of Christ's forerunner, John the Baptist. Perhaps this section is directed against those followers of the Baptist who maintained that he was the Messiah. The evangelist makes it clear, (1) that the Baptist had a true mission from God, and (2) that he was not the Light. His mission was to bear witness to it, and to reflect it.
9. The preface resumed. The true Light, Christ our Lord, existed even before His Incarnation, and enlightened every man, whether Jew or Gentile, born into the world. This important text teaches us that the light of revelation shines among all races, and that there is some truth, however distorted by error, in all religions. The best translation is, 'Already the true Light existed, which lighteth every man as he cometh into the world.' For other translations see the RV.
10. He was in the world] viz. before His Incarnation.
11. He came, viz. at the Incarnation, unto his own (home), viz. the Holy Land; and his own, i.e. the Jews, received, i.e. believed, Him not.
12. Power] rather, 'the right,' or 'privilege.' Those who 'believed on His name,' i.e. accepted Him as the divine Son of God, and the Saviour of the world, received the privilege of becoming true sons of God.
13. This sonship conferred on men depended not on human descent from Abraham (blood), nor upon the sexual relations of their parents (the will of the flesh), nor could it be had for willing or wishing it, i.e. human effort (the will of man). It was a free and supernatural gift from God, inward and spiritual, implanted by the Holy Ghost, and dependent for its maintenance on union with Christ: see on Joh_3:3, Joh_3:5.
14. The Word was made (RV 'became') flesh] a plain statement of the wondrous fact of the Incarnation, the central mystery of our religion. God became man to atone for sin, and to make us partakers of the divine nature. 'Flesh' in St. John means human nature (body, soul, and spirit) without the added idea of sinfulness, which attaches to it in St. Paul (see especially Joh_6:51.). Our text affirms, therefore, that the Redeemer is 'perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting; equal to the Father, as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father, as touching His manhood. Who although He be God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.'
Dwelt among us] lit. 'dwelt in a tabernacle among us, 'the tabernacle being His body (see Joh_2:19, and cp. 2Co_5:1, 2Co_5:4; 2Pe_1:13-14). The allusion is to the 'Shekinah,' which the rabbis identified with 'the Word of Jehovah.' As the 'Shekinah,' or visible glory of God, dwelt in the tabernacle of old, so, when Christ was born into the world, His divine nature dwelt in His body as in a temple. We beheld his glory] i.e. not merely the visible glory of the Transfiguration and the Ascension, but the moral and spiritual splendour of His unique life, which revealed the nature of the invisible Father. The evangelist here claims to have been an eyewitness, as in Joh_19:35. The only begotten of (RV 'from') the Father] The glory of Christ's life was not a reflected glory, as would have been the case had He been a mere human saint or prophet, but it was the glory of God's only begotten Son, and therefore God's own glory, for Christ and His Father are one. 'Only begotten' as a title of Christ is peculiar to St. John (Joh_1:18; Joh_3:16-18; 1Jn_4:9). It indicates that no man or even angel is God's son in the sense in which Christ is. A 'son' in the full sense of the word is of the same nature as his father, and hence Christ, being God's Son, is divine. Full of grace and truth] 'grace' is the divine favour and loving-kindness; 'truth,' as often in St. John, is not simply veracity, but holiness in general (cp. Joh_1:17; Joh_3:21; Joh_4:23; Joh_8:44; 1Jn_1:6). Christ was full of grace and holiness, not that He might keep them to Himself, but that He might bestow them upon men.
15. Another parenthesis, introducing further testimony of the Baptist, which the evangelist indicates as of permanent importance ('beareth,' 'crieth,' RV, not bare, cried, AV).
He that cometh after me] i.e. He who begins his work later than myself. Is become (RV) before me] viz. in honour. For he was before me] i.e. He existed before my birth, and even before His own birth, as the eternal Son of God. The Baptist learnt that Christ was God's Son by a special revelation, and by the voice of the Father at Christ's baptism: see Joh_1:32-34.
16-18. The preface concluded. The 'we' of Joh_1:16 shows that these vv. are not words of the Baptist, but that they express the spiritual experience of Christ's disciples, in whose name the evangelist speaks.
16. Of his fulness] 'Fulness' (pleroma) was a word much used (and abused) by the Gnostics against whom St. John contended. Here it means, (1) the fulness of the divine attributes which dwelt in Christ (Eph_1:23; Col_1:19; Col_2:9), and (2) the fulness of the human virtues which He displayed. Both these 'fulnesses' Christ imparts in some measure to true believers, as the evangelist testifies from personal experience. Grace for grace] i.e. grace succeeding grace, one act of love after another, ever increasing in proportion as we deserve it or require it.
17. Moses set before us mere commands, without changing our nature, or giving us the power to obey them. Jesus Christ came to change our nature. He offers us 'grace,' whereby we are born again as children of God, and become heirs of everlasting life; also 'truth,' i.e. Christian holiness, which becomes possible to those who abide in Christ: cp. Rom_5:21. By Moses.. by Jesus] lit. 'through' Moses, 'through' Jesus.
18. God the Father never reveals Himself to men directly, but always by and through His only-begotten Son. This was the case even before the Incarnation. It was God the Son who manifested Himself to the patriarchs, gave the Law to Moses, inspired the prophets, and enlightened the sages of the Gentiles. But now by His Incarnation He has revealed God more perfectly. So completely does 'the Word made flesh' represent the invisible Father, that 'he that hath seen me hath seen the Father' (Joh_14:9): cp. Joh_5:37; Joh_6:48; Exo_33:20; Col_1:15; 1Ti_6:16; 1Jn_4:12, 1Jn_4:20. The only begotten Son] Many very ancient authorities read, '(the) only begotten God,' a striking statement of our Lord's Deity. In the bosom] i.e. in eternal, intimate, loving union with the Father: cp. the expression 'in Abraham's bosom' (Luk_16:22), and Joh_13:23. This v. explains how it is that God is love, not only since the creation, when He created objects for His love, but from eternity: cp. Joh_17:24.
Joh_1:19 to Joh_4:42. Preliminary ministry of our Lord. All the events recorded by St. John from Joh_1:19 to Joh_4:42; (the testimony of the Baptist; the preliminary call of John, Andrew, Peter, Philip, and Nathanael; the marriage at Cana; the visit to Capernaum; the first cleansing of the Temple; the interview with Nicodemus; the interview with the Samaritan woman) may be regarded as a preliminary ministry, for they took place before the Baptist was cast into prison (see Mat_4:12). The ministry proper begins with the imprisonment of the Baptist, upon news of which Jesus withdrew into Galilee (Mat_4:12; Joh_4:43, Joh_4:46).
19-28. Public testimony of the Baptist to Jesus in reply to a deputation from the Sanhedrin. The independence and fulness of the account of the Baptist in this Gospel renders it highly probable that the evangelist had once been the Baptist's disciple. He knows, for example, the exact places where John baptised (Joh_1:28; Joh_3:23); the exact day and even hour when certain things were said (Joh_1:29, Joh_1:35, Joh_1:39); the contemporary disputes with the Jews about purifying (Joh_3:25); the relations, not always friendly, between the disciples of John and those of Christ (Joh_3:26); the exact time when John was cast into prison (Joh_3:24). His account of the Baptist's testimony agrees with that of the Synoptists, but he adds to it important particulars. He mentions, for instance, that John actually saw the dove descending upon Jesus, and was thus enabled to recognise Him (Joh_1:32), that he applied to Him the titles Lamb of God (Joh_1:29, Joh_1:36) and Son of God (Joh_1:34; Joh_3:36), the latter clearly in a superhuman sense, for he declares His preëxistence (Joh_1:15, Joh_1:30), and says that to believe in Him is to have eternal life (Joh_3:36). For the historical difficulties, see on these passages and on Mat_11:2. The Synoptists record the Baptist's testimony before our Lord's baptism, and St. John his testimony afterwards, when the descent of the Spirit upon Jesus, and the voice of the Father, had convinced the Baptist that Jesus was truly the Son of God.
19. The Jews] In this Gospel 'the Jews' has the following special senses: (1) the inhabitants of Judæa, (2) members of the Sanhedrin (the meaning here), and (3) the enemies of Jesus. Sent] One function of the Sanhedrin was to judge false prophets, hence they now desired to judge the claims of John.
Priests and Levites] the proper parties to enquire into a new religious movement. The priests performed the services of the Temple, offered the sacrifices, and burnt the incense. The Levites waited upon the priests in their ministry, and discharged subordinate duties.
20. Not the Christ] Some already believed that he was, Luk_3:15.
21. Elias] i.e. Elijah, whose personal return to prepare the way of the Messiah was expected by many (Mal_4:5; Mar_6:15 see especially on Mat_16:14; Mat_17:10). John denied that he was literally Elijah, though his coming fulfilled Malachi's prophecy (Mat_11:14; Mat_17:12; Luk_1:17). That prophet] RV 'the prophet,' viz. the prophet mentioned Deu_18:15, and regarded by the deputation not as the Messiah, but as one of his forerunners. John, however, regarded the prophet of Deu_18:15 as actually the Messiah (cp. Act_3:22), and therefore denied that he was 'that prophet.'
23. The words in Isaiah (Isa_40:3) refer to the preparation for the return from Babylon of the exiled Jews: the Baptist applies them to himself, as descriptive of his work: see on Mat_3:3.
24. And they] RV 'and they had been sent from the Pharisees.'
25. Why baptizest thou?] Baptism was ordinarily administered only to proselytes. The meaning of the challenge seems, therefore, to be, 'What right hast thou, who art neither the Messiah, nor his forerunner “that Prophet,” to treat Israelites as if they were proselytes?' It is implied that the Messiah, who came to inaugurate an entirely new covenant, might possibly be expected to baptise even Jews.
26. With water] John's baptism was outward, symbolising repentance and remission of sin: Christ's was inward, conveying the gift of the Spirit, and the power to lead a new life.
28. Bethabara] lit, 'house of passing over,' RV 'Bethany,' RM 'Bethabarah,' or 'Betharabah'; probably the same as the Bethbarah of Jdg_7:24. A ford on the Jordan, NE. of Bethshean, is still called 'Abarah,' lit. 'passing over.'
29. The Lamb of God] The reference is perhaps not to the Paschal lamb, but to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53, who is 'brought as a lamb to the slaughter,' and whose death atones for sin. Contrast this description of the Messiah with the prevalent idea of a conqueror who would restore the kingdom to Israel. The Jews generally regarded the Messiah not as 'the Lamb of God,' but as 'the Lion of the tribe of Judah.' The sin of the world] The idea of atonement for the sins of Israel is found in Isaiah 53 : the further idea that the Messiah will atone for the sins of the world, follows naturally from the numerous utterances of the OT. prophets which speak of the participation of the Gentiles in the Messianic kingdom (Psalms 87, etc.).
30. See Joh_1:15.
31. I knew him not] But in Mat_3:14 he seems to know Him, for he says, 'I have need to be baptized of thee.' The discrepancy, however, is only apparent. John is looking for the promised sign. Jesus presents Himself for Baptism. His majestic appearance strikes John with awe. Through prophetic insight (or perhaps as the result of a personal interview before the Baptism) he surmises that He is the true Messiah ('I have need,' etc.). The sign that follows makes the surmise a certainty.
34. The Son of God] The chief difficulty as to the use of this term by the Baptist is removed by the statement that he first learnt that Jesus was 'the Son of God' at the Baptism. In the OT. it was a title of the Davidic king, and of the Messiah (2Sa_7:14; Psa_89:27, etc.), and did not necessarily imply (though see Psalms 2, and cp. Psalms 110) superhuman dignity.
35-51. Preliminary call of five Apostles, Andrew, John, Peter, Philip, and Bartholomew (peculiar to Jn). This account, so far from conflicting with the (later) call described Mat_4:18; Mar_1:15; (cp. Luk_5:1), really removes a difficulty, for it shows how the Apostles came to obey the final call to follow Jesus so readily. After their preliminary call, described here, the Apostles loosely attached themselves to Jesus as learners, but did not leave their homes and occupations. Afterwards when further intercourse had strengthened their hope that He was really the Messiah, they left all and followed Him.
35. Two] One was Andrew, the other (who characteristically suppresses his name) was John himself (see Joh_1:40). The Baptist points out Jesus, thus suggesting that henceforth they should be His disciples.
39. The tenth hour] i.e. by Jewish reckoning, about 4 p.m. But some think that at Ephesus, where this Gospel was written, hours were numbered as with us, in which case the time would be 10 a.m. (see Joh_4:6; Joh_19:14).
42. Jona] RV 'John'; see Mat_16:17. Cephas] At the very first interview our Lord reads Peter's character: see on Mat_16:18.
43. It would appear that Jesus Himself was acquainted with Philip.
45. Nathanael] is probably an apostle, and is hence to be identified with Bartholomew, whose name also appears coupled with Philip's in Mat_10:3. 'Bartholomew' means 'son of Tolmai': cp. Barjona, Barabbas, Bartimæus, Barjesus. The son of Joseph] This does not indicate the evangelist's own belief, but what was generally believed at this time.
46. Nazareth] an obscure place not even mentioned in OT., which indicated Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah (Mic_5:2).
47. No guile] 'guile' or deceitfulness was the special failing of Jacob (Israel) and of Israelites generally. Again our Lord discerns the heart of man.
48. I saw thee] implies supernatural knowledge. Perhaps Jesus alludes to some recent prayer or resolution which Nathanael made under the figtree.
49. The Son of God] A title of the Messiah even in the OT.: see on Joh_1:34.
51. See Gen_28:12. As Jacob saw in his dream a vision of angels ascending and descending the ladder, so the disciples would see in Christ the link and connexion between heaven and earth. Through Christ the locked-up heavens were again to be opened, and communion between heaven and earth restored. The title 'Son of man' indicates Christ as completely partaking of human nature, and realising its original ideal: see especially the full note on Mat_8:20.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. W. McGarvey 1914 · Public Domain On v1 J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [II. John's Introduction].
J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [II. John's Introduction].
II. JOHN'S INTRODUCTION. dJOHN I. 1-18.
Read full note →
d1 In the beginning was the Word [a title for Jesus peculiar to the apostle John], and the Word was with God [not going before nor coming after God, but with Him at the beginning], and the Word was God. [Not more, not less.] 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him [the New Testament often speaks of Christ as the Creator--see Joh_1:10, 1Co_8:6, Col_1:13, Heb_1:2]; and without him was not anything made that hath been made. [This shows that Jesus himself is not a creature.] 4 In his was life [As in the Father ( Joh_5:26). As this life animates the living, so can it reanimate the dead-- Joh_11:25; and the life was the light of men. [The life of Jesus is the light of men, because from that life we get our intellect and understanding, and because that life formed and governs the creation around us by which we become enlightened as to the existence and power of God-- Rom_1:18-21, Act_14:16, Act_14:17.] 5 And the light shineth in the darkness [an ignorant, benighted world]; and the darkness apprehended it not. [Did not receive or admit it. Jesus, the Light of the world, was despised and rejected by men.] 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for witness, that he might bear witness of the light. [that he might tell men that Jesus was the Messiah], that all [who heard his testimony] might believe [in Jesus] through him. 8 He was not the light ["He was the lamp that burneth and shineth" ( Joh_5:35); but not the Sun of righteousness-- [2] Mal_4:2], but i came that he might bear witness of the light. 9 There was the true light [as opposed to the imperfect, incomplete, and transitory lights], even the light which lighteth every man [all men are enlightened in some degree and enlightened of Christ: some by nature, some by conscience, and some by Bible revelation], coming into the world. 10 He was in the world. [invisibly present, renewing and sustaining his creation], and the world was made through him, and the world knew him not. [Though it might and should have known him-- Rom_1:18-21, Act_14:16, Act_14:17.] 11 He came [visibly in the flesh] unto his own [his own land or possessions-- Hos_9:3, Jer_2:7, Zec_2:12], and they that were his own [the children of Israel-- Exo_19:5, Deu_7:6, Deu_14:2] received him not. 12 But as many as received him [whether Jew or Gentile], to them gave he the right to become children of God [comp. Rom_3:14-17, Gal_3:26, Gal_4:6, Gal_4:7, 1Jo_3:1, 1Jo_3:2], even to them that believe on his name: 13 who were born, not of blood [descent from Abraham, David or any other godly person does not make a man a child of God-- Luk_3:8, Mat_3:9, Joh_8:39, Joh_8:40, Gal_3:6, Gal_3:7, Gal_3:29], nor of the will of the flesh [the efforts and exertions of our own human hearts and natures may reform, but can not regenerate, the life-- Joh_3:6], nor of the will of man [we are not begotten of God by the acts and deeds of our fellow-men, however much they may aid us in leading right lives], but of God. [ Joh_3:5, 1Jo_4:7, 1Jo_5:1.] 14 And the Word became flesh [by being born in Bethlehem of the Virgin Mary], and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory [in his miracles, and especially in his transfiguration-- Joh_2:11, 2Pe_1:16-18], glory as of the only begotten from the Father) [such glory as was suitable to the Son of God], full of grace and truth. [The glory of Christ was not in pomp and worldly grandeur, but in the holiness, grace, and truth of his daily life.] 15 John [the Baptist] beareth witness of him [the words of John the Baptist still witness to unbelieving Jews and Gentiles], and crieth, [3] saying, This was he of whom I said [John had preached about Jesus before Jesus appeared; he now points to Jesus as the one about whom he had preached], He that cometh after me [He for whom I as a forerunner have prepared the way-- Mat_3:3] is become before me [is worthy of more honor and reverence than am I]: for he was before me. [Though born into the world six months later than John, Jesus, as the Word, had existed from eternity. (In Joh_1:16 the words are the apostle John's, and not John the Baptist's.)] 16 For of his fulness [Jesus was full of grace and truth--and all the attributes of God-- Eph_1:23, Eph_3:19, Eph_4:13, Col_1:19, Col_2:9] we all received [by union with him all his perfection and righteousness became ours-- Phi_1:10, Phi_1:11, Phi_3:8, Phi_3:9, 1Co_1:30], and grace for grace. [This may mean that we receive a grace kindred to or like each several grace that is in Christ ( Rom_8:29, Rom_12:2, Eph_4:11-13). But it more probably means fullness of grace, or fresh grace daily added to the grace already bestowed.] 17 For the law [the Old Dispensation with its condemnation ( Rom_3:20, Gal_2:21) and its types and shadows-- Col_2:16, Col_2:17, Heb_8:4, Heb_8:5, Heb_10:1] was given through Moses [by angels at Mt. Sinai-- Heb_2:2]; grace and truth [the New Dispensation with its justification ( Rom_3:21-26) and its realities-- Heb_9:1-15] came through Jesus Christ. [ Heb_1:1, Heb_1:2, Heb_2:3.] 18 No man hath seen God at any time [ 1Jo_4:12, 1Jo_4:20, Joh_1:18, 1Ti_4:16]; the only begotten Son [the word "only begotten" indicates that none other bears with Christ a like relationship to God], who is in the bosom of the Father [who bears the closest and tenderest relationship and fellowship as to the Father], he hath declared i him. [ Joh_3:2, Joh_15:9, Col_1:15.] [4]
[FFG 2-4]
J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v1 Gr. "Logos" (arm. "Memra," used in the Targums, or…
Word
Gr. "Logos" (arm. "Memra," used in the Targums, or Heb. paraphrases, for God). The Greek term means,
Read full note →
(1) a thought or concept;
(2) the expression or utterance of that thought. As a designation of Christ, therefore, Logos is peculiarly felicitous because,
(1) in Him are embodied all the treasures of the divine wisdom, the collective "thought" of God 1Co 1:24; Eph 3:11; Col 2:2; Col 2:3 and,
(2) He is from eternity, but especially in His incarnation, the utterance or expression of the Person, and "thought" of Deity Joh 1:3-5; Joh 1:9; Joh 1:14-18; Joh 14:9-11; Col 2:9.
In the Being, Person, and work of Christ, Deity is told out.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On v1 Analysis and Annotations
Analysis and Annotations
I. The Only-begotten, the Eternal Word;
Read full note →
His Glory and His Manifestation
-- Chapter 1:1-2:22
CHAPTER 1
1. The Word: the Creator, the Life and the Light. (Joh 1:1-4.)
2. The Light and the Darkness. The Light not Known. (Joh 1:5-11.)
3. The Word Made Flesh and Its Gracious Results. (Joh 1:12-18.)
4. The Witness of John. (Joh 1:19-34.)
5. Following Him and Dwelling With Him. (Joh 1:35-42.)
6. The Next Day. Nathanael’s Unbelief and Confession. (Joh 1:43-49.)
7. The Promise of Greater Things. (Joh 1:50-51.)
Majestic is the beginning of this Gospel. Hundreds of pages might be written on the opening verses and their meaning would not be exhausted. They are inexhaustible. The name of our Lord as “the Word” (Logos) is exclusively used by the Apostle John. The Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria, who lived in the days of the Apostle John, also speaks of the Word. Critics have therefore claimed that the Apostle copied from Philo and reproduced his mystical Jewish philosophy. However, this theory has been exploded. Professor Harnack, the eminent German scholar, states “the Logos of John has little more in common with the Logos of Philo than the name.” It is significant that the rabbinical paraphrases on the Old Testament (Targumim) speak hundreds of times of the Lord as “the Word” (Memra). These ancient Jewish paraphrases describe Jehovah, when He reveals Himself, by the term “Memra,” which is the same as the Greek “Logos”--”the Word.” Gen 3:8 they paraphrased “they heard the Word walking in the garden.” These Jewish comments ascribe the creation of the world to the Word. It was “the Word” which communed with the Patriarchs. According to them “the Word” redeemed Israel out of Egypt; “the Word” was dwelling in the tabernacle; “the Word” spake out of the fire of Horeb; “the Word” brought them into the promised land. All the relationship of the Lord with Israel is explained by them as having been through “the Word.” In the light of the opening verses of the Gospel of John these Jewish statements appear more than interesting. [These paraphrases in the form we possess them were written in Aramaic about 300 A.D. But long before they were written they must have existed as traditions among the Jewish people.] The Only Begotten is called “The Word” because He is the express image of God, as the invisible thought is expressed by the corresponding word. He is the revealer and interpreter of the mind and will of God.
“In (the) beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Three great facts are made known concerning our Lord. 1. He is eternal. He did not begin to exist. He has no beginning, for “in the beginning was the Word.” He ever was. Before time began and matter was created, He was. 2. He was and is a Person distinct from God the Father, yet one with Him. “The Word was with God.” 3. The Lord Jesus Christ is God, for we read “The Word was God.” He could therefore not be a being, a creature like the angels. The verses which follow add to this the fact that He is the Creator of all things and the Source of all light and life. Here is the most complete refutation of the wicked teachings concerning the Person of our Lord, which were current in the days of the Apostle, which have been in the world ever since and which will continue to exist till the Lord comes. Arianism, which makes our Lord a Being inferior to God, is answered. So is Socinianism, Unitarianism, Russellism, International Bible Student Association, which teach that Christ was not very God, but a man. Well has it been said in view of the revelation contained in the first verse: “to maintain in the face of such a text, as some so called ‘Christians’ do, that our Lord Jesus Christ was only a man, is a mournful proof of the perversity of the human heart.” And in Him was life, which must be applied to spiritual life. Spiritual life and light is impossible apart from the second Person of the Godhead. The commentator Bengel makes a helpful statement on the opening verses of this chapter. “In the first and second verses of this chapter mention is made of a state before the creation of the world; in the third verse, the world’s creation; in the fourth, the time of man’s uprightness; in the fifth, the time of man’s decline and fall.”
John the forerunner is in this Gospel presented to bear witness of the Light. How this reveals the darkness which is in the world that He, Who is the Life and the Light, needed one to announce His coming! “The true light was that which, coming into the world, lighteth every man.” (Joh 1:9; correct translation.) And when He came into the world He had made, the world knew Him not. Even His own, to whom He came, received Him not. This is His rejection by Israel, which in detail is described in the first three Gospels.
Joh 1:12-13 make known the gracious results for those, who receive Him, who believe on His name. The world had not known its Creator; Israel had rejected Him. After the great work of the Cross had been accomplished, the work done for guilty man, the good news is made known. As many as receive Him, to them He gives the right to be the children of God. The new birth is here mentioned for the first time; it is the communication of the divine nature by believing on His name. Believing on Him, receiving Him, we are begotten again and are therefore the children of God. Of this nothing is said in the preceding Gospels. The Gospel of John begins where the others end. The Authorized Version is incorrect in having “sons of God.” (The same error appears in 1Jn 3:2.) John always speaks of “children” not of “sons.” The expression “children of God” denotes the fact that we are God’s born ones, born by the new birth into the family of God. “Sons of God” we are called in view of our destiny in Christ and with Him. As sons of God we are also the heirs of God and fellow- heirs of Jesus Christ. Nowhere is it said that we are heirs of God because we are children of God. Our Lord is never called a child of God, for He is not born of God as we are; He is “Son.” (Act 4:30 is incorrect; not “holy child Jesus,” but “holy servant.”) Joh 1:14 gives the fact of His incarnation. Here then we read what the Word became. It is almost impossible to believe that men who claim scholarship, who deny the fact of the incarnation, can state as they do, that the Gospel of John has nothing to say on this great foundation truth of our faith. These apostates must be blinded. The great mystery is made known here as it is in Matthew and in Luke. The Eternal Word, the Word which ever was, the Word which is God, became flesh. He became so by the union of two perfect and distinct natures in one Person. His person however cannot be divided. And when He became flesh, took on the creature’s form, He did not cease to be very God; He emptied Himself of His outward glory, but not of His Deity. He became truly man, but He was holy, sinless; not alone did He not sin, but He could not sin. There is an ancient Latin statement which is worth repeating. It represents “the Word having become flesh as saying: “I am what I was, that is God”--”I was not what I am, that is Man”--”I am now called both, God and Man.” In Him they beheld His glory, the glory of the Only Begotten, full of grace and truth. Grace and truth came by Him. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, declared Him, Whom no one hath seen at any time. These are great statements. The word “grace” is found here for the first time in the New Testament. And He, the Incarnate Word, and He alone is full of Grace and Truth. Out of His fullness have we all received, and grace upon grace. It is all grace, that those receive from Him who believe on His name.
The witness of John the forerunner is different from his witness and preaching as given by the Synoptics. They report mostly his testimony to the nation. Here we read when he saw Jesus coming to him, he saith, “Behold the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world.” (Often Christians quote “sins of the world.” If our Lord had taken away the sins of the world, the whole world would be saved. Our Lord only bore the sins of those who believe on Him. All who do not believe die in their sins and are lost.) He knew that He Who came to him was to be the Sin-bearer. He knew that He is the true Sacrifice for sin, the true Passover-Lamb, the Lamb which Isaiah predicted. And he testified that the Lamb of God was to take away (not taking away then, or has taken away) the sin of the world. The Lamb of God had to die and the ultimate results of His death are announced in this testimony. They have not yet come, but will be realized in the new heaven and the new earth, when all things are made new.
Beginning with Joh 1:35 we read what happened the next day after John had given his testimony concerning the Lamb of God. The results of that testimony now appear. Once more John points to Him: “Behold the Lamb of God.” He, who was the greatest prophet of the Old Testament, directs his disciples to the Lord. The two disciples heard him speak and followed Jesus. These are the blessed steps: speaking the message, hearing (and in hearing believing) then following the Lord. And He knew them and their hearts’ desire. His grace was drawing them to Himself. Their question, “Rabbi, where dwellest Thou?” is answered by that most blessed invitation, “Come and see.” These are the first words of our Lord besides His question, written in this Gospel. He wanted them to know Him, to be in communion with Himself. They abode with Him that day. It foreshadows the results of the Gospel of Grace. The unmentioned place where they dwelt with Him is typical of the heavenly place where He is now. In faith we see where He abides, and by faith we know we are there in Him. It is a beautiful picture of the gathering which takes place throughout this Gospel-age. He is the Center, and “Come and see” are still His gracious words to all who hear and believe. And how Andrew at once testified and brought his brother Simon to Jesus!
Joh 1:43-49 unfold another picture. Nathanael (gift of God) would not believe. Philip had testified to him “We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” Nathanael under the fig tree, where the Lord had seen him, is the type of the remnant of Israel. When the Lord spoke to him he owned Him as the Son of God, the King of Israel. So all Israel in a future day will confess Him. Notice the first day, when the first company is gathered to abide with Him (typical of this age and the gathering of a heavenly company); then the second day, when the Lord reveals Himself to unbelieving Nathanael (typical of the conversion of the remnant of Israel).
The last two verses of this marvelous chapter will find their fulfillment in that day when heaven is opened. Then greater things will take place. The angels of God will be seen ascending and descending upon the Son of Man. It will take place when He comes the second time, when Israel acknowledges Him as their King and as the Son of God.
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v1 John Chapter 1
John Chapter 1
The Prologue of the Gospel.
Read full note →
The introduction:
v. 1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
v. 2. The same was in the beginning with God.
v. 3. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made.
v. 4. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men.
v. 5. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
In the beginning, when time began, before anything was formed, when God made ready to create heaven and earth, Gen 1:1, when God first called things into existence. It is necessary that the evangelist use some expression which will, at least in a way, come within the ideas of men, for eternity itself is beyond the understanding of man. In the beginning was the Word, not: came the Word, or: was brought into existence, but: existed, had been in existence since the timeless reaches of eternity. The Word was in the beginning, 1Jn 1:1; Rev 1:2. The term. Word, or Logos, is strictly a Biblical expression or designation for the second person of the God-head, for Jesus Christ. He is no creature, no part of the creation, for He existed when no part of that existed. He is the Word which God spoke from eternity, begotten of God from eternity. And He existed, not as a dead substance or thing, but He was alive and active. - The relation between God and the Logos is next stated. The Word was with God, in inseparable nearness and closest intercommunion with God the Father. The Logos Himself is God, was God from the beginning and from eternity, was always connected most closely with the Father. He is distinct from God, in person, not in the essence. The text implies intercourse, and therefore separate personality. But though the Word is distinguishable from God in this manner yet the Word was God, in the absolute sense, not with a secondary or derived meaning. The Word is God in kind and essence: Jesus Christ is, according to His nature and essence, true God, 1Jn 5:21. A god that would have someone over him as a superior could not be considered God. But the Word is coessential with God, is in full possession of the Godhead with eternity and all the other attributes of the Godhead.
This same Word was in the beginning with God: an emphatic reassertion of the distinction between the persons of the Godhead, and yet not a mere repetition of the first verse. The first statement had characterized the Word alone; the second had declared the personal distinction of the Word from God the Father; the third had expressed the essential unity and identity of the divine essence. Here John states that the eternal existence of the Word and His distinct personality had their being contemporaneously. It was the same Logos that he had spoken of in the first statements, whose deity he was here so plainly establishing. Incidentally, there is some emphasis on "in the beginning. " "In the beginning He was with God; afterwards, in time, He came to be with man. His pristine condition must first be grasped, if the grace of what succeeds is to be understood."
The next statement refers to the relation of the Logos to the world. All things were made through Him, through His almighty power, the entire creation. He was not the instrument of the creating God, being Himself without power; He was not a dead tool. He was Himself the almighty Creator of the universe; He called things into existence out of nothing; the world and everything in the world owes its existence to the creation of the Word. And there is nothing, not even one thing, not a single thing, which came into existence in the beginning, at the time of creation, that was made outside of Him, without His almighty power. Note: There is a great comfort in the idea that the Savior is interested in men not only from the standpoint of redemption, but also from that of creation. There is absolutely nothing in the wide world in which He is not personally interested, with the kindness of the great Creator that cares for all His creatures. The creatures of His hands are to become partakers of the atonement of His blood.
The relation of the Logos to mankind is brought out most beautifully. In Him is life, the true, divine, immortal life, Joh 3:15-16; Rom 2:7; Rom 5:10-17. He is the absolute Possessor of all that may be called life; He is the Fountainhead of life; all true life has its origin in Him. It is not physical life to which John has reference,—for that has a different name in the Greek language, but spiritual and eternal life. Of all these He is the Author, the absolute Possessor. Outside of Him, as outside of the Father, there is no life; And the life in Him, which was the fountain of existence for all true, lasting life in the world, was, at the same time, the light of men, of all men. Life and light are synonymous: the two words characterize the work of Christ. The life which Christ gives to men, wants to give to all men, is that which incidentally illumines their dark hearts and minds. That is its glorious purpose, and that purpose is to be realized by the life-giving powers of the light, by the illuminating powers of the life. According to the usage of Scriptures, light is identical with salvation, Psa 27:1; Isa 49:6; Isa 60:1-2. Christ, the Messiah, is the Light of the Gentiles, because He is the salvation, the Savior of all men.
The opposite of light is darkness, and the relation of the Logos to darkness is stated. And the Light, that wonderful, heavenly Light, shines in the darkness; it exerts its power, it sheds forth its light; it still shines, even now, through the Gospel. In the midst of the reign of darkness it shines, where misfortune, misery, wretchedness, condemnation are ruling, in this world, as it appears since the fall of man. The world is the kingdom of darkness, in the power of the Prince of Darkness. And the Logos has become the Light and Salvation of the world, just as soon as it had rejected God, just as soon as the darkness set in. In the Old Testament He was indeed preached only in prophecy and type; but none the less clearly for those that believed in the coming Messiah. But the true revelation of the Light took place with the incarnation of the Word. Then He, the Light, the Salvation, entered into the dark world, to give all men the benefit of His glorious illumination. He and His salvation were revealed to the world that all the people in the world might see Him and His redemption. But the darkness did not accept Him, would not understand Him; the darkness rejected the light. The darkened minds of the children of darkness, of all men by nature, do not, will not, receive the heavenly light in the Savior. That is their status, that is their character: opposition to Christ and His life—and light-giving Gospel. The great majority of the people in the world rejected the light absolutely, and they continue to do so, even when its glorious beams fall into their hearts. They prefer wretchedness and eternal death to light and life with Christ. Those that do accept His salvation have been filled with willingness by the power of the Light.
The Deity of Jesus
There is hardly a page of Scriptures which unbelief, often parading under the name of science and truth, has not touched and soiled with blasphemous hands. But no other doctrine has so challenged the most desperate efforts of unbelievers inside and outside of the Church than that of the person and office of Christ. The question of Jesus: "What think ye of Christ, whose Son is He?" Mat 22:42, important at all times since the Gospel was first proclaimed, has become a touchstone in our days; for by their answer to this question men range themselves with the friends or with the enemies of the Church of God in the real sense of the term.
Fortunately it will not be necessary to do more than merely refer to the fact that a few decades ago the very historicity of Jesus was questioned, and that some so-called Bible critics to this day do not hesitate to speak of a mythical theory of Jesus. "They assure us that in the gospels we have not got any ’tradition of a personality. ’ Jesus, the central figure, never existed at all, but was a purely mythical personage. " We refer to this in the same way that we would register the idea of some mentally deranged person that denied the existence of the sun.
Far more dangerous are such critics that assume a sanctimonious attitude and act as though they were firm believers in the Bible and all its doctrines, while, as a matter of fact, they are undermining the very foundations of Christian belief by their insidious attacks upon Christ, the Savior of the world. It is by such as these that Jesus is represented merely as a leader in social progress, as the "supreme example of genius in the realm of intellect," whose "wonderful name lifts society upward in character and culture, and will yet lift man back to His Father’s side. " Christ is indeed conceded a position as religious teacher, but one that "portrayed as an Infinite Father that God who holds the earth in His hand and rolls the sun like a golden ball along the pavement of the morning. " Christ is pictured in wonderfully flowing language in His relation to the poet, the philosopher, the scientist, and the seer. But it does not seem to occur to anyone to picture Christ, with equal beauty of language, in His relation to the poor sinner in need of salvation. And, with all their harping on the divinity of Christ, a great many of the modern religious leaders seem to have forgotten that there can be no salvation without the deity of Jesus assured.
We believe that Jesus Christ is true God. And, in order to summarize very briefly, let us point to only a few passages of the Bible. Jesus is, beyond the shadow of a doubt, called the Son of God, and not a son by adoption, but one born out of the essence of the Father from eternity. " Thou art My Son; this day have I begotten Thee," Psa 2:7; Heb 1:5. Mary is given the assurance: "That Holy Thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God," Luk 1:35. John expressly states of Jesus: "We saw His glory, the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father," Joh 1:14. Jesus Himself does not reject the confession of Nathanael: "Thou art the Son of God," Joh 1:50, with horror, but accepts it as a matter of fact. John states it to be the purpose of His entire gospel: "These are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God," Joh 20:31. St. Paul declares that "God spared not His own Son," Rom 8:32. And that the argument from the Sonship of Jesus to His Godhead is valid even the unbelieving Jews knew, thus surpassing many a modern critic: "The Jews sought to kill Him because He said also that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God," Joh 5:18.
But that is not all. Jesus is expressly and unequivocally called God; deity is actually ascribed to Him. The words of the prologue of our gospel are so unmistakable that only a flat denial can. remove them and their power. John writes: "The Word was God," Joh 1:1. He does not say that the Word was divine, but that the Word is actual, true, essential God. He says the same thing in his first epistle, when he declares that Jesus is "the true God and eternal life," 1Jn 5:20. And Jesus Himself did not refuse to be honored and addressed as God when Thomas exclaimed: "My Lord and my God," Joh 20:28.
If we confine ourselves to the gospel of John alone, there is so much material to defend the deity of Christ that the sifting alone requires long and careful work. There is the testimony of the evangelist himself, Joh 1:1-14; Joh 2:11. There is the testimony of John the Baptist, Joh 1:15-36; Joh 3:23-36. See Joh 1:37; Joh 10:41-42. There is the testimony of Christ Himself, Joh 4:25-26; Joh 10:24-25; Joh 9:35-37; Joh 13:13; also Joh 3:16; Joh 5:17-18; Joh 10:30; Joh 8:19; Joh 10:38; Joh 14:7-11; Joh 5:19; Joh 14:26. There is the testimony of the Father, Joh 5:31-32; Joh 8:17-18; Joh 12:23-28; Joh 19:34-35; Joh 20:12. There is the testimony of the disciples of Jesus, Joh 1:41-45; Joh 1:49; Joh 6:67-69; Joh 11:27; Joh 20:28; Joh 21:15-17. There is finally the testimony of the people, Joh 6:14-15; Joh 7:31; Joh 10:41-42; Joh 12:12-13; Joh 4:42.
The Logos of the Prologue
The opening verses of the Gospel according to St. John have given occasion to numerous expositions which refuse to distinguish between inspiration and philosophy. John’s choice of a name for Christ especially has brought on a veritable flood of opinions concerning the influence of pagan philosophy upon the doctrine of Christianity. It has been stated that the evangelist tried to effect a compromise between Platonic and Stoic ideas, on the one hand, and the fundamentals of Christianity, on the other. The old Greek philosopher Plato had written much about nous and logo s, and the later schools of philosophy had carried out the ideas and founded a philosophical system which, about the time that John wrote his gospel, began to be known as the Neo-Platonic. One man especially made use of the terms of Plato in the attempt to harmonize Jewish theology and Greek philosophy. That was the Greek Jew Philo, of Alexandria, Egypt, who lived from about 20 B. C. to about 42 A. D. He makes use of the term logos throughout his writings, sometimes in a definite, then again in a vague way, to bring out his mystical speculations. For this reason many critics have stated that John borrowed the term from Philo, together with many of the latter’s philosophical deductions. But a careful comparison of the works of Philo with the gospel of John and with all other New Testament books shows that Philo’s logos is a vague, shadowy conception, as unreal to himself, perhaps, as it is to anyone else, that it is merely a philosophic conception, the joint product of a peculiar theory respecting the nature of the Deity and the fact of the existence of the material universe. "The mere thought of an incarnation of the Logos would have been in the highest degree abhorrent to the tastes and sensibilities of the Alexandrians."
Other critics have identified the Logos of John with the memra of Jewish philosophical reflections. They refer to the Targum of Onkelos on Gen 3:8, who substitutes "The voice of the word of the Lord" for "The voice of the Lord God"; the Jerusalem Targum, which has, on Gen 22:14: "Abraham invoked in the name of the word of the Lord," and many others. Critics have even found many parallels in the Persian Zend-Avesta of Zoroastrian and in other writings. But the memra of the Jews in their Chaldee paraphrases of the Old Testament is nothing more than the product of theological reflection, just as that of Philo is the result of philosophic speculation. It is a device invented in order to render the notion of revelation conceivable to Jewish thought. Hilt of such an idea there is nowhere a trace in the prologue of John.
The conclusion that the believing commentator is bound to reach is "that, inspired by God, the Apostle John fixed on the word Logos (which was entirely familiar to him from the inspired writings of the Old Testament, especially from Gen 1:1-31, Psa 33:1-22, and others) as a designation of Jesus Christ, not only because the teaching of the Old Testament suggested it as singularly appropriate, but also in order to expose the futility of the Logos theories that had sprung up in the soil of pagan and semi pagan philosophy. " "Where among Christians Logos was mentioned without further restriction, nothing else could have been meant and understood, nor intended so, than the Word which was now preached and believed... But this Word is now Christ Himself: He personally is the Word which God has sent into the world, He is personally the essential, not only the final revelation. For in both respects He may be called the Word, inasmuch as He is spoken by God into the world, and inasmuch as He is now preached in the world... Only one Word the apostles brought, but a Word of whom they could testify that He was with God and was God, before the world came into existence, because this is true of Christ whom they preach, and who is even now, wherever He permits Himself to be preached, the Word intended for the world, to be believed by the world, just as it was in the days of His flesh". Since John begins his book with a statement concerning the Word, he surely means the Word which is now in the world for the purpose of being believed and for giving to the believers eternal life."
"Further we should know that there is a Word in God, unlike my word or thy word. For we also have a word, especially the word of the heart, as the holy fathers call it, as, when a person meditates upon something and diligently searches, then he has a word or conversation with himself of which no one knows but he alone,... Thus God also in eternity, in His majesty and divine essence, had a word, speech, conversation, and thought in His divine heart with Himself, unknown to all angels and men. That is called His Word, which was from eternity in His fatherly heart, by which God has determined to create heaven and earth, But of such will of God no person ever knew until that same Word became flesh and declared it, as is stated afterwards: The Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him."
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On v1 In the beginning
In the beginning
This refers to the very earliest time before God created the heavens and the earth.
Read full note →
the Word
This refers to Jesus. Translate as "the Word" if possible. If "Word" is feminine in your language, it could be translated as "the one who is called the Word."
All things were made through him
This can be translated with an active verb. AT: "God made all things through him" (See: Active or Passive)
without him there was not one thing made that has been made
This can be translated with an active verb. If your language does not permit double negatives, these words should communicate that the opposite of "all things were made through him" is false. AT: "God did not make anything without him" or "with him there was every thing made that has been made" or "God made with him every thing that God has made" (See: Active or Passive and Double Negatives)
translationWords
word
God
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1, 3 1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be…
1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.
1:1 Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, the Word (Greek logos), not only revealed God but was God. In Greek thought, the logos was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the logos was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative power. By Jesus’ time, the logos was viewed as coming from God and having his personality (see Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31); John affirmed this understanding (John 1:14).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.