John 1:1-18 The prologue

Commentary

1:1-18 The prologue
This gospel, unlike the others, does not begin with the historical Jesus. Instead, the reader is introduced at once to the Word (Gk. logos), who is not identified with Jesus until the end of the prologue. It is of great importance to consider the meaning of the Word as a key to an understanding of the whole gospel. The term was widely used in Greek literature, and many scholars have supposed that its significance for John can be understood only against such a background. It was used among the Stoics to describe the principle of divine reason which caused the natural creation to grow. This idea was much more fully developed in the writings of Philo of Alexandria, who used it of the instrument through which the world was created. Although there may appear to be some parallels with John’s use of the term, there are crucial differences. Philo never thought of the Word as a person, nor did he maintain its pre–existence to the world. But the most striking and significant difference between Philo and John is that the former denied the incarnation of the Word, whereas John specifically maintained that the Word became flesh. Some scholars have found parallels between John’s use and the syncretistic philosophical literature current in the early centuries of the Christian era known as the Hermetica, but the essential thought is quite different. Greek thought may have supplied some of the terminology that John uses, but for the basic ideas we must look elsewhere.
    There is much more to be said for the similarity of thought between John’s use and that of certain ideas in the OT. Jewish thought contributed a major dimension to the Word idea. In the Wisdom Literature we find an emphasis on the creative activity of God through his Word of Wisdom (cf. Pr. 8). Closely linked to this is the rabbinic practice of attributing to the Torah (Law) some agency in creation. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls led to a more sympathetic appreciation of the contribution of Jewish thought for an understanding of John’s gospel.
    The prologue, nevertheless, must be considered on its own merits. It is essentially Christian, designed to prepare the way for the record of the activities of a unique person. The gospel itself must furnish the key for the understanding of the Prologue, not vice versa. A careful analysis of the gospel will show how integral the prologue is with the recurrent themes of the gospel.

1:1-5 The pre–existent Word

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life,1 and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

The opening words of this gospel bear a striking parallel with the opening words of Genesis. John’s own particular contribution is to show that the Word existed before creation. This is implicit in the opening words In the beginning was the Word. Although the verb is used in the past tense, the idea is of continuity. The Word that now is was in existence before the world began. This at once introduces a profound theme, made more profound by the subsequent two statements. The Greek preposition translated with suggests the idea of communion. The thought is lit. ‘towards God’, which requires some distinctiveness between God and the Word. But the next phrase adds a further aspect, since it affirms that the Word was God. This cannot be understood in an adjectival sense (the Word was divine), which would weaken the statement. Since the Greek has no article before God, the term must be taken setting out a characteristic of the Word. Since God is a noun, John must be affirming the Godhead of the Word. It involves not only divinity but deity.
    John at once proceeds to declare the creative activity of the Word. The Greek focuses attention on the agency of the Word. This idea is further underlined by excluding all possibility of creation apart from the Word. The close association between God and the Word in v 1 is also seen in their part in creation. The part taken by Christ in creation is a theme which recurs many times in the NT. Such an emphasis would exclude gnostic ideas of intermediaries within creation which were designed to protect God from contamination with an essentially evil [p. 1025] world. John’s further assertion that the Word was life is a logical sequence from his creative activity. This idea is basic to this gospel and is highlighted in the statement of purpose in 20:31, that the readers might have life in him.
    The close connection between life and light is not unexpected. In the physical world life is dependent on light, and this idea is here transferred to the spiritual world. The statement in v 5 must be interpreted by the mention of light in v 4. There it is an illumination which comes to everyone generally and would seem to refer to the light of conscience and reason. In v 5, however, the focus falls on the environment which is described as darkness. The light, which is closely linked with the Word, must be regarded as personal. It must mean the spiritual enlightenment which humankind has received exclusively through the coming of the Word. The following statement, but the darkness has not understood it, could be translated as ‘has not overcome it’. Both interpretations express a truth, and both are illustrated in the body of the gospel. But the former fits the context better, especially in the light of vs 10-11.

1:6-8 The witness of John the Baptist

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.

The thought now moves nearer to the historical events which surrounded the coming of the light by mentioning the ministry of John the Baptist. We are at once assured that this ministry was divinely appointed (6). The verb sent is characteristic of this gospel in describing the ministry of Jesus. It is fitting that it should also be applied to the herald. It may be that some of the original readers of this gospel were putting too much emphasis on the importance of John the Baptist (cf. Acts 19:3-4) and that John was aiming to rectify any misunderstandings at the outset (cf. also vs 15, 26-27). Not only is it expressly denied that John himself was the light, but his function as witness to the light is twice affirmed (7-8). The purpose, so that through him all men might believe, expresses the function of all true Christian witness, from that day to this.

1:9-13 The light coming to the world

9 The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to his own,2 and his own people3 did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

The author switches from the witness to the subject of the witness as being the most important. The true light (9) is the Word, which has not yet been identified as Jesus. The coming refers to the incarnation. This is more intelligible than the alternative rendering, which connects the coming to every person (as the NIV mg.), which would give the impression that everyone receives this light at the time of birth. Before Christ’s coming light certainly existed but this was derived light. Christ is the central source of light as he himself claimed (cf. 8:12).
    It should be noted that when John uses the word world he is meaning more than the created world. The term is widely used of people as created beings who are opposed to God. In fact in this gospel there is a distinction between those who believe and the world that does not believe. The statement that the world did not recognise him (10) shows that in John’s mind there is no question of dualism here. The moral responsibility rests with those who reject the light.
    The translation of v 11 has led to various ideas. One is that the Word came into what rightly belonged to him. Another is that the Word came to his own home, i.e. his own people, Israel. Both are true, but in view of the fact that the words are masculine it is most probable that the second translation is to be preferred. For the author believing and receiving are identical.
    Vs 12-13 are to be seen as modifying the previous verses. There were some who received the Word, and John now focuses on these. Believers receive the power to become children of God in the sense of God’s covenant people. John is not talking of natural descent (13). There is here an allusion to the new birth, which recurs more explicitly in ch. 3. Since spiritual birth is different from physical birth, John excludes sexual means (human decision, a husband’s will).

1:14-18 The incarnation of the Word

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) 16 For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace.4 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God,5 who is at the Father's side,6 he has made him known.

This concluding part of the prologue leads into the account of the historical life of Jesus, hence the Word is said to have become flesh. The most significant thing about this statement is the emphasis on the word flesh, which is used as a symbol of humanity. The statement, however, is more striking than if John had written ‘the Word took on the form of humanity’. Flesh draws attention to the entry of the Word into the full flow of human affairs. The divine Word had become the human Jesus. The phrase made his dwelling among us uses a word which means ‘tabernacled’ and carries with it reminiscences of God dwelling among his people in the tabernacle in the wilderness. The dwelling is clearly seen as temporary. But John is anxious to make clear that the stupendous coming of the Word into human life was fully witnessed. John had been an eyewitness of the glory of the earthly life of Jesus (14b). This is more likely than to suppose that the we refers to Christians generally, and that the glory is the glory of Jesus after the resurrection. The context requires that there were some who actually saw the glory of the incarnated Word. An allusion to the transfiguration may be intended, but it is more likely that the glory refers to the whole ministry of Jesus. [p. 1026] The distinctiveness of the glory is seen in the description of the the One and Only, who received the kind of glory which could be bestowed only by a loving Father on a beloved Son. The uniqueness of Jesus is thus seen at the outset of the gospel. But it is not merely his coming from the Father but the fact that he is the source of grace and truth which is most significant. John intends us to see in the ministry of Jesus an expression of God’s grace and a revelation of his truth.
    Although v 16 follows naturally after v 14, the intervening verse is clearly to be regarded as an intentional parenthesis. The words about John the Baptist add greater strength to his witness to Jesus. There is an indirect allusion here to the pre–existence of Jesus, which has already been affirmed in v 1. V 16 shows clearly the relevance of the grace which Christians (we... all) have received. Again the thought of firsthand experience is stressed. The NIV has aptly brought out the meaning of the cryptic phrase ‘grace upon grace’ with the rendering one blessing after another. The fulness does not come to us all at once but in a progression of gracious experiences. There may be a contrast between Moses and Jesus Christ in the different method of approach to God, in that legal observances are inferior to the acceptance of a gracious gift. But the text does not require a contrast. It is better to see a comparison between God’s sending the law through Moses and grace through Jesus.
    The culmination of this prologue in v 18 is intended to remind the reader of v 1. There was no other possibility of our knowing God except through Jesus Christ, the Word. The statement no–one has ever seen God is a reflection from the OT. Even Moses was not allowed to see him. In this, therefore, the revelation of Jesus is infinitely superior since he is the one who has made God known. The NIV follows what is certainly the more strongly attested reading in translating God the One and Only, an affirmation of the deity of Jesus. Yet in view of the subsequent words who is at the Father’s side, the alternative ‘but the only Son’ fits in better with the context.