John 1 commentary

JOH 1 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
I TRODUCTIO BY ARTHUR PI K
It is our purpose to give (D. V.) a verse by verse exposition of the fourth Gospel in
the course of this series of studies, but before turning to the opening verses of
chapter I it will be necessary to consider John’s Gospel as a whole, with the
endeavor of discovering its scope, its central theme, and its relation to the other
three Gospels. We shall not waste the reader’s time by entering into a discussion as
to who wrote this fourth Gospel, as to where John was when he wrote it, nor as to
the probable date when it was written. These may be points of academical interest,
but they provide no food for the soul, nor do they afford any help to an
understanding of this section of the Bible, and these are the two chief things we
desire to accomplish. Our aim is to open up the Scriptures in such a way that the
reader will be able to enter into the meaning of what God has recorded for our
learning in this part of His Holy Word, and to edify those who are members of the
Household of Faith.
The four Gospels deal with the earthly life of the Savior, but each one presents Him
in an entirely different character. Matthew portrays the Lord Jesus as the Son of
David, the Heir of Israel’s throne, the King of the Jews; and everything in his
Gospel contributes to this central theme. In Mark, Christ is seen as the Servant of
Jehovah, the perfect Workman of God; and everything in this second Gospel brings
out the characteristics of His service and the manner in which He served. Luke
treats of the humanity of the Savior, and presents Him as the perfect Man,
contrasting Him from the sinful sons of men. The fourth Gospel views Him as the
Heavenly One come down to earth, the eternal Son of the Father made flesh and
tabernacling among men, and from start to finish this is the one dominant truth
which is steadily held in view.
As we turn to the fourth Gospel we come to entirely different ground from that
which is traversed in the other three. It is true, the period of time covered by it is the
same as in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, some of the incidents treated of by the
"Synoptics" come before us here, and He who has occupied the central position in
the narratives of the first three Evangelists is the same One that is made pre-
eminent by John; but otherwise, everything is entirely new. The viewpoint of this
fourth Gospel is more elevated than that of the others; its contents bring into view
spiritual relationships rather than human ties; and, higher glories are revealed as
touching the peerless Person of the Savior. In each of the first three Gospels Christ
is viewed in human relationships, but not so in John. The purpose of this fourth
Gospel is to show that the One who was born in a manger and afterward died on the
Cross had higher glories than those of King, that He who humbled Himself to take
the Servant place was, previously, "equal with God," that the One who became the
Son of Man was none other than, and ever remains, the Only Begotten of the Father.
Each book of the Bible has a prominent and dominant theme which is peculiar to
itself. Just as each member in the human body has its own particular function, so
every book in the Bible has its own special purpose and mission. The theme of

John’s Gospel is the Deity of the Savior. Here, as nowhere else in Scripture so fully,
the Godhood of Christ is presented to our view. That which is outstanding in this
fourth Gospel is the Divine Sonship of the Lord Jesus. In this Book we are shown
that the One who was heralded by the angels to the Bethlehem shepherds, who
walked this earth for thirty-three years, who was crucified at Calvary who rose in
triumph from the grave, and who forty days later departed from these scenes, was
none other than the Lord of Glory. The evidence for this is overwhelming, the
proofs almost without number, and the effect of contemplating them must be to bow
our hearts in worship before "the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ" (Titus
2:13).
Here is a theme worthy of our most prayerful attention. If the Holy Spirit took such
marked care to guard the perfections of our Lord’s humanity-seen for example, in
the words of the angel to Mary "that Holy Thing which shall be born of thee,"
"made in the likeness of sin’s flesh," etc.—equally so has the Inspirer of the
Scriptures seen to it that there is no uncertainty touching the Divine Sonship of our
Savior. Just as the Old Testament prophets made known that the Coming One
should be a Man, a perfect Man, so did Messianic prediction give plain intimation
that He should be more than a man. Through Isaiah God foretold, "For unto us a
Child is born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall be upon His
shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The Mighty God,
The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." Through Micah He declared, "But
thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah yet
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be Ruler in Israel; Whose goings
forth have been from the days of eternity." Through Zechariah He said, "Awake, O
Sword, against my Shepherd, and against the man that is my Fellow, saith the Lord
of Hosts: smite the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered." Through the
Psalmist He announced, "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand,
until I make thine enemies thy footstool." And again, when looking forward to the
second advent, "Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee (or, ‘brought thee
forth’)." In these days of wide-spread departure from the faith, it cannot be insisted
upon too strongly or too frequently that the Lord Jesus is none other than the
Second Person of the blessed Trinity, co-eternal and co-equal with the Father and
the Holy Spirit.
In keeping with the special theme of this fourth Gospel, it is here we have the full
unveiling of Christ’s Divine glories. It is here that we behold Him dwelling with God
before time began and before ever the creature was formed (John 1:1, 2). It is here
that He is denominated "The only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth"
(John 1:14). It is here we read of John the Baptist bearing record "that this is the
Son of God" (John 1:34). It is here that we read "This beginning of miracles did
Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory" (John 2:11). It is here we
are told that the Savior said "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it
up" (John 2:19). It is here we learn that "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given
all things into his hand" (John 3:35). It is in this Gospel we hear Christ saying, "For
as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth
whom he will. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment
unto the Son: that all should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father" (John
5:21-23). It is here we find Him declaring, "Before Abraham was, I am" (John

8:58). It is here He affirmed "I and my Father are One" (John 10:30). It is here He
testifies "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9).
Before we take up John’s Gospel in detail, a few words should also be said
concerning the scope of the fourth Gospel. It must be evident at once that this is
quite different from the other three. There, Christ is seen in human relationships,
and as connected with an earthly people; but here He is viewed in a Divine
relationship, and as connected with a heavenly people. It is true the mystery of the
"Body" is not unfolded here—that is found only in what the Apostle Paul wrote as
he was moved by the Holy Spirit—rather is it the Family relationship which is here
in view: the Son of God together with the sons of God. It is also true that the
"heavenly calling," as such, is not fully unfolded here, yet are there plain
intimations of it, as a careful study of it makes apparent. In the first three Gospels
Christ is seen connected with the Jews, proclaiming the Messianic kingdom, a
proclamation which ceased, however, as soon as it became evident that the nation
had rejected Him. But here in John’s Gospel His rejection is anticipated from the
beginning, for in the very first chapter we are told, "He came unto his own, and his
own received him not." The limitations which obtain in connection with much
which is found in the first three Gospels does not, therefore, obtain in John’s. Again,
in John’s Gospel the Savior is displayed as the Son of God, and as such He can be
known only by believers. On this plane, then, the Jew has no priority. The Jew’s
claim upon Christ was purely a fleshly one (arising from the fact that He was "the
Son of David"), whereas believers are related to the Son of God by spiritual union.
As there may be some of our readers who have been influenced by ultra-
dispensational teaching we deem it well to here call attention to other points which
help to fix the true dispensational bearings and scope of this fourth Gospel. There
are those who make no distinction between John’s Gospel and the Synoptics, and
who insist that this fourth Gospel is entirely Jewish, and has nothing but a remote
application to believers of the present dispensation. But this, we are assured, is a
serious mistake. John’s Gospel, like his Epistles, concerns the family of God. In
proof of this we request the reader to weigh carefully the following points:
First, in John 1:11-13 we read, "He came unto his own, and his own received him
not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons 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."
From these verses we may notice three things: first, the Jews as a nation rejected the
Sent One of the Father, they "received him not;" second, a company did "receive
him," even those that "believed on his name"; third, this company are here
designated "the sons of God," who were "born . . . of God." There is nothing which
in any wise resembles this in the other Gospels. Here only, in the four Gospels, is the
truth of the new birth brought before us. And it is by new birth we enter the family
of God. As, then, the family of God reaches out beyond Jewish believers, and takes
in all Gentile believers too, we submit that John’s Gospel cannot be restricted to the
twelve-tribed people.
Second, after stating that the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us, "and
we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father (which is a glory
that none but believers behold!), full of grace and truth," and after summarizing
John the Bapist’s witness to the Person of Christ, the Holy Spirit through the

Evangelist goes on to say, "and of his fulness have all we received, and grace for
grace. Surely this verse alone establishes the point of who it is that is here being
addressed. The Jewish nation never received "of his fulness"—that can be
predicated of believers only. The "all we" of verse 16 is the "as many as" received
Him, to them gave He power to become "the sons of God" of verse 12.
Third, in the tenth chapter of John, we read that the Savior said, "I am the good
shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me,
even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep" (verses 14, 15).
Immediately following this He went on to say, "And other sheep I have, which are
not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall
be one fold, and one shepherd" (verse 16). Who were these "other sheep?" Before
we can answer this, we must ascertain who were the "sheep" referred to by Christ
in the first fifteen verses of this chapter. As to who they were there can be only one
answer: they were not the nation of Israel as such, for they had "received him not";
no, they were the little company who had "received him," who had "believed on his
name." But Christ goes on to speak of a future company of believers, "other sheep I
have (speaking as God who calleth those things which be not as though they were:
Romans 4:17), them also I must bring." Clearly, the "other sheep" which had not
been brought into the fold at the time the Savior then spake, were believers from
among the Gentiles, and these, together with the Jewish believers, should be "one
fold" (or, better "one flock"), which is the equivalent of one family, the family of
God.
Fourth, in John 11:49-52 we read, "and one of them, named Caiaphas, being the
high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that
it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole
nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year,
he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation, and not for that nation only, but
that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered
abroad." This was a remarkable prophecy, and contained far more in it than
Caiaphas was aware. It made known the Divine purpose in the death of the Savior
and revealed what was to be the outcome of the great Sacrifice. It looked out far
beyond the bounds of Judaism, including within its range believing sinners from the
Gentiles. The "children of God that were scattered abroad" were the elect found
among all nations. That they were here termed "children of God" while viewed as
still "scattered abroad," gives us the Divine viewpoint, being parallel with "other
sheep I have." But what we desire to call special attention to is the declaration that
these believers from among the Gentiles were to be "gathered together in one," not
into one "body" (for as previously said, the body does not fall within the scope of
John’s writings), but one family, the family of God.
Fifth, in John 14:2, 3 we read that Christ said to His disciples, "In My Father’s
house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a
place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive
you unto myself that where I am, there ye may be also." How entirely different this
is from anything that is to be found in the first three Gospels scarcely needs to be
pointed out. In them, reference is invariably made to the coming of "the Son of
man," but here it is the rapture of the saints to heaven, and the taking of them to be
where Christ now is that is expressly mentioned. And manifestly this can in no wise

be limited to Jewish believers.
Sixth, without attempting to develop this point at any length it should be noticed
that the relation which the Holy Spirit sustains to believers in this Gospel is entirely
different from what is before us in the first three. Here only do we read of being
"born of the Spirit" (John 3:5). Here only is He denominated their "Comforter’’ or
Advocate (John 14:16); and here only do we read of Him "abiding forever" with
believers (John 14:16).
Seventh, the High Priestly prayer of the Savior which is recorded in John 17, and
found nowhere else in the Gospels, shows plainly that more than Jewish believers
are here contemplated, and evidences the wider scope of this fourth Gospel. Here we
find the Savior saying, "Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also
may glorify thee: as thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give
eternal life to as many as thou hast given him." The "as many as thou hast given
him" takes in the whole family of God. Again, in verse 20 the Lord Jesus says,
" either pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through
their word:" the "these" evidently refers to Jewish believers, while the "them also"
looked forward to Gentile believers. Finally, His words in verse 22, "and the glory
which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one"
shows, once more, that the whole family of God was here before Him.
1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God.
BAR ES, "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:
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.
(a) 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.
(b) 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.”
(c) The term was used by the Jews who were scattered among the Gentiles, and
especially those who were conversant with the Greek philosophy.
(d) The term was used by the followers of Plato among the Greeks, to denote the
Second Person of the Trinity. The Greek term νοሞς 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:
1. There is no doubt that by the λόγος Logos is meant Jesus Christ.
2. 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.
3. 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.”
4. 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.
5. 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:
1. 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.
2. The name was in use at the time of John, and it was his design to state the correct
doctrine respecting the λόγος Logos.
3. The “Word,” or λόγος Logos, existed “before creation” - of course was not a
“creature,” and must have been, therefore, from eternity.
4. 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.
5. 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.

CLARKE, "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 Gen_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 Savior 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 Savior 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, Rev_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’ ᆇν, αει οντα, τα γενοµενα εγενετο - by whom, eternally existing, all
things were made. But as Plato, Pythagoras, Zeno, and others, traveled 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.
GILL, "In the beginning was the word,.... That this is said not of the written word,
but of the essential word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, is clear, from all that is said from
hence, to Joh_1:14 as that this word was in the beginning, was with God, and is God;
from the creation of all things being ascribed to him, and his being said to be the life and
light of men; from his coming into the world, and usage in it; from his bestowing the
privilege of adoption on believers; and from his incarnation; and also there is a
particular application of all this to Christ, Joh_1:15. And likewise from what this
evangelist elsewhere says of him, when he calls him the word of life, and places him
between the Father and the Holy Ghost; and speaks of the record of the word of God,
and the testimony of Jesus, as the same thing; and represents him as a warrior and
conqueror, 1Jo_1:1. Moreover this appears to be spoken of Christ, from what other
inspired writers have said of him, under the same character; as the Evangelist Luke,

Luk_1:2, the Apostle Paul, Act_20:32 and the Apostle Peter, 2Pe_3:5. And who is called
the word, not as man; for as man he was not in the beginning with God, but became so in
the fulness of time; nor is the man God; besides, as such, he is a creature, and not the
Creator, nor is he the life and light of men; moreover, he was the word, before he was
man, and therefore not as such: nor can any part of the human nature be so called; not
the flesh, for the word was made flesh; nor his human soul, for self-subsistence, deity,
eternity, and the creation of all things, can never be ascribed to that; but he is the word
as the Son of God, as is evident from what is here attributed to him, and from the word
being said to be so, as in Joh_1:14 and from those places, where the word is explained by
the Son, compare 1Jo_5:5. And is so called from his nature, being begotten of the
Father; for as the word, whether silent or expressed, is the birth of the mind, the image
of it, equal to it, and distinct from it; so Christ is the only begotten of the Father, the
express image of his person, in all things equal to him, and a distinct person from him:
and he may be so called, from some action, or actions, said of him, or ascribed to him; as
that he spoke for, and on the behalf of the elect of God, in the eternal council and
covenant of grace and peace; and spoke all things out of nothing, in creation; for with
regard to those words so often mentioned in the history of the creation, and God said,
may Jehovah the Son be called the word; also he was spoken of as the promised Messiah,
throughout the whole Old Testament dispensation; and is the interpreter of his Father's
mind, as he was in Eden's garden, as well as in the days of his flesh; and now speaks in
heaven for the saints. The phrase, ‫מימרא‬‫דיי‬ , "the word of the Lord", so frequently used by
the Targumists, is well known: and it is to be observed, that the same things which John
here says of the word, they say likewise, as will be observed on the several clauses; from
whence it is more likely, that John should take this phrase, since the paraphrases of
Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uzziel were written before his time, than that he should
borrow it from the writings of Plato, or his followers, as some have thought; with whose
philosophy, Ebion and Cerinthus are said to be acquainted; wherefore John, the more
easily to gain upon them, uses this phrase, when that of the Son of God would have been
disagreeable to them: that there is some likeness between the Evangelist John and Plato
in their sentiments concerning the word, will not be denied. Amelius (f), a Platonic
philosopher, who lived after the times of John, manifestly refers to these words of his, in
agreement with his master's doctrine: his words are these,
"and this was truly "Logos", or the word, by whom always existing, the things that are
made, were made, as also Heraclitus thought; and who, likewise that Barbarian
(meaning the Evangelist John) reckons was in the order and dignity of the beginning,
constituted with God, and was God, by whom all things are entirely made; in whom,
whatsoever is made, lives, and has life, and being; and who entered into bodies, and was
clothed with flesh, and appeared a man; so notwithstanding, that he showed forth the
majesty of his nature; and after his dissolution, he was again deified, and was God, as he
was before he descended into a body, flesh and man.
In which words it is easy to observe plain traces of what the evangelist says in the first
four verses, and in the fourteenth verse of this chapter; yet it is much more probable,
that Plato had his notion of the Logos, or word, out of the writings of the Old Testament,
than that John should take this phrase, or what he says concerning the word, from him;
since it is a matter of fact not disputed, that Plato went into Egypt to get knowledge: not
only Clemens Alexandrinus a Christian writer says, that he was a philosopher of the
Hebrews (g), and understood prophecy (h), and stirred up the fire of the Hebrew
philosophy (i); but it is affirmed by Heathen writers, that he went into Egypt to learn of

the priests (k), and to understand the rites of the prophets (l); and Aristobulus, a Jew,
affirms (m), he studied their law; and Numenius, a Pythagoric philosopher (n), charges
him with stealing what he wrote, concerning God and the world, out of the books of
Moses; and used to say to him, what is Plato, but Moses "Atticising?" or Moses speaking
Greek: and Eusebius (o), an ancient Christian writer, points at the very places, from
whence Plato took his hints: wherefore it is more probable, that the evangelist received
this phrase of the word, as a divine person, from the Targums, where there is such
frequent mention made of it; or however, there is a very great agreement between what
he and these ancient writings of the Jews say of the word, as will be hereafter shown.
Moreover, the phrase is frequently used in like manner, in the writings of Philo the Jew;
from whence it is manifest, that the name was well known to the Jews, and may be the
reason of the evangelist's using it. This word, he says, was in the beginning; by which is
meant, not the Father of Christ; for he is never called the beginning, but the Son only;
and was he, he must be such a beginning as is without one; nor can he be said to be so,
with respect to the Son or Spirit, who are as eternal as himself; only with respect to the
creatures, of whom he is the author and efficient cause: Christ is indeed in the Father,
and the Father in him, but this cannot be meant here; nor is the beginning of the Gospel
of Christ, by the preaching of John the Baptist, intended here: John's ministry was an
evangelical one, and the Gospel was more clearly preached by him, and after him, by
Christ and his apostles, than before; but it did not then begin; it was preached before by
the angel to the shepherds, at the birth of Christ; and before that, by the prophets under
the former dispensation, as by Isaiah, and others; it was preached before unto Abraham,
and to our first parents, in the garden of Eden: nor did Christ begin to be, when John
began to preach; for John's preaching and baptism were for the manifestation of him:
yea, Christ existed as man, before John began to preach; and though he was born after
him as man, yet as the Word and Son of God, he existed before John was born; he was in
being in the times of the prophets, which were before John; and in the times of Moses,
and before Abraham, and in the days of Noah: but by the beginning is here meant, the
beginning of the world, or the creation of all things; and which is expressive of the
eternity of Christ, he was in the beginning, as the Maker of all creatures, and therefore
must be before them all: and it is to be observed, that it is said of him, that in the
beginning he was; not made, as the heavens and earth, and the things in them were; nor
was he merely in the purpose and predestination of God, but really existed as a divine
person, as he did from all eternity; as appears from his being set up in office from
everlasting; from all the elect being chosen in him, and given to him before the
foundation of the world; from the covenant of grace, which is from eternity, being made
with him; and from the blessings and promises of grace, being as early put into his
hands; and from his nature as God, and his relation to his Father: so Philo the Jew often
calls the Logos, or word, the eternal word, the most ancient word, and more ancient than
any thing that is made (p). The eternity of the Messiah is acknowledged by the ancient
Jews: Mic_5:2 is a full proof of it; which by them (q) is thus paraphrased,
"out of thee, before me, shall come forth the Messiah, that he may exercise dominion
over Israel; whose name is said from eternity, from the days of old.
Jarchi upon it only mentions Psa_72:17 which is rendered by the Targum on the place,
before the sun his name was prepared; it may be translated, "before the sun his name
was Yinnon"; that is, the Son, namely the Son of God; and Aben Ezra interprets it, ‫יקרא‬‫בן‬
, "he shall be called the son"; and to this agrees what the Talmudisis say (r), that the
name of the Messiah was before the world was created; in proof of which they produce

the same passage,
And the word was with God; not with men or angels; for he was before either of
these; but with God, not essentially, but personally considered; with God his Father: not
in the Socinian sense, that he was only known to him, and to no other before the
ministry of John the Baptist; for he was known and spoken of by the angel Gabriel
before; and was known to Mary and to Joseph; and to Zacharias and Elisabeth; to the
shepherds, and to the wise men; to Simeon and Anna, who saw him in the temple; and to
the prophets and patriarchs in all ages, from the beginning of the world: but this phrase
denotes the existence of the word with the Father, his relation and nearness to him, his
equality with him, and particularly the distinction of his person from him, as well as his
eternal being with him; for he was always with him, and is, and ever will be; he was with
him in the council and covenant of grace, and in the creation of the universe, and is with
him in the providential government of the world; he was with him as the word and Son
of God in heaven, whilst he as man, was here on earth; and he is now with him, and ever
will be: and as John here speaks of the word, as a distinct person from God the Father,
so do the Targums, or Chaldee paraphrases; Psa_110:1 "the Lord said to my Lord", is
rendered, "the Lord said to his word"; where he is manifestly distinguished from
Jehovah, that speaks to him; and in Hos_1:7 the Lord promises to "have mercy on the
house of Judah", and "save them by the Lord their God". The Targum is, "I will redeem
them by the word of the Lord their God"; where the word of the Lord, who is spoken of
as a Redeemer and Saviour, is distinguished from the Lord, who promises to save by
him. This distinction of Jehovah and his word, may be observed in multitudes of places,
in the Chaldee paraphrases, and in the writings of Philo the Jew; and this phrase, of "the
word" being "with God", is in the Targums expressed by, ‫מימר‬‫מן‬‫קדם‬ , "the word from
before the Lord", or "which is before the Lord": being always in his presence, and the
angel of it; so Onkelos paraphrases Gen_31:22 "and the word from before the Lord,
came to Laban", &c. and Exo_20:19 thus, "and let not the word from before the Lord
speak with us, lest we die"; for so it is read in the King of Spain's Bible; and wisdom,
which is the same with the word of God, is said to be by him, or with him, in Pro_8:1
agreeably to which John here speaks. John makes use of the word God, rather than
Father, because the word is commonly called the word of God, and because of what
follows,
and the word was God; not made a God, as he is said here after to be made flesh; nor
constituted or appointed a God, or a God by office; but truly and properly God, in the
highest sense of the word, as appears from the names by which he is called; as Jehovah,
God, our, your, their, and my God, God with us, the mighty God, God over all, the great
God, the living God, the true God, and eternal life; and from his perfections, and the
whole fulness of the Godhead that dwells in him, as independence, eternity,
immutability, omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence; and from his works of
creation and providence, his miracles, the work of redemption, his forgiving sins, the
resurrection of himself and others from the dead, and the administration of the last
judgment; and from the worship given him, as prayer to him, faith in him, and the
performance of baptism in his name: nor is it any objection to the proper deity of Christ,
that the article is here wanting; since when the word is applied to the Father, it is not
always used, and even in this chapter, Joh_1:6 and which shows, that the word "God", is
not the subject, but the predicate of this proposition, as we render it: so the Jews often
use the word of the Lord for Jehovah, and call him God. Thus the words in Gen_28:20
are paraphrased by Onkelos,

"if "the word of the Lord" will be my help, and will keep me, &c. then "the word of the
Lord" shall be, ‫לי‬‫לאלהא‬ , "my God":
again, Lev_26:12 is paraphrased, by the Targum ascribed to Jonathan Ben Uzziel, thus,
"I will cause the glory of my Shekinah to dwell among you, and my word shall "be your
God", the Redeemer;
once more, Deu_26:17 is rendered by the Jerusalem Targum after this manner,
"ye have made "the word of the Lord" king over you this day, that he may be your God:
and this is frequent with Philo the Jew, who says, the name of God is his word, and calls
him, my Lord, the divine word; and affirms, that the most ancient word is God (s),
HE RY, "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 1Jo_1:1; 1Jo_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.
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 (1Pe_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,
Zec_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.
JAMISO ," Joh_1:1-14. The Word made flesh.
In the beginning — of all time and created existence, for this Word gave it being
(Joh_1:3, Joh_1:10); therefore, “before the world was” (Joh_17:5, Joh_17:24); or, from
all eternity.
was the Word — He who is to God what man’s word is to himself, the manifestation
or expression of himself to those without him. (See on Joh_1:18). On the origin of this
most lofty and now for ever consecrated title of Christ, this is not the place to speak. It
occurs only in the writings of this seraphic apostle.
was with God — having a conscious personal existence distinct from God (as one is
from the person he is “with”), but inseparable from Him and associated with Him
(Joh_1:18; Joh_17:5; 1Jo_1:2), where “THE FATHER” is used in the same sense as
“God” here.

was God — in substance and essence God; or was possessed of essential or proper
divinity. Thus, each of these brief but pregnant statements is the complement of the
other, correcting any misapprehensions which the others might occasion. Was the Word
eternal? It was not the eternity of “the Father,” but of a conscious personal existence
distinct from Him and associated with Him. Was the Word thus “with God?” It was not
the distinctness and the fellowship of another being, as if there were more Gods than
one, but of One who was Himself God - in such sense that the absolute unity of the God
head, the great principle of all religion, is only transferred from the region of shadowy
abstraction to the region of essential life and love. But why all this definition? Not to give
us any abstract information about certain mysterious distinctions in the Godhead, but
solely to let the reader know who it was that in the fullness of time “was made flesh.”
After each verse, then, the reader must say, “It was He who is thus, and thus, and thus
described, who was made flesh.”
CALVI , " 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, asSpeech 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,
andcalculation; 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
eternalSpeech 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 (9) 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 nobeginning; 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, (10) 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. (11)
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; (12) 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?
PI K, "In the last chapter we stated, "Each book of the Bible has a prominent and
dominant theme which is peculiar to itself. Just as each member in the human body
has its own particular function, so, every book in the Bible has its own special
purpose and mission. The theme of John’s Gospel is the Deity of the Savior. Here, as
nowhere else in Scripture so fully, the Godhood of Christ is presented to our view.
That which is outstanding in this fourth Gospel is the Divine Sonship of the Lord
Jesus. In this book we are shown that the One who was heralded by the angels to the
Bethlehem shepherds, who walked this earth for thirty-three years, who was

crucified at Calvary, who rose in triumph from the grave, and who forty days later
departed from these scenes, was none other than the Lord of glory. The evidence for
this is overwhelming, the proofs almost without number, and the effect of
contemplating them must be to bow our hearts in worship before ‘the great God and
our Savior Jesus Christ’ (Titus 2:13)."
That John’s Gospel does present the Deity of the Savior is at once apparent from the
opening words of the first chapter. The Holy Spirit has, as it were, placed the key
right over the entrance, for the introductory verses of this fourth Gospel present the
Lord Jesus Christ in Divine relationships and unveil His essential glories. Before we
attempt an exposition of this profound passage we shall first submit an analysis of
its contents. In these first thirteen verses of John 1 we have set forth: —
1. The Relation of Christ to Time—"In the beginning," therefore, Eternal: John 1:1.
2. The Relation of Christ to the Godhead—"With God," therefore, One of the Holy
Trinity: John 1:1.
3. The Relation of Christ to the Holy Trinity—"God was the Word"—the Revealer:
John 1:1.
4. The Relation of Christ to the Universe—"All things were made by him"—the
Creator: John 1:3.
5. The Relation of Christ to Men—Their "Light": John 1:4, 5.
6. The Relation of John the Baptist to Christ—"Witness" of His Deity: John 1:6-9.
7. The Reception which Christ met here: John 1:10-13.
(a) "The world knew him not": John 1:10.
(b) "His own (Israel) received him not": John 1:11.
(c) A company born of God "received him": John 1:12, 13.
"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 anything made that was made" (John 1:1-3). How entirely
different is this from the opening verses of the other Gospels! John opens by
immediately presenting Christ not as the Son of David, nor as the Son of man, but as
the Son of God. John takes us back to the beginning, and shows that the Lord Jesus
had no beginning. John goes behind creation and shows that the Savior was Himself
the Creator. Every clause in these verses calls for our most careful and prayerful
attention.
"In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was
God." Here we enter a realm which transcends the finite mind, and where
speculation is profane. "In the beginning" is something we are unable to
comprehend: it is one of those matchless sweeps of inspiration which rises above the
level of human thought. "In the beginning was the word," and we are equally
unable to grasp the final meaning of this. A "word" is an expression: by words we
articulate our speech. The Word of God, then, is Deity expressing itself in audible
terms. And yet, when we have said this, how much there is that we leave unsaid!
"And the word was with God," and this intimates His separate personality, and
shows His relation to the other Persons of the blessed Trinity. But how sadly
incapacitated are we for meditating upon the relations which exist between the
different Persons of the Godhead. "And God was the word." ot only was Christ
the Revealer of God, but He always was, and ever remains, none other than God
Himself. ot only was our Savior the One through whom, and by whom, the Deity

expressed itself in audible terms, but He was Himself co-equal with the Father and
the Spirit. Let us now approach the Throne of grace and there seek the mercy and
grace we so sorely need to help us as we turn now to take a closer look at these
verses.
"Our God and Father, in the name of Thy dear Son, we pray Thee that Thy Holy
Spirit may now take of the things of Christ and show them unto us: to the praise of
the glory of Thy grace. Amen."
"In THE BEGI I G," or, more literally, "in beginning," for there is no article in
the Greek. In what "beginning?" There are various "beginnings" referred to in the
ew Testament. There is the "beginning" of "the world" (Matthew 24:21); of "the
gospel of Jesus Christ" (Mark 1:1); of "sorrows" (Mark 13:8); of "miracles" (or
"signs"), (John 2:11), etc. But the "beginning" mentioned in John 1:1 clearly
antedates all these "beginnings." The "beginning" of John 1:1 precedes the making
of the "all things" of John 1:3. It is then, the beginning of creation, the beginning of
time. This earth of ours is old, how old we do not know, possibly millions of years.
But "the word" was before all things. He was not only from the beginning, but He
was "in the beginning."
"In beginning:" the absence of the definite article is designed to carry us back to the
most remote point that can be imagined. If then, He was before all creation, and He
was, for "all things were made by him;" if He was "in the beginning," then He was
Himself without beginning, which is only the negative way of saying He was eternal.
In perfect accord with this we find, that in His prayer recorded in John 17, He said,
"And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had
with thee before the world was." As, then, the Word was "in the beginning," and if
in the beginning, eternal, and as none but God Himself is eternal, the absolute Deity
of the Lord Jesus is conclusively established.
"WAS the word." There are two separate words in the Greek which, in this passage,
are both rendered "was": the one means to exist, the other to come into being. The
latter word (egeneto) is used in John 1:3 which, literally rendered, reads, "all things
through him came into being, and without him came into being not even one (thing)
which has come into being;" and again we have this word "egeneto" in John 1:6
where we read, "there was (became to be) a man sent from God, whose name was
John;" and again in John 1:14, "And the word was made (became) flesh." But here
in John 1:1 and John 1:2 it is "the word (ito) with God." As the Word He did not
come into being, or begin to be, but He was "with God" from all eternity. It is
noteworthy that the Holy Spirit uses this word "ito," which signifies that the Son
personally subsisted, no less than four times in the first two verses of John 1. Unlike
John the Baptist who "became (egeneto) a man," the "word" was (ito), that is,
existed with God before time began.
"Was THE WORD." The reference here is to the Second Person in the Holy Trinity,
the Son of God. But why is the Lord Jesus Christ designated "the word?" What is
the exact force and significance of this title? The first passage which occurs to our
minds as throwing light on this question is the opening statement in the Epistle to
the Hebrews: "God who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past
unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son."
Here we learn that Christ is the final spokesman of God. Closely connected with this
is the Savior’s title found in Revelation 1:8—"I am Alpha and Omega," which

intimates that He is God’s alphabet, the One who spells out Deity, the One who
utters all God has to say. Even clearer, perhaps, is the testimony of John 1:18: " o
man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the
Father, he hath declared him." The word "declared" means tell out, cf. Acts 15:14,
and 21:19; it is translated "told" in Luke 24:35. Putting together these three
passages we learn that Christ is the One who is the Spokesman of God, and One
who spelled out the Deity, the One who has declared or told forth the Father.
Christ, then, is the One who has made the incomprehensible God intelligible. The
force of this title of His found in John 1:1, may be discovered by comparing it with
that name which is given to the Holy Scriptures—"the Word of God." What are the
Scriptures? They are the Word of God. And what does that mean? This: the
Scriptures reveal God’s mind, express His will, make known His perfections, and
lay bare His heart. This is precisely what the Lord Jesus has done for the Father.
But let us enter a little more into detail:—
(a) A "word" is a medium of manifestation. I have in my mind a thought, but others
know not its nature. But the moment I clothe that thought in words it becomes
cognizable. Words, then, make objective unseen thoughts. This is precisely what the
Lord Jesus has done. As the Word, Christ has made manifest the invisible God.
(b) A "word" is a means of communication. By means of words I transmit
information to others. By words I express myself, make known my will, and impart
knowledge. So Christ, as the Word, is the Divine Transmitter, communicating to us
the life and love of God.
(c) A "word" is a method of revelation. By his words a speaker exhibits both his
intellectual caliber and his moral character. By our words we shall be justified, and
by our ‘words we shall be condemned. And Christ, as the Word, reveals the
attributes and perfections of God. How fully has Christ revealed God! He displayed
His power, He manifested His wisdom, He exhibited His holiness, He made known
His grace, He unveiled His heart. In Christ, and nowhere else, is God fully and
finally told out.
"And the word was WITH GOD." This preposition "with" seems to suggest two
thoughts. First, the Word was in the presence of God. As we read, "Enoch walked
with God," that is, he lived in fellowship with God. There is a beautiful verse in
Proverbs 8 which throws its light on the meaning of "with" in John 1:1, and reveals
the blessed relation which obtained from all eternity between the Word and God.
The passage begins at John 8:22 where "wisdom" is personified. It tells us of the
happy fellowship which existed between the Word and God before ever the world
was. In John 8:30 we read, "Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I
was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him." In addition to the two thoughts
just suggested, we may add that the Greek preposition "pros" here translated
"with" is sometimes rendered "toward," but most frequently "unto." The Word
was toward or unto God. One has significantly said, "The word rendered with
denotes a perpetual tendency, as it were, of the Son to the Father, in unity of
essence."
That it is here said "the word was with God" tells of His separate personality: He
was not "in" God, but "with" God. ow, mark here the marvelous accuracy of
Scripture. It is not said, "the word was with the Father" as we might have expected,
but "the word was with God." The name "God" is common to the three Persons of

the Holy Trinity, whereas "the Father" is the special title of the first Person only.
Had it said "the word was with the Father," the Holy Spirit had been excluded; but
"with God" takes in the Word dwelling in eternal fellowship with both the Father
and the Spirit. Observe, too, it does not say, And God was with God,"’ for while
there is plurality of Persons in the Godhead, there is but "one God," therefore the
minute accuracy of "the WORD was with God."
"And the word WAS GOD," or, more literally, "and God was the word." Lest the
figurative expression "the word" should convey to us an inadequate conception of
the Divine glories of Christ, the Holy Spirit goes on to say, "and the word was with
God," which denoted His separate personality, and intimated His essential relation
to the Godhead. And, as though that were not strong enough, the Holy Spirit
expressly adds, "and God was the word." Who could express God save Him who is
God! The Word was not an emanation of God, but God Himself made manifest. ot
only the revealer of God, but God Himself revealed. A more emphatic and
unequivocal affirmation of the absolute Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ it is
impossible to conceive.
"The same was in the beginning with God." The same," that is, the Word; "was,"
that is, subsisted, not began to be; "in the beginning," that is, before time
commenced; "with God," that is, as a distinct Personality. That it is here repeated
Christ was "with God," seems to be intended as a repudiation of the early Gnostic
heresy that Christ was only an idea or ideal I the mind of God from eternity, duly
made manifest in time—a horrible heresy which is being reechoed in our own day.
It is not said that the Word was in God; He was, eternally, "with God."
Before we pass on to the next verse, let us seek to make practical application of what
has been before us, and at the same time answer the third of the seven questions
asked at the close of the previous chapter; "How may I obtain a better, deeper,
fuller knowledge of God Himself? By studying nature? By prayer? By studying
Scripture? Or—how?" A more important question we cannot consider. What
conception have you formed, dear reader, of the Being, Personality, and Character,
of God? Before the Lord Jesus came to this earth, the world was without the
knowledge of the true and living God. To say that God is revealed in nature is true,
yet it is a statement which needs qualifying. ature reveals the existence of God, but
how little it tells of His character. ature manifests His natural attributes—His
power, His wisdom, His immutability, etc.; but what does nature say to us of His
moral attributes—His justice, His holiness, His grace, His love? ature, as such
knows no mercy and shows no pity. If a blind saint unwittingly steps over the edge
of a precipice he meets with the same fate as if a vile murderer had been hurled over
it. If I break nature’s laws, no matter how sincere may be my subsequent
repentance, there is no escaping the penalty. ature conceals as well as reveals God.
The ancients had "nature" before them, and what did they learn of God? Let that
altar, which the Apostle Paul beheld in one of the chief centers of ancient learning
and culture make answer—"to the Unknown God" is what he found inscribed
thereon!
It is only in Christ that God is fully told out. ature is no longer as it left the
Creator’s hands: it is under the Curse, and how could that which is imperfect be a
perfect medium for revealing God? But the Lord Jesus Christ is the Holy One. He
was God, the Son, manifest in flesh. And so fully and so perfectly did He reveal God,

He could say, "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9). Here, then,
is the answer to our question, and here is the practical value of what is before us in
these opening verses of John’s Gospel. If the believer would enter into a better,
deeper, fuller knowledge of God, he must prayerfully study the person and work of
the Lord Jesus Christ as revealed in the Scriptures! Let this be made our chief
business, our great delight, to reverently scrutinize and meditate upon the
excellencies of our Divine Savior as they are displayed upon the pages of Holy Writ,
then, and only then, shall we "increase in the knowledge of God" (Col. 1:10). The
"light of the knowledge of the glory of God" is seen only "in the face of Jesus
Christ" (2 Cor. 4:6).
MACLARE , “THE WORD IN ETERNITY, IN THE WORLD, AND IN THE
FLESH
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_1:1-2, 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_1:6-13 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_1:10-11 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_1:10-11 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.
SBC, “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.
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.

LIGHTFOOT, “[In the beginning was the Word.] In the beginning; in the same sense
withBereshith, In the beginning, in the history of the creation, Genesis 1:1. For the evangelist
proposeth this to himself, viz. to shew how that, by the Word, by which the creation was perfected, the
redemption was perfected also: That the second person in the holy Trinity, in the fulness of time,
became our Redeemer, as in the beginning of time he had been our Maker. Compare this with verse
14:
Verse 1
In the beginning was the Word.
Was with God.
The Word was God.
Verse 14
The Word was made flesh.
Dwelt among us.
Was made flesh, and we beheld, &c.
[Was the Word.] There is no great necessity for us to make any very curious inquiry, whence our
evangelist should borrow this title, when in the history of the creation we find it so often repeated, And
God said. It is observed almost by all that have of late undertaken a commentary upon this evangelist,
thatthe Word of the Lord, doth very frequently occur amongst the Targumists, which may something
enlighten the matter now before us. "And Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet the Word
of the Lord." "And the Word of the Lord accepted the face of Job." And the Word of the Lord shall
laugh them to scorn. "They believed in the name of his Word." And my Word spared them. To add no
more, Genesis 26:3, instead of "I will be with thee," the Targum hath it And my Word shall be thine
help. So Genesis 39:2, "And the Lord was with Joseph": Targ. And the Word of the Lord was Joseph's
helper. And so, all along, that kind of phrase is most familiar amongst them.
BENSON, “John 1:1-2. In the beginning — Namely, of the creation, (for the evangelist evidently refers
to the first word of the book of Genesis, ‫בראׁשית‬,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, (John 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 John 10:34 ; 1 Corinthians 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 John 1:6; John 1:12-13; John
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 John 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, (John 1:14,) as distinct from that
of the Father.
GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, “The Word
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.—
Joh_1:1.
1. The text seems speculative and hard to understand. But St. John wrote the Fourth
Gospel with a practical aim, and in language which he meant to be intelligible. What his
aim was he states in the end of the twentieth chapter—the chapter with which his Gospel
originally ended (he himself seems to have added the twenty-first at a later time). He
says: “These are written, (1) that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God;
and (2) that believing ye may have life in his name.” No doubt his language was more
familiar to his Jewish readers than it is to us. But we ought to know the Old Testament,
and although the special expression he uses here, Logos or Word, is not found exactly in
this way in the Old Testament, the idea is there. For in the Old Testament God
constantly makes Himself known and seen. Now, “No man hath seen God at any time.” It
is therefore not God the Father; but He whom the Father sanctifies and sends into the
world—it is He who appeared to Abraham, to Moses, to Joshua, to Samuel. This Person
may well be called God’s Word, since His mission is always to reveal the will of God, to
speak for God, to speak as God. By and by this Person, whom the Old Testament writers
call the Angel of the Lord, comes into the world to dwell there for a season, taking
human flesh, and He is called not the Word or Revealer now, but Jesus the Saviour, for
He is come to save His people from their sins.
2. St. John works backwards. He came to know the Word first as Jesus. He knew Him as
a Man among men. He went with Him to the marriage feast. He saw Him sit weary on
the wayside well. He was near when the cry, “O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup
pass from me,” rent the silent night. He saw Him nailed to the cross. He knew that He
remained there till He was dead. But he also at that wedding feast saw Him turn the
water into wine. He heard Him say, “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink.”
He caught the prayer, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do,” and the
promise, “To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.” He started thus with a man among
men, but a Man who was more than men, and as soon as He had ascended into heaven,
John and the rest felt that the first thing for them was to know and to make known who
He was. They had the facts of the life of Jesus on the earth. They saw that that human
life had passed into the eternal. This, then, was what they learned first, that it had come
out of the eternal. It looked before as well as after. The Jesus whom they knew had been
before they knew Him. He had been the Revealer of God to men in Old Testament times,
the Logos, the Word. He had been the Agent in the creation (which of itself is simply a

revelation). He had been with the Father before the creation of the world. “In the
beginning was the Word.”
3. St. John started with Jesus of Nazareth, and he has reached this: “In the beginning
was the Word.” But he cannot rest in that. Jesus was the Word in Old Testament times
and earlier, because He uttered God’s will. He came into the world to utter it. But He did
not separate Himself from God by coming into the world. You must not say that the
Word is here and God is yonder. If He could thus be separated from God, He could not
perfectly reveal God. He must be in closest proximity, in proximity of heart and will. He
must rather be God to men than represent God to men. And so the Old Testament
writers speak of the Angel of the Lord, and next moment let the Angel of the Lord say, “I
am the God of Abraham.” And in like manner St. John says that all the while Jesus was
the Word and was coming into the world to reveal God’s will to men, He was “with God.”
St. John caught the thought from Jesus, “As thou, Father, art in me and I in thee.”
Indeed, St. John caught all these thoughts from Jesus, and we may trace them all from
words of Christ he himself has reported.
4. Starting from Jesus of Nazareth, St. John has now reached two thoughts: Jesus is the
pre-existent Word, and though He was continually revealing God’s will to the world, He
never left the Father’s presence. He was more than in constant communication with
God. He did more than come and go between the earth and heaven. He was always with
God. He was always, not only doing God’s will, but willing it. And that leads inevitably to
a third thought. If the will of the Word and of God is one, then the Word and God are
themselves one. There is God the Father, whom no man hath seen or can see. There is
also God the Son, who constantly made Himself seen and known from the beginning,
and in St. John’s own day had flesh and dwelt among men, so that St. John and the rest
could say of Him: “We have heard, we have seen with our eyes, we have looked upon,
and our hands have handled.” And these two are one God. It is a long way to go from
Jesus of Nazareth, “whose father and mother we know”; but the way was open and
unobstructed, and Jesus Himself showed it. St. John, who saw Jesus nailed to the cross
on Calvary by rough Roman soldiers, says at last, “In the beginning was (Jesus) the
Word, and (Jesus) the Word was with God, and (Jesus) the Word was God.” And he
writes these things “that believing ye may have life in his name.”
I
The Word
1. Let us look in at this writer’s workshop, and watch him choosing his themes and even
at times his very language: or rather let us listen to the religious teacher as, with
disciples around him, he proceeds to recall, and probably dictate to one of them, his
reminiscences of his Lord, and, before doing so, tries to show the central importance of
the life which he is going to illustrate.
That life, he has come to see more and more, was no accident in history; each saying,
each action had grown in meaning as he had watched each prophecy fulfilled, and seen
the power of each act repeated in the experience of the Christian Church; the life was of
eternal significance; it came from God and told of God in every detail; it was the act of
that God who had ever been revealing Himself: it was a link, the most important link, in
a chain of continuous revelation. Now Jewish and Greek and Christian thought alike had
long been feeling after some means of expressing this method of revelation, some Being
who could mediate between the infinite God and the finite creature, who could act as
God’s organ in creation and in providence. And the writer had seen Jesus Christ control
creation, he had known His care for himself and for the Church; of this, at least, he is

John 1 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (10)

Similar to John 1 commentary

Similar to John 1 commentary (17)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (17)

John 1 commentary