Introduction

When considering the first five verses of John’s Prologue[1], rather the preparatory portion[2] of the Prologue, John makes his marks with an exacting audience in mind—the whole known world. In today’s day in age, the known world is separated into hundreds, maybe thousands, of known nationalities; however, in John’s time there would have been only two accepted—the Jew and the Greek, or Gentile. John must captivate the entire world so as to show the entire world that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; his intended purposes in penning this account, that you—all who read—might believe and have life in his name (John 20.31). The Prologue of John’s gospel narrative is sovereignly inspired by God through the penmanship of John the Apostle.

Context

Historical/Cultural

John’s verbiage throughout the entire Prologue is centered on one Greek word, or concept, being the logos[3] translated to “Word” in the English. It is here in the Prologue of John’s Gospel that the term is introduce in a theological sense[4] relating to Jesus (cf. v.14); however, the word “logos” was not a new concept. The classical Greek sense of the logos—John fully conscious of this sense—implies both “reason” and “thought”; however, logos is often engaged as “word” in Biblical Greek—also in the mind of John.[5]  These two meanings of the logos, thought and word, are not two different meanings, rather they are super glued elements of the same meaning that cannot be rightly unglued from the other—reason is word derived from thought. C.K. Barrett explains that the logos can be summarized as “inward thought” and “outward expression of thought through speech”.[6] He goes on to explain that the logos is “God’s self-revelation…His thought communicated by speech”. The idea is that of the same as within the human’s mind; the mind reasons with thought and then conveys that thought through expressed word. Reason then becomes action when thought is transpired into word that is operated on. The concept of the logos is not just a concept belonging only to the Greek. For it was both the Jew and Greek who held similar positions in regards to the logos; therefore, the entire known world would have recognized John’s verbiage. John’s clear intention, by the strategic centering of the logos within the text, is purposed to captivate his audience by the similar concept of all who read. The Jewish practice of monotheism[7] would have contributed to the formation of the logos—one singular source, being God—whereas the Greeks practice of polytheism[8] would have viewed multiple gods linking back to one superior source. Both views would have recognized the logos as the originating source of creation, which is why John opens with “in the beginning was the Word [or logos]” directly securing both views to the origination of the creative order. Even so, it would seem that differing views of monotheism and polytheism would gain no likenesses in concept; however, this would be a misconstrued theory. Both the Jew and the Greek viewed the logos as the supratemporal reason of a higher Being or Principle.[9]  John then pens his narrative with the intention of introducing the logos as God himself, the Creator of the universe, whom he later claims to be Jesus Christ.

Literary

In today’s world, it is often hard for the reader, especially the Christian, to read John’s prologue without the mind directly moving to the known Jesus Christ of v.14. Since it be that the Christian knows the end of the story, so the Christian knows Jesus as the Word; however, it may be of value to remember that in John’s world the notion of Jesus Christ being the Word of God was a new concept. John, here, introduces this theme and gives no link to the Word and Jesus up until v.14; therefore, the first readers of John’s Gospel would have been primarily fixated on the idea of the Word as a supreme source of reason—a Being or Principle—first, as oppose to first fixating on the person of Jesus Christ. Leon Morris suggest that the best impact of John’s Prologue, prior to the revelation of the Word as Jesus Christ in v.14, is viewed in a greater light by understanding that John is speaking of the Being or Principle that was familiar to both the Jew and the Greek as oppose to the man of Jesus Christ. John’s attempt is to captive the mind of the Jew and Greek, alike, by use of similar mentality before introducing Jesus as the Word in v.14. It must first be known and understood who God was prior to becoming a man; He was everlasting, He was eternal, He was Creator and Sustainer, and therefore, He still is. How can it be that sinful man can understand the eternal love of God if sinful man does not understand the eternality of God first? John, then, sets up his Prologue in a preparatory fashion to prove the eternal connection between the Word and God, as one eternal entity prior to disclosing Jesus Christ the man as the Son of God.

Content

The Existence of the Word John 1a-1b

The Continual Pre-Existence of the Word (v.1a)

Most commentators concur that John opens his Gospel with the intention of pointing his audience directly to the commencement words of the Hebrew Bible.[10]  The words “in the beginning” are not only a direct reference to Genesis 1.1 but they parallel the foundational three words of the Bible with the clear intention of calling the audiences mind to the commencement of the creative order.[11]  As stated earlier, John’s focused purport in penning his Gospel is the presentation of this “Word” as the very Son of God; therefore, he must place the Word first “in the beginning”. Nonetheless, the choice of John’s verbiage does not, nor is it intended to, limit the Word to the commencement of the creative order. If it be that the Word was “in the beginning” creating as the ultimate reason then it withal be that the Word was prior to “the beginning” in order to create. John is starkly clear in making this point as he progresses into v. 3, where he is secure in his claim, that the Word is the responsible agent for creation.[12]  Prevalent sense then comes into play and the reader is able to determine that the Word must have pre-existed “the beginning” in order to have brought all things into being (v.3) “in the beginning”. John’s following statements make it imperative for the reader to look beyond the conception of creation alone and into the realm of the eternal pre-existing presence of the Word.

The Word’s Continual Existence (v.1b)

The very fact that the Word was presently pre-existing “the beginning” does not forcibly support the fact that the Word was in a state of continual[13] existence before the commencement of the order; however, John’s utilization of the verb “was” vigorously poses the notion that the Word was not only pre-existent to the commencement but withal in a state of continual existence prior to and thereafter the beginning—the Word was and He still is creating. The Greek verb εἰμί (eimi[14]), for the English “was”, is the same verb utilized in John’s Gospel when Jesus states His supratemporal existence as God—seven times.[15]  Leon Morris refers to the utilization of “was” as an “eternal existence of the Word”. He paraphrases “the Word continually existed”. Furthermore, Morris relates the utilization of the word “was” as a direct reference the “eternal unchanging being” of the Word.[16] If it be that the Word continually exists in a state of unchanging eternality than the creation of the Word was not a possible achievement. For the Word always was in a state of continual existence; therefore, “there never was a time when the Word was not”.

The Relation of the Word to God and Man John 1c-2

The Word as God’s Continual Revelation to Man (v.1c)

Just as the conception of “the beginning” was familiar to John’s intended audience, so stated earlier, the conception of the “Word” or the logos was also. While the human mind vividly exhibits it incapability of grasping the full meaning of the Word, there may be one clear specific meaning that John intends for his reader to embark to understand—the relation of the Word to man is that the Word is the revelation of God (cf. v. 18) to man. As earlier pointed out the Word is viewed as reason, which is composed of its inception of mentally conceived thought expressed through verbally spoken word.[17] The very revelation of God comes through this “Word” that John seeks to make known through the open declaration of truth. Morris says it like this, “The Word of God is His thought (if we may put it so) uttered so that men can understand it.” It is through the process of reason, thought being conveyed to word, that man understands truth—it is that truth that is the very Word of God (v.16 cf. Psa. 119.160). It is as if John leaves no suspense that “the Word was” in continual being, as a continual Being of supremacy, but gives much suspense to the fact that God became a man.

The Word in Continual Communion “with God” (v.1d cf. v.2)

There, again, seems to be a general consensus among commentators that “the Word was with God” is the best translation. Morris harmonizes this truth when he states that “with God” is “as good a translation as we can manage for a difficult Greek expression” but like “in the beginning was the Word”, there is much more to the analysis then that the Word was simply present with God.[18] The literal Greek preposition means “the Word was towards God”.[19] Again, by properly discerning the application of the word “was” points to the continual action of the Word facing towards God—the Word was “face to face” with God.[20] It is better viewed and understood as a total and perpetual acquiescent, or communion, between the Word and the Father; there is and cannot be any opposition between the two Persons.[21] John is then furthering his conception that the Word pre-existed “in the beginning” by integrating “the Word was with God”. John is vividly stating that not only was the Word “in the beginning” but that the Word was withal “with God” in the commencement of the order firmly positioned in a state of perfect and continual existence that remains continually in communion with the Father[22]—that of perfect acquiescent. This statement of John’s, “the Word was with God”, becomes imperative to the explanation of the identity of the Word. John with perfect intention sandwiches this phrase between succeeding and proceeding statements of profundity giving it the utmost of importance that he again highlights in v. 2. John discerns a desire for the reader to understand that the Word is much more than the conception of a supreme Principle or Being. He is about to disclose the absolute most profound of all statements in the entire Bible, “the Word was God”, but he must first utilize a phrase that differentiates between the Word and God while still showing the relation of the Word of God as “with God” in perfect harmonious agreement.

The Word’s Continual Existence as God (v.1e)

Is the Word God? Certainly, John professes this truth but John is also careful not to profess the Word to be all inclusive of God; instead the Word is separate in person from God but of the same essence making them one inseparable unit that remains in continual acquiescent at all times. It is not pointedly stated here that the Word was the Father but that “the Word was God” just as the Father is God. While it is certain that the human mind is incapable of grasping this truth it need be a truth that is accepted within the human mind—“the Word was [and is, and always will be] God” just as the Father “was” and the Spirit “was”, are, and will be God.[23] John, then, shows the relation of the Word to God as being God all while holding a separate person distinctive to the Father and the Spirit.

The Relation of the Word to the World John 1.3-5

The Word as the Continual Creator and Sustainer (v.3)

John, again, uses language that is not to be misunderstood. “All things came into being through Him” but not without the Father. For it was “through” the Word that “all things came into being”. It is certainly clear that in the absence of the Word “nothing came into being that has come into being”; however, it is withal truth that in the absence of the Father “nothing came into being that has come into being”.[24]  The same truth holds firm with the Holy Spirit since all are God. For John is unambiguously clear that “the Word was with God” in perfect communion in acquiescent of all things including those that “came into being”. May it be better understood by borrowing from the notion of reason—the whole world’s belief—in that there must have first been a mental thought that emerged into word. It may be reasonably appropriate to suggest that the Father thought the mental thought, the Word produced the expressed word, and the Spirit carried out the furthering action. Though John does not materialize and disclose this notion, the Bible is replete in its pattern of truth that the Spirit carries out the action; a truth that John himself attest in his compilation of works.[25] John relatively, certainly, and implicatively insinuates this truth as well by the context of v.1.[26] Furthermore, since it be that John has already disclosed the eternality of God, with specificity to the eternality of God the Father and God the Son, here with specificity he discloses that as a whole it is this eternality that is the responsible agency of creation through the reason of God as a self-reliant unit of three. The mental thought of God must move through the Word of God in order for the Spirit of God to act. The Word then becomes the compulsory element that mediates between the mental thought and the action; therefore, “apart from Him” the mediating Word, “nothing came into being that came into being”. It is for this motive that John descriptively letters the Word in both a positive and negative veneration, thus, exhibiting the Word as the compulsory agent of mediation to all thing.[27] Positively speaking John pens, “All things came into being through Him” and negatively, “Apart from Him nothing came into being that came into being”.[28]  It is an effective approach that hoists the entire Triune God as one unit in perfect communion as opposed to one singular person within the Tri-unity of God. But be not misled that this notion be limited to creation itself. As earlier stated, John does not limit the notion of “the beginning” nor does he limit the notion of creation to “the beginning”. It is shown to all who devout themselves to the text that there is complete dependence of each individual Person within the Trinity—in all works and at all times, all of God is creating and sustaining through the Word.[29]

The Word as the Continual Light in the World (v.4)

Since it be that “all things came into being through Him” it is “in Him”, this agency of creation, the Word, that life is possible: established and sustained. The Greek use, here, of ἐν (en[30]), or “in”, is yet another small word to be discovered. This small preposition denotes a position that is fixed—a state of being. By combining en with eimi, “in…was”, a state of continuality is clearly viewed; therefore, it may be said that the state of life continually rest with the Word. Should the Word be removed, then life to is removed. The notion is used at the commencement of the Prologue—in the beginning was the Word.

John leaves no wondering that it is too through the agency of the Word that that light follows the same procedure as life; established and sustained only through the agency of the Word. But it is not just that of physical life and light but that also of spiritual life and light, which may be rightfully reversed; evil lurks in the shadows of darkness but not in the presence of light— light becomes the compulsory factor that brings the evil out into the light; thus producing spiritual life. The Word is here explained as the mediator between darkness and light that holds the transforming power from death to life.

The Word as the Continual Overcomer (v.5)

“The Light shines in the darkness” may be farther expounded as the prologue progress (v.9, 10). The darkness has not the possibility of lurking in the shadows, rather hiding the sin of man, when the Light is present nor does the darkness have the ability to “comprehend it”. Though certainly it be true that darkness cannot “comprehend” or understand “the Light” there is a more vigorous meaning in the Greek for this word that may be better translated as “overcome”[31]—the darkness did not, cannot, and will not ever overcome the Light. For the Light is the Word and “the Word was God” (Romans 8.31). Darkness then has no comprehension of Light. If light is present than the presence of darkness is not a possibility—the two do not and cannot commix. John richly states that darkness can neither understand, grasp, nor lay hold of the Light because darkness is not a factor within the Light. But is it not true that darkness is present today? Is it not true that evil resides in this world? Certainly, the presence of evil is all around becoming an inescapable trap for those who run from the Light, enslaving humankind to death. How then does John make such a claim? The impossible becomes possible through sovereignty of the God. Darkness is allowed so that the Light might come, darkness is permitted that the Light might shine and darkness is present that the Light might overcome.  The Light shines that humankind may have a way of escape, being no longer enslaved to the power of darkness (Romans 6.6).

Theological Interpretation and Application

John strategically uses the first five verses of his Prologue to prepare the reader to accept the truth to come in v.14—that Jesus Christ is the Word. He captivates the audience by the use of the logos, the ultimate reason, by which all things came into being. He intentionally points out that the Word was pre-existent to the beginning, with God in the beginning, and was God in the beginning, to show the eternality and distinctive Persons of God—as One God. He contributes the Word as the mediating and compulsory agent and sustaining power of creation by which physical and spiritual life and light is given to man. He shows that the darkness has no power over the light and the Light will overcome. John simply states with profundity that the Word is the continual pre-existing, revelation of God to man. John indeed captivates the entire world of his time with the notion of reason—the logos, the very Word of God—so as to show the entire world that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; his intended purposes in penning his account, that you—all who read—might believe and have life in his name (John 20.31).

Bibliography

Balz, Horst and Gerhard Schneider, eds. Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, vol.3. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990-93, 160

Barrett, C.K. The Gospel according to John; An Introduction with Commentary and notes on the Greek Text. 2nd ed. London: S.P.C.K.; Philadelphia: Westminster

Bloomberg, Craig L. The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel: Issues and Commentary. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press: 2001, 73.

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans: 1991

Kittel, Gerhard and Gerhard Friedrich, ed. and abridged by Geoffrey Bromiley. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 1 vol. edition. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985, 505, 506

Morris, L. Commentary on the Gospel of John, 2nd ed. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995

Vine, W.E. Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville, TN. Thomas Nelson, Inc. 1996

[1] The Prologue of John’s Gospel narrative is widely accepted as v.1—18

[2] Meaning the introductory portion of the Prologue the sets up the remaining verses (v. 6-18)

[3] Vine, W.E. Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville, TN. Thomas Nelson, Inc. 1996, 683

[4] Barrett, C.K. The Gospel according to John; An Introduction with Commentary and notes on the Greek Text. 2nd ed. London: S.P.C.K.; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978, 152

[5] Most commentators agree that John often writes with more than one idea behind his choice of words so as to grab whomever reads his text

[6] Barrett, C.K. The Gospel according to John, 152

[7] monotheism—the doctrine or belief that there is but one God (Merriam Webster Dictionary)

[8] polytheism—belief in or worship of more than one god (Merriam Webster Dictionary)

[9] Kittel, Gerhard and Gerhard Friedrich, ed. and abridged by Geoffrey Bromiley. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 1 vol. edition. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985, 505, 506

[10] Morris, L. Commentary on the Gospel of John, 2d ed. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995, 71.

[11] Bloomberg, Craig L. The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel: Issues and Commentary. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press: 2001, 73.

[12] Barrett, C.K. The Gospel according to John, 149 cf. 158

[13] Barrett, C.K. The Gospel according to John, 152

[14] Kittel, TDNT, 206,207

[15] Cf. John 6.35; 8.12; 10.9; 10.11; 11.25; 14.6; 15.5

[16] Morris, L. Commentary on the Gospel of John, 74

[17] Kittel, TDNT, 206,207

[18] Morris, L. Commentary on the Gospel of John, 75, 76

[19] Kittel, TDNT, 942

[20] Balz, Horst and Gerhard Schneider, eds. Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, vol.3. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990-93, 160

[21] Morris, L. Commentary on the Gospel of John, 76

[22] Morris, L. Commentary on the Gospel of John, 76

[23] Cf. Rev. 19.13

[24] Hypothetical note as it was earlier determined the Word “was” always in existence; therefore the absence of the Word, or the Father, is not a possibility to be tickled.

[25] Cf. Jhn. 3.3—7; 14.26; 2 Jhn. 16.8

[26] Keeping all that was said in mind

[27] Cf. Rom. 11.36

[28] Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans: 1991, 118

[29] Note the sustaining power of the Word in Psa. 147.15—18; Heb. 1.3; 2 Pet. 3.5—7

[30] Balz, Horst and Gerhard Schneider, ed Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, vol.1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990-93, 447 cf. Kittel, TDNT, 223

[31] Balz, Horst and Gerhard Schneider, ed Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, vol.2. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990-93, 257