“…and the Word was with God”: A Commentary on John 1:1b

-

To hear the full podcast for these notes click here.

In this episode we continue a discussion with Rivers of Eden interpreting the first verse of the Gospel of John. Today’s episode is called “… and the word was with God”, a Commentary on the Gospel of John 1:1b.


  1.  In keeping with the methodology described in the two previous podcasts on John 1:1, we look at how the phrase “with God” is used in the Gospel of John and in other biblical literature to determine what the author meant by the phrase.
  2.  I start by pointing out that even though John 1:1 is a favorite proof text for Trinitarians, there is no Trinity described in John 1:1. The word or title “God” in John 1:1, does not mean the Trinity. In fact, nowhere in John’s Gospel does the word “God” mean a Trinity. This is very strange for the book that is often appealed to as the main text as evidence that God is a Trinity. Strange. “God” in the Gospel of John is never a Trinity.
  3.  The discussion in this episode gets a bit technical since it is necessary to examine the phrase “was with God” and the similar phrase “was with the Father” in Greek.  It will benefit the listener to know these two phrases in Greek.  “with God” in Greek is pros ton theon. “with the Father” is pros ton patera.
  4.  Rivers explains why the Greek preposition pros, which normally means “toward” is best understood and translated in John 1:1 as “with” – “and the word was with God.”
  5.  A main point of our discussion is to show that the phrase “the Word was with God” refers to a human person, and not to either an abstract attribute, or to a 2nd deity person along with God. The phrase occurs over 100 times in the Bible and in each case involves a person on earth relating to God in heaven.
  6.  Another point Rivers makes is that pros ton theon is not the language that is used of something that is in God’s mind, like wisdom, that is then personified as “with God”. In other words, pros ton theon does not describe something or someone that is “within God”. The grammar of “personified wisdom” in Proverbs 8 and other literature (biblical and non-biblical) is different than what we have here in John 1.
  7. "Word" (logos in Greek and its parallel davar in Hebrew) is more connected in the Old Testament with the concepts of promise, warning, and judgment than it is to creation. Logos/davar do not occur in the Genesis creation account. Rather, the "word of Yahweh/God" comes to the people of God with promise and warning. So, while there are parallels in the Old Testament, the Gospel of John is declaring that the ultimate declaration of God, the ultimate word of God, is the person Jesus the Messiah.
  8. We suggest two options for understanding the phrase “and the word was with God”, and a third option that somewhat overlaps the first two.
  9.  Rivers suggests seeing the phrase “and the word was with God” as resurrection or ascension text, parallel to John 1:18, which describes the unique one who “is in the bosom of the Father.” He refers to the occurrences of pros ton theon in the Gospel of John (13:1-3, 3; 14:6, 12, 28; 16:10, 17, 28; 20:17) which in each case describe the person of Jesus going “to the Father”.
  10.  Bill suggests another possibility, focusing on the past tense of John 1:1b “the word was with God”. The author introduces his Gospel by declaring that in a parallel way to Moses, the one he describes in his Gospel, Jesus, was with God in a unique way. Jesus is directly compared with Moses in John 1:17. Jesus, like Moses, gained knowledge by being uniquely “with God”. How did Jesus get his great understanding? How did he know his unique calling as the Messiah? Like Moses, who was with God at the burning bush, and then received the word of God with God on Mt. Sinai, the human Jesus was with God. As Jesus said in John 8:38 “I speak of what I have seen with my Father”. In this interpretation, “the Word was with God” refers to the unique relationship Jesus had with God while he was on earth, before his death and resurrection.
  11.  The two options mentioned above are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Indeed, the third option we suggest somewhat overlaps the previous two. We suggest John may have had in mind the mediatorial role that Jesus had and has, as a priest who is said to be in God’s presence, “with God”.
  12.  Finally, we take a look at the similar language in the First Epistle of John 1:1-3 and see that the eternal life which was with the Father is not an abstract idea, but is a description of the real human person, Jesus the Messiah, who the author saw, heard and touched.

 In a future podcast we plan to look closer at John 1:1c, “and the Word was God”.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Word Became Flesh? Why John 1:14 Does NOT Say that God Became Man

-
Image
For an audio podcast of this post, click here : For many Trinitarians, or for those who believe in the “deity of Christ”, a few words from John 1:1 combined with a few words from John 1:14 forms the , and I mean the #1 evidence that Jesus is God, and that therefor somehow God is a Trinity. John 1:1 says “the Word was God”, and then skip down to John 1:14, “the Word became flesh”. That’s it. Jesus is God, literally.   But wait a second.   In a future podcast I plan to suggest that a better way to understand John 1:14 is that “the Logos, the Word was flesh”. In other words, the Logos, the Word - God’s communication to us - was a human being, the man Christ Jesus from Nazareth.   But the focus of this podcast will be on the problems with the “deity of Christ” interpretation of John 1:14.   Jerusalem, we have a Problem: Problems with the Trinitarian and Deity of Christ Interpretation of John 1:14   The “deity of Christ” interpretation of John 1:14 may sound or look
Read more

Why Did Hamas Attack Israel?

-
Image
I found this analysis called “Why Did They Attack Us?” by Shai Eden, an Israeli digital creator and businessman, to be helpful in understanding the wider picture of what is going on between Israel and Hamas. I don’t necessarily agree with everything Mr. Eden says, and I find him to be inconsistent in several places. However, I think Mr. Eden explains well how the Israel-Hamas situation is related to a wider Russian-Iranian-Chinese alliance as opposed to a Western-Sunni-Israeli alliance. The translation is from Hebrew to English, done by Google translate and polished by me, Bill Schlegel. Original Hebrew Post by Shai Eden, digital creator & businessman. Oct/27/2023 (with additional links and maps) https://www.facebook.com/631503054/posts/pfbid02mZNeKtu28eUcs3VtBeqfa7BDuDAx6bPY8VusRmFdZP14FuJ7ZKdcoLFCjtu2YHdNl/?mibextid=cr9u03 Translation begins: _ _ _ _ _  Why did they attack us? Despite the hatred, and love of death of Hamas, the reason for the timing and size of their a
Read more

Hebrews 1:8-14, Is the Son called God? Did Jesus create the heavens?

-
Image
Below are summary notes for Part 2 of our study of chapter 1 of the Book of Hebrews. In the first episode we examined Hebrews 1:1-7. In this episode we examine Hebrews 1:8-14. To hear the podcast, click here , or find One God Report on your podcast platform. We note that the word “saying”, or “he says” which appears in English translations in Hebrews 1:8 is not in the Greek text.  The Greek is only "of the Son".  The speaker of the words quoted from Psalm 45 is not God, but the Psalmist. Adding “he says” or “saying” to Hebrews 1:8 makes it sound, incorrectly, that God is calling the Son, “God”. But the speaker at this point is not God. The speaker is the Psalmist who shows honor to the Israelite/Judean king. Hebrews 1:8-9 is a quote from Psalm 45, which is a marriage hymn addressed to a king descended from David (perhaps Solomon, or Hezekiah?). The Davidic king has a God who has blessed him (45:2) and anointed him (45:7). The Davidic king is lauded for his stre
Read more