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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.”
- 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.
- 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.
- "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.
- We suggest two options for understanding the
phrase “and the word was with God”, and a third option that somewhat overlaps
the first two.
- 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”.
- 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.
- 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”.
- 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