“In the beginning was the word.” (Jno. 1:1)
Nearly all commentators regard this verse as evidence for the theory that Jesus had a personal pre-existence before he was born in Bethlehem, but this idea is by no means inherent in this verse. Indeed, we ourselves believe that it is capable of bearing a quite different interpretation without in any way straining its meaning.
The word logos appears as early as Heraclitus (cir. 540-475 B.C.), a Greek philosopher, to denote the principle which, he thought, maintained order in the world. The Stoics seem to have used logos similarly.
Marcus Aurelius (121-180 A.D.), Roman Emperor and Stoic philosopher, used logos to express the generative principle or creative force in nature, and there seems every reason to believe that the term was familiar in this sense to Greek and Roman philosophers.
The Fourth Gospel was probably written at Ephesus, where no doubt John came into contact with various forms of thought and speculation which were common at that time in Gentile cities. And we can well believe that—like Paul—John decided to teach in his gospel the much-needed truth that God was the creator and sustainer of the universe. Thus, ” in the beginning” (a charactertistic Jewish allusion to Gen. 1 :1) was the logos (his Gentile readers would accept this assertion), and the logos was with God . . .” This second assertion is paralleled in Prov. 8:22, 23, where we read:
“The Lord possessed me (wisdom) in the beginning of His way, before His works of old. I (wisdom) was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.”
We can therefore say with truth that “in the beginning was wisdom, and wisdom was with God, and wisdom was God.” Now we do not regard wisdom as a person, and there is obviously no inherent need to regard logos as a person either. The Greek Philosophers merely thought of logos as a creative force or principle, which had to be assumed in order to account for the world. John endeavours to show that this creative force came from God; indeed, that it was God Himself Who was the Creator. ” The logos was God.”
Those who think that Jesus was part of the Godhead from the very beginning, and that logos in John 1: 1 refers to Jesus, seem compelled to believe also that Jesus was the Creator, a conclusion which is against the clear teaching of many plain Scriptures. For example, in Rev. 3 :14 we are told that God created Jesus. Rev. 4: 11 (R.V.) tells us that God created all things; that because of His will they were created, and Rev. 5 : 7 makes it quite clear that this was notlesus.
A careful reading of Is. 42 (especially verses 5 and 6) furnishes indisputable proof that Jehovah was the Creator, and that He (Jehovah) has given Jesus to the world. From 2 Kings 19:15 we learn that Jehovah, the God of Israel, ” made heaven and earth,” and we cannot believe that anybody would maintain seriously that Jesus was Jehovah. In fact, Psa. 11: 1 seems sufficient to refute such an assertion if it were ever made. ” The LORD (Jehovah) said unto my Lord (David’s Lord, i.e., Jesus Christ), Sit thou on My right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool,”
It was Jehovah who—in Ezek. 21 : 27— announced that He would ” overturn ” the Israelitish kingdom, and will give it to him, “whose right it is.” (Luke 1.32 seems to show conclusively that the overturned kingdom is to be given to Jesus Christ).
I Cor. 15:28 speaks of the future time when the Son will be ” subjected ” to ” Him that did subject all things unto him, that God (Jehovah) may be all in all.”
These are but a few of many passages of Scripture which tell us directly or by inference that Jesus was not the Creator. It is admittedly not easy to grasp fully the Apostle John’s doctrine of the logos, but it makes it still more difficult if we try to give to this doctrine a Trinitarian interpretation.
“… which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh …” (Jno. 1:13)
In our present-day versions these words are used to describe the spiritual children of God. In the second century of our era, however, Jno. 1:13 seems to have taught the Virgin Birth of Jesus “. . . who was born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”
We cannot say at this late stage whether the second century reading was legitimate or not, but we suggest that the doctrine of the Virgin Birth of our Lord is implicit in Jno. F:13, even as it now stands.
“Of his fulness have all we received.” (Jno. 1:16)
The words of John the Baptist seem to conclude with the previous verse, and verse 16 is apparently by the Apostle John himself. He had already (v. 14) written of ” the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth,” and this seems to be the ” fulness ” which all Christians have received, namely, the grace and truth which Jesus brought to the world, and which sincere disciples of Jesus receive through belief and obedience.
“No man hath seen God at any time.” (Jno. 1 :18)
It is evident that the Apostle John—in writing so dogmatically as he does in this verse—was thoroughly convinced from a complete knowledge of the Old Testament that no mortal eyes had ever seen the invisible God.
The Apostle Paul, with an equally thorough knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures, was just as definite on the point, for he writes in 1 Tim. 6:16 of God, “Whom no man hath seen, or can see.”
Quite clearly, both these apostles were satisfied that Jehovah Himself had never been seen by humans, and that all cases where God showed Himself to His servants must be understood as meaning that angels appeared in God’s stead.
We are told in Ex. 33:11 that “the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend,” but in verse 20 of the same chapter we read that God said to Moses, ” Thou canst not see My face, for man shall not see Me and live.” Evidently, therefore, the Being who spake to Moses ” face to face ” was not God Himself, but an eminent angel.
Later in this chapter we have the record of the incident when Moses was put into a cleft of a rock, and ” God ” covered Moses with His hand until He had passed by, and we are told that Moses saw the back of God, but even this appearance was not regarded by either John or Paul as an instance where Jehovah Himself was seen.
It seems to us that the apostolic testimony is quite definite that ” no man hath seen God (Himself) at any time,” and this seems to allow of no exceptions. We have two interesting statements by Stephen recorded in Acts. 7. In verse 30 he says that an “angel” spoke to Moses out of the burning bush, and in v. 38 that it was an angel who spoke with Moses at Sinai, but the Old Testament records seem to teach that God himself conversed with Moses on these two occasions.
It is clear that Stephen, John and Paul were all agreed that God appears to His creatures only through the medium of angels.
“Art thou Elias?” (Jno. 1:21)
We are told in Jno. 1 :19 that the Jews asked John the Baptist, “who art thou?” Evidently they could see that John was in some way unusual. He dressed like a prophet; he spoke like a prophet; he even dared to baptise for the remission of sins. “Who art thou ?” they asked quite understandably. John confessed (v. 20) “I am not the Christ.” Evidently John knew that ” all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ or not.” (Luk3 3:15).
Apparently the Jews were somewhat surprised to hear John state that he was not the Messiah they were then expecting, and they could only think of one alternative explanation of John’s behaviour. “And they asked him, What then, Art thou Elias?” Again came John’s denial, “I am not.”
Quite evidently they had in mind the prophecy in Mal. 4 :5 that Elijah (Elias) would come again ” before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.” They were expecting the Messiah, and John had said that he was not the Messiah. He must therefore be Elias.
When John denied that he was Elias, he knew that his questioners meant, “Was he the Elijah predicted in Mal. 4: 5?” We take John’s denial therefore, to mean that he was not the one predicted by Malachi. Had he merely meant that he was not Elijah the Tishbite, his denial that he was “Elias” would have amounted to something very nearly approaching quibbling, and we can acquit the Baptist of that, we feel sure.
John’s denial that he was either the Messiah or the forerunner spoken of in Mal. 4 :5 puzzled the Jews. ” Who art thou then?” they asked in bewilderment. He was obviously a prophet, but they could no longer fit him into any of the Old Testament prophecies, and so were constrained to say in effect to John the Baptist, ” Well, then, whom do you say that you are?”
For ourselves, we are quite satisfied that John’s denial that he was Elias means that he did not fulfil the prophecy in Malachi.
“Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” (Jno. 1 :29)
Some critics have professed to see a contradiction between this verse and verses 31 and 33 of the same chapter. In these later verses the Baptist says, regarding Jesus, ” I knew him not,” whereas verse 29 seems to imply that John had a considerable knowledge of the work of Jesus as the Saviour.
The explanation of the apparent difficulty lies in the chronology of these three verses. Verses 31 and 33 appear to mean that John did not know the whole truth about our Lord’s mission until just after he had baptised Jesus. Then the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Jesus in the form of a dove revealed to John the Baptist that Jesus, his cousin, was indeed the expected Messiah.
With this knowledge, John seems to have realised from Is. 53 that Jesus, the Messiah, would also be the Suffering Servant, and would “justify many, and bear their iniquities”
Jno. 1:29 seems to refer to a meeting between Jesus and the Baptist some forty days after the baptism of Jesus, and probably after our Lord’s return from the Temptation, when John’s now-extended knowledge about Jesus had had time to bear fruit.
“The angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.” (John. 1:57)
This may refer to something still in the future, when Jesus—during his millennial reign upon the earth—will perhaps repeatedly be accorded visible recognition of his Divine mission.
Alternatively, a non-literal interpretation may have been intended. Our minds go back to the history of Jacob, who—at Beth-eldreamed of ” a ladder set up on the earth, and the top reached to heaven, and angels of God were ascending and descending on it.” (Gen. 28:12).
This apparently was a God-sent vision, intended to assure Jacob that God was well-disposed towards him, and it may be that Jesus intended Nathaniel to put a similar interpretation on the words contained in Jno. 1 :57. This receives a measure of support, apparently, from our Lord’s previous words about Nathaniel, ” Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile,” for the word in the Greek for ” guile ” is the same word as is used in the LXX. text of Gen. 27 :35 concerning Jacob’s guile.
The Cleansing of the Temple (Jno. 2:13)
It would seem from Jno. 2 :13 that Jesus expelled from the Temple the moneychangers and the sellers of animals and birds for sacrifices in the course of his visit to Jerusalem for the first Passover during his ministry. Matthew, Mark and Luke, however, all record a similar incident which they place on the occasion when Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the colt, on the Sunday before his crucifixion. John records the ride into Jerusalem, but says nothing about a cleansing of the Temple at that time.
It seems reasonable to assume that there were two cleansings of the Temple by Jesus, the first being shortly after the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (recorded by John), and the second, recorded by the Synoptists, nearly at the close of the ministry, and therefore about three years later than the first cleansing.
We can easily believe that the mercenary Jews concerned, and whom Jesus expelled (Jno. 2:13), would creep back as soon as they could, so that Jesus would be constrained to expel them again when he discovered how they had persisted in carrying on their money-making activities in the Temple precincts.
The Solution