The first theme introduced in John’s Gospel is the relationship of the Word to God.13 Before defining the nature of this relationship, however, John begins by asserting the existence of the Word at the beginning: “In the beginning was the Word” (v. 1). As noted above, the opening phrase of this verse recalls the creation account in Genesis 1.
Unexpectedly, the reader does not encounter something becoming in verse 1. Nothing is made or created. In the beginning the Word was. The significance of the verb h™n becomes clear when it is contrasted with how John uses the verb gi÷nomai in verse 3 to describe the created world. The Word, unlike created beings, did not come into existence;
the Word existed, without explanation and without cause. When creation occurred, the Word was, indicating that the Word exists outside of time and space. The Word existed in eternity, without the existence of creation and without the existence of time or space.
The eternal being of the Word, existing outside time and space, creates a dilemma. For Jewish monotheists committed to the OT and the Mosaic Law, the only
Hendrickson Publishers, 2003), 1:339-63, who takes a nuanced version of position (3) above, describing Jesus as “the supreme revelation of God” because He is the embodiment of God’s Word revealed in the Torah through Moses.
12Morris, John, 64-70, follows a nearly identical division of the first verses of John’s Prologue.
Morris, however, keeps vv. 4-5 with v. 3, as speaking about the Word and His relationship to creation. For reasons discussed below, it seems preferable to take vv. 4-5 as a description of the Word as He is in Himself, not as a description of the relationship of the Word with the creation event. So M. E. Boismard, St.
John's Prologue (London: Blackfriars, 1957), 79-80.
13J. Ramsey Michaels, The Gospel of John, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2010), 47, notes how John’s focus in these opening verses is on the “being” of the Word, explaining, “The Word must be identified, and can only be identified in relation to God, the God of Israel.”
39
being who existed prior to creation is God.14 To assert that the Word existed prior to creation immediately raises the issue of the Word’s relationship to God. In what sense is it possible to say that the Word existed in the beginning when God alone existed in the beginning?15 John continues by explaining that the Word was with God (kai« oJ lo/goß h™n pro\ß to\n qeo/n; v. 1). The Word’s relationship to God was one of distinction within community. The Evangelist speaks of the Word as separate from God but in close
fellowship with God. The pronoun pro/ß can express several nuances when used with the accusative case. One possible meaning in this verse is “with” in the sense of being in the presence of another person.16 While BDAG cites this verse under this definition, it seems hard to understand how an eternal Word could be with, in the sense of proximity, God, the eternal Spirit who is not confined by space. Moreover, in what sense can God and the Word be said to be with each other in proximity in their existence without any place existing? No place was for them to be. Their existence prior to and outside of space makes nonsense out of any kind of definition that emphasizes proximity or nearness in space. A better interpretation of this term is to take it relationally.17 The Word was with God in a relationship of loving communion.18 Carson points out that this term is
14As Köstenberger, John, 25, notes, “John’s first readers would have expected the phrase ‘In the beginning God’” (emphasis his).
15For a review of the various ways Judaism understood both wisdom and memra existing in the beginning, see Daniel Boyarin, "The Gospel of the Memra: Jewish Binitarianism and the Prologue to John,"
Harvard Theological Review 94 (2001): 243-84.
16BDAG, 875.
17Contra C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text (London: S.P.C.K., 1978), 155, who can find “no clear meaning” when the Word and God are described in relationship rather than spacially, citing Prov 8:30 as an example of the spacial meaning. And yet, is there a “clear meaning” of location prior to space existing? As difficult as it is to conceive of the Deity existing apart from space, it is no more difficult than the Deity’s existence apart from time. Both spacelessness and timelessness are outside the realm of human description and
comprehension, but both remain true despite human finitude.
18BDAG, 874, says this term can mean “with” in the context of a friendly relationship, which seems preferable in John 1:1.
40
commonly used of persons with other persons “usually in a fairly intimate relationship.”19 Such would appear to be the case here, as the Word and God exist together in harmonious relationship in the beginning.
John concludes verse 1 by emphatically declaring that the Word was God.20 The Evangelist thus transitions from speaking of the community of God and the Word to the unity of God and the Word. Not only are the Word and God distinct and in
relationship, but they also share the divine nature. The Word cannot be sharply severed from God, as if the Word and God were two separate beings. Moreover, this unity implies that when the Word acts, He acts as God, an implication that will become explicit in verse 3.21 Through this statement, John presents the mystery of the unity that exists between God and the Word. What God is, the Word is. What God does, so the Word does in like manner. What God says is His Word, so that the words of the Word are the very words of God.
John summarizes his threefold description of the relationship between the Word and God in verse 2.22 When John refers to the Word with the pronoun ou∞toß, he recapitulates the last statement in verse 1 while directing the reader’s attention to the
19Carson, John, 116
20The controversy over how to interpret the construction kai« qeo\ß h™n oJ lo/goß is well known and will not be rehearsed here. The present writer understands this to be a statement of the Word’s deity.
For discussion of this issue, consult the standard Greek grammars and Johannine literature.
21Barrett, St. John, 156, writes of John 1:1, “John intends that the whole of his gospel shall be read in the light of this verse. The deeds and words of Jesus are the deeds and words of God.” So also Witherington, John's Wisdom, 54. Barrett jumps ahead a bit in his exegesis since the name “Jesus” has not been mentioned yet, let alone any of His words or deeds; nevertheless, he touches on the critical point this verse serves to make. The Word as God and as with God acts as God Himself in unity with the God with whom He was (and is). Without understanding this profound principle, the reader will be left in the same condition as many of Jesus’ interlocutors: confused, and perhaps even outraged, rejecting not only the gift but, more importantly, the Giver.
22As Morris, John, 70, notes, “Nothing new is added in this verse.” It serves to repeat and emphasize what John has just said in v. 1.
41
Word for the following verses.23 John then repeats his claims that the Word existed in the beginning in relationship with God. The Word is thus identified with God, yet at the same time a distinction is preserved between the Word and God. Gift and giving are not
mentioned in these opening verses in John’s Gospel, yet the foundation these verses lay of the simultaneous distinction and unity of God and the Word is vital to building a proper interpretation of the gift in Johannine terms.