The Gospel and Letters of John, Volume 2: The Gospel of John

By Urban C. von Wahlde

Urban von Wahlde’s radically new, three-volume commentary on the Gospel and Letters of John is the most detailed study of the composition of the Johannine literature ever put forth by an American scholar. / Nearly all of the problems confronted by those who study John have to do with the literary strata of the Gospel of John and their relation to the composition of the Letters of John. With an archaeologist’s precision, and engaging a whole range of scholarly contributions in this area, von Wahlde digs down to the foundations and exposes three distinct literary strata in the development of the Johannine tradition. Volume 1 gives detailed evidence identifying and listing the criteria for each stratum. Volumes 2 and 3 apply those criteria to the Gospel and Letters of John respectively. / These books are part of the Eerdmans Critical Commentary series, edited by David Noel Freedman and Astrid B. Beck.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Eerdmans
• Release date: Nov 22, 2010
• ISBN: 9781467422376

Urban C. von Wahlde

Urban C. von Wahlde is professor of New Testament at LoyolaUniversity Chicago. He is also the author of TheJohannine Commandments: 1 John and the Struggle for theJohannine Tradition and The Earliest Version ofJohn's Gospel: Recovering the Gospel of Signs.

Book preview

7:53–8:11

1:1-18

The Prologue to the Gospel

1 IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD*

AND THE WORD WAS WITH GOD AND THE WORD WAS GOD.

2 THIS ONE WAS WITH GOD IN THE BEGINNING.

3 ALL THINGS CAME TO BE THROUGH HIM

AND WITHOUT HIM CAME TO BE NOT ONE THING THAT HAS COME TO BE.

4 IN HIM WAS LIFE

AND THE LIFE WAS THE LIGHT OF ALL PEOPLE.

5 AND THE LIGHT SHINES IN THE DARKNESS

AND THE DARKNESS DID NOT OVERCOME IT.

6 A man came to be, sent from God. His name was John. 7 This man came as a witness, to witness about the light in order that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light but was intended to witness about the light. 9 The true light, that shines on every person, was coming into the world.

10 HE WAS IN THE WORLD AND THE WORLD CAME TO BE THROUGH HIM

AND THE WORLD DID NOT KNOW HIM.

11 HE CAME INTO HIS OWN

AND HIS OWN DID NOT ACCEPT HIM.

12 BUT TO AS MANY AS DID ACCEPT HIM

HE GAVE TO THEM POWER TO BECOME CHILDREN OF GOD,

TO THOSE BELIEVING IN HIS NAME,

13 who were born,

not from blood,

nor from the will of the flesh,

nor from the will of a man,

but from God.

14 AND THE WORD BECAME FLESH AND DWELLED WITH US

AND WE SAW HIS GLORY, THE GLORY OF ONE UNIQUE

FROM THE FATHER, FULL OF GRACE AND TRUTH.

15 John witnesses about him and has cried out saying, "This is the one about whom I said, ‘The one coming after me existed before me because he ranks above me.’ "

16 BECAUSE WE HAVE ALL RECEIVED FROM HIS FULLNESS,

INDEED GRACE UPON GRACE.

17 Because the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the unique Son, the one at the bosom of the Father, made him known.

NOTES TO 1:1-18

V. 1 In the beginning These words echo Gen 1:1 and are the author’s way of referring to the beginning of time. This statement expresses the community’s belief that Jesus was already in existence at the beginning of time. On the preexistence of the Word, see at 1:15. 1 John will also start with a reference to the beginning. However, in 1 John, beginning will refer to the beginning of the community’s experience of Jesus.

Word As Dodd (Interpretation 265-67) has shown, word is used in four ways in the Gospel: (1) in the ordinary sense to refer to words spoken by Jesus or others (e.g., 7:40; 19:13); (2) in the singular to refer to a statement or saying of Jesus or of another (e.g., 2:22; 4:37); (3) to refer to the entirety of the message of Jesus (e.g., 5:24; 15:3) — and in this sense it is synonymous with teaching (didachē) (7:16-18); (4) as a title for Jesus — only in the Prologue (1:1, 14).

While it is true that the term Word (as a title for the preexistent Jesus) does not appear elsewhere in the Gospel, there is a clear relation between the conviction that the word of Jesus is not his own but the word of God (5:37-38; 7:16-18; 8:28; 12:48-49) and the conviction that Jesus is the Word of God.

The thought-world that gave rise to this conception of a personalized Word has been explored extensively. The closest parallels are to Wisdom writings and to the concept of Logos in the writings of Philo (see below on the background of the Prologue).

in the presence of God Literally was before God. This expression is used of Wisdom in Prov 8:22 (but never of Logos). The imperfect here and in vv. 2-4 indicates continuous timeless existence (Bernard). In Philo, Wisdom and Logos are sometimes identified (Leg. 1.65; Her. 191; Somn. 2.242-45).

the Word was God This equates the Word with God. Although for many English readers the word divine would seem to say the same thing, this is not what is said in the Greek (since there was a Greek word for divine [theios]). Verbally, there is a parallel to this in Philo Somn. 1.228-30 although the meaning in Philo does not as clearly equate the Word with God.

V. 3 All things came to be In the Gospel, the Word is the instrument through whom creation takes place. So also Philo (Cher. 125-27) who distinguishes, in a much more philosophical manner, four modes of instrumentality: the by which, the from which, the through which, and the for which. For Philo, the Logos was the image of God (Fug. 101) but also the paradigm and model of creation (Somn. 2:45).

not one thing that has come to be There is a notorious textual problem here involving the placement of punctuation. On text-critical grounds, a full stop before: That came to be … is to be preferred. In this view, the clause: That [which] came to be is to be joined with in him was life. This is argued most persuasively by K. Aland, Untersuchung. Scholars also point to the fact that this rendering preserves the staircase parallelism better than the alternate. However, with this punctuation, the meaning of the resulting sentence becomes almost impossible to understand. It is difficult to make sense of everything that came to be in him (as if there were other things not coming to be in him) is life. Yet, in the larger context, the essential point is that the Word is the source of life (in him was life) and that he gives the power to become children of God to those who believe in him.

Schnackenburg (Gospel 1:239-40) concludes that both possibilities are equally awkward from the point of view of good Greek. Schnackenburg himself argues that not only does the second make better sense, but it is to be preferred on the basis of the remainder of Johannine theology (e.g., 5:26; 8:12, etc.). This view has now been adopted by scholars such as Barrett and Carson.

While I am reluctant, for reasons that will be given in the Interpretation, to interpret details of the Prologue in the light of the remainder of the Gospel, I would nevertheless consider the awkwardness of the first alternative to be decisive. The second alternative (that life was in it, i.e., in the Word) is the only one that makes good sense.

V. 4 In him was life Even with the period at the end of v. 3, the meaning still is not completely clear and one wonders if in fact it is due to a lapse of logic within the hymn itself. Verse 4 begins by saying that life is in the Word. Thus, the hymn distinguishes between him (i.e., the Word) and life. Here it is not said that Jesus is the life (as will be said later in 11:25) but that the life was in him. But then immediately it is said that this life is the light. This becomes problematic because in what follows (in both the original hymn and in the final form of the Prologue) it is clear that the Word is the light. There would appear to be no way to solve this by grammar alone. Most scholars deal with it by pointing to statements later in the Gospel in which Jesus is equated with life (i.e., 11:25 cited above) and light (e.g., 8:12). While this solves the problem in the context of the Gospel, it does not truly solve the grammar of v. 4.

The general meaning of the statement would seem to be that the Word is the source of life. But is this life intended to be understood in terms of the life that comes from creation or in terms of the life that makes it possible to be a child of God? Because the remainder of the hymn speaks of the acceptance or rejection of something offered after creation, it seems more likely that life here is intended to refer to the offer of that special life that is eternal.

V. 5 The light shines Although there is widespread attestation of life and light in the Old Testament, the terms also appear in other literature of the time. For example, Odes Sol. 18:6 (Let light not be conquered by darkness). A particularly close parallel to this imagery appears in Wisdom 7:30 ("… when compared with light [Wisdom] is judged superior, for light is replaced by the night but evil does not overpower Wisdom). The LXX has ou katischyei, (does not overpower), a verb whose meaning is clearer than ou katelaben. See also Acts Thom. 130. Recently R. Bauckham (Qumran, 105-15) has argued, as part of a larger argument about the dualism of the Gospel, that the images of light and darkness do not reflect the dualistic categories of apocalyptic but the traditional categories of the Jewish Scriptures (cf. Qumran, esp. 107). However, while Bauckham’s conclusions show that the Gospel as a whole does not reflect the dualism of the SDQ, it is precisely in assuming that the entire Gospel should reflect these categories that the error appears.

the darkness did not overcome it. (Gk: ou katelaben) The word overcome is ambiguous and can mean either to seize and therefore to overcome (i.e., to conquer by force), or it can mean to seize with the mind and therefore to understand. The verb appears also (with skotia) in 12:35, where the notion of conquering is intended. But, while that tells us the meaning intended by the third author, it does not give us the precise meaning in the original hymn. Within the context of did not know (v. 10) and did not accept (v. 11), it would seem that the notion of conflict is less intended than that of recognition and understanding. If it is read in the light of Wisdom 7:27-29, the notion of conflict is predominant. (See also Note above.)

Some scholars would understand this shining of the light in darkness to refer (in the context of Genesis) to the first sin and the fall of mankind. Others would see it in terms of the incarnation. I am inclined to accept the latter. This is the first of a variety of ways in which the hymn describes the result of the appearance of the Word: being in the world but not known by the world, coming into his own but not being accepted, the Word becoming flesh.

V. 6 A man came to be The verb here is egeneto, the verb used of creation. John is not referred to as a man (anēr) but as a person (anthrōpos).

sent from God John’s mission is described in the same way as Jesus’, i.e., he was sent from God.

V. 7 witness (Gk: martyreō) Although this verb is used in a general sense of stating emphatically (4:44; 13:21) or reporting (4:39), the predominant use is in its narrower sense of bearing testimony about. In this sense, it appears 23 times in the Gospel (1:7, 8, 15, 32, 34; 3:11, 26; 5:31, 32, 33, 36, 37, 39; 8:13, 14, 18 [twice]; 10:25; 12:17; 15:26, 27; 19:35; 21:24). It is a central concept of the Gospel and the Letters. It has an almost technical meaning that is contrasted with teaching. Thus, the believer is taught by God, by Jesus and/or by the Spirit, but is not taught by humans. The proper duty of humans is to witness.

Yet Jesus himself witnesses to what he has heard and seen (3:32); about the world (7:7); about himself (8:18); to the truth (18:37). So also the Father witnesses to Jesus (5:32 [twice], 37) as do the Paraclete (15:26), the disciples (15:27) and among them especially the Beloved Disciple (BD) (19:35; 21:24).

Jesus is said not to have need of others to bear witness (2:25), yet he affirms that they do (3:28); and he challenges his accusers at the trial to bear witness if he has spoken in a way worthy of accusation (18:23).

The noun form (martyria) appears fourteen times in the same pattern. It refers to witness to Jesus (1:7, 19; 3:11; 5:32; 19:35; 21:24) but also to the witness of Jesus (3:32, 33; 5:31). He says that he does not accept witness of humans (5:34, 36) and that he does (8:14) and does not (8:13) witness to himself. The witness of the BD is affirmed as true (19:35; 21:24).

In 1 John, although the term appears less frequently, it is still an important concept. It appears in 1:2; 4:14 (in both instances it is joined to the verb of seeing) so that the witnessing is linked to the experience of physical sight. In 5:6, the Spirit is said to witness; in 5:10, God is said to witness. The water and blood are also said to witness (5:7, 9). There is also reference to human witness in 3 John 3, 6, 12 (twice).

that all might believe through him This is the first occurrence of the verb believe in the Gospel. It describes one of the primary goals of the Johannine Gospel, as expressed in the first conclusion to the Gospel (20:31): [S]o that you may believe… that believing you may have life in his name. The development of its meaning within the Johannine tradition is explored in depth in Part 4, Section 2 of Volume 1.

V. 9 coming Grammatically this word could modify either light or person. Opinion has been divided but most modern commentators take it as referring to the light coming into the world. It will be suggested below that this verse is one of those inserted into the hymn when the hymn was prefaced to the Gospel and that the author was intimately familiar with the thought of 1 John and the third edition. Because of this, it seems appropriate to interpret the verse in the light of material of the third edition elsewhere in the Gospel. Since the same expression occurs in 3:19 and 12:46 (both from the third edition) and since it is clear in both of those cases that coming modifies light, this is likely to be the case here also.

into the world World appears 78 times in the Gospel of John and its use is complex. In a number of instances, it has a neutral (or positive) sense but also a negative sense as that which does not accept or recognize God/Jesus. It is clear from its use in the Prologue that within Johannine theology in the widest sense (i.e., including the theology of the hymn), the two aspects constitute a paradoxical relationship and are not the result of two editions.

In v. 10, we hear that the world was created through the Word but the world did not know him. The world is also the object of God’s love (3:16) and of Jesus’ ministry (3:17; 6:51). But Jesus was in the world and had come into the world (1:9, 10; 3:17, 19; 9:39; 10:36; 11:27; 12:46; 16:28 [cf. 17:11]; 17:16, 18 [cf. 18:36]; 18:37).

In addition to these uses, there is another that reflects the categories of apocalyptic dualism. Thus, Jesus is not of the world (8:23; 17:14). As we shall see later, this is also true of the disciples. They were also in the world (13:1; 17:11, 18) but not of the world (15:19; 17:6, 14, 16). On the other hand, the Jews were of the world (8:23).

The term is also used frequently in 1 John. For a discussion of that usage, see the Note on 1 John 2:2.

V. 10 He Previously, the light (phōs), which is neuter gender in Greek, had not been identified as masculine. Therefore, it could be translated it. However, at the end of v. 10 the masculine accusative (auton) appears, indicating that the author intended for the light to be understood here personally as him rather than impersonally as it. The English requires the pronoun’s presence here at the beginning of the sentence.

V. 11 his own In the immediate context of the hymn, these words could well apply to those who were his own because they were created through him (cf. v. 10). For a contemporary Jew, his own could also be understood to refer to Israel, which had been chosen to be Yahweh’s own.

V. 12 he gave to them In the Gospel, the verb give is used in a number of theologically important ways. Here, I will discuss briefly those instances that speak of what Jesus gives to the believer. In the Note on 3:16, I will discuss what the Father gives to the world and to the believer. In the Note on 3:27, I will discuss what the Father gives to Jesus. In the Note on 6:37, I will discuss the notion of believers being given by the Father. In the Note on 6:70, I will discuss the related concept of the believers being chosen by Jesus. Not all of these are equally significant but a review of each will aid in understanding them all.

The texts that speak of what Jesus will give to the believer come from both the second and third editions. Although they differ in significant ways, they do agree that Jesus gives eternal life. In the second edition (4:10, 14), Jesus promises the Spirit under the symbolism of living water. Also, in the second edition, Jesus is said to give eternal life (6:33; 10:28; 17:2) and the glory that the Father gave Jesus (17:22). However, in the third edition, Jesus (identified as the Son of Man) is said to give life through the gift of his flesh (6:27, 51).

In 1 John, there is only one passage in which Jesus is said to give something to the believer. However, it is particularly significant in that it contains the concluding confession of the Letter. In 1 John 5:20, it is said that Jesus has given the believer the understanding (dianoia) so that the believer might know the True One, and the believer is in the True One and in his son Jesus Christ. This is the True God and eternal life. Thus, Jesus has given the believer the means of knowing God and of having eternal life.

power (Gk: exousia) This is the only time in the Johannine tradition that the believer is said to have the power to become a child of God. Elsewhere, the word refers to power given to Jesus (5:27; 10:18; 17:2) or the authority of Pilate (19:10, 11). In the Johannine tradition, becoming a child of God is said to come about through birth from the Spirit (John 3:5) or from God (1 John 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18).

children of God Teknon appears three times in the Gospel (1:12; 8:39; 11:52). Of these, only the first and the last speak of children of God; the other refers to children of Abraham. The diminutive (teknion) appears in the Gospel only in 13:33.

In 1 John, teknon refers only to children of God (3:1, 2, 10; 5:2 [twice]) and the diminutive (teknion) is used to refer to the members of the author’s own community (cf. 1 John 2:1, 12, 28; 3:18; 4:4; 5:21). However, in 2 and 3 John the author uses teknon to refer to the members of the community of the Elect Lady (2 John 1, 4, 13) and to the members of the community to which Gaius belongs (3 John 4). The related word paidion (child, servant) appears in John 4:49; 16:21, referring to natural children, and in direct address to the disciples in 21:5. In 1 John, it is always used in direct address to the members of the community (2:14, 18). The Johannine literature never refers to the believer as a son (huios) of God but applies this term only to Jesus.

Although the phrase children of God does not appear in the OT, the concept, and in some cases, the exact phrase appears regularly in later Jewish literature including that of the rabbinic period. The phrase appears regularly in Paul but not in the Synoptics. Paul also uses huioi tou theou (sons of God) to refer to believers but always in the plural. See Culpepper (Pivot, 17-30) who gives a detailed discussion of the background of the phrase.

believing in his name The general usage of believe has been addressed in the Note on v. 7. This Note will address two additional aspects of this phrase.

First, it is important to notice the variations in the phrase in the name of. In the present verse, the Greek preposition translated by the English in is eis followed by the accusative. This appears also in 2:23 and 3:18. However, in the name of is also a rendering of the Greek preposition en followed by the dative. Both prepositions occur with name in the Gospel (see the discussion of in the name of in the dative at 5:43) but eis to onoma appears only with believe.

Although various shades of meaning have been suggested for the preposition with the accusative (e.g., in connection with Baptism, where the accusative phrase appears, or as a symbol for the person as in Semitic usage, or as a mark of ownership as in a master/slave relationship), it is most likely that no distinction is intended.

Second, what is the meaning of the phrase? To do something in the name of someone means to invoke that person’s authority as a reference point, or authorization, for the action being performed. Thus, Jesus has come and has performed his works in the name of his Father (e.g., 5:43; 10:25), which is to say that Jesus attributes the authority for what he does to God the Father. In his prayer to the Father, Jesus speaks of guarding the disciples in your name (17:12). It is possible for someone to come in his own name (5:43) and in that case the individual invokes only his own personal authority for his actions. When one believes in the name of Jesus, the person declares that his belief in God is conditioned by or formed by the teaching of Jesus regarding God (1:12; 2:23; 3:18; 20:31). Ultimately belief was directed to God the Father, but the Johannine belief was in the name of Jesus. In the Farewell Discourses, Jesus tells the disciples to make their petitions in my name (14:13, 14; 15:16; 16:23, 24, 26). The Father will send the Paraclete in my name (14:26). The Father will protect the disciples in his own name (17:11).

In 1 John, the author states that the believer’s sins are forgiven through his name (2:12) and believers are to believe in the name of his son, Jesus Christ (3:23; 5:13).

The name also appears in the quotation of Ps 118:25-26 in 12:13, where it refers to the king of Israel coming in the name of the Lord.

The word name has two other uses of importance within the Johannine literature. In the Farewell Discourses, Jesus says that he has revealed the name of the Father to the disciples (17:6, 26). In 3 John 7, the Elder refers to those who have begun missionary travels for the Name. Neither of these is directly relevant to the instance in 1:12.

V. 13 flesh See v. 14.

not from blood This is the first of three phrases that are functionally synonymous. The point in all of them is to emphasize that the believer’s birth is not from human initiative but from that of God.

Blood is meant to symbolize the human dimension of birth. In 6:51-58, it will be used in a quite different sense with flesh and will refer to Jesus in the sacramental form of flesh and blood. In 19:34, it will refer to the physical death of Jesus, insofar as it has a salvific, atoning value to it.

born… from God That the believer experiences a (re)birth is an important conviction within the Johannine tradition. The concept is developed more fully in 3:3-10 (2E) and occurs repeatedly throughout 1 John. Here the emphasis is on a spiritual birth and the emphasis is achieved by a denial of any human involvement (blood, will of the flesh, will of a man) in the process.

However, only here in the Gospel is this birth said to be from God. In chapter 3, it is said to be from the Spirit (3:5, 6, 8) or from above (3:3, 7). In 1 John, this birth is exclusively said to be from God (3:9 [twice]; 4:7; 5:1 [twice], 4, 18 [twice]). This is one indication of the affinity of the Prologue to 1 John.

V. 14 flesh (Gk: sarx) The word does not occur with great frequency in the Johannine writings but it is of considerable significance theologically. Our interest here is in its use in the Gospel of John. It occurs in 1:13, 14; 3:6 [twice]; 6:51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 63; 8:15; 17:2. It is used as a way of referring to the realm of the human but with three different connotations. In 1:13 and 17:2, it is used in a neutral way as a synonym for humanity (i.e., 1:13 = birth from human intention; 17:2 = Jesus has power to give eternal life to any human person). These occur in the third edition.

In 3:6; 6:63; and 8:15, it is used in a pejorative sense to contrast the realm of the (merely) human with the realm of the Spirit. (There is a contrast between birth from human intention and birth from God in 1:13 but the flesh as such is not devalued.) The author of the second edition uses it in this sense and the clearest example is 6:63: The Spirit is what gives life; the flesh is useless.

The remaining instances refer to the flesh of Jesus (1:14; 6:51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56) and do so in a positive way. The instances of chapter 6 indicate that the believer must eat the flesh of Jesus in order to have eternal life. These also come from the third edition.

Coming now to the statement in 1:14, we see that this verse affirms that the eternal Word became human. The Prologue was prefaced to the Gospel by an author familiar with the final edition of the Gospel. It is a major tool for presenting at the beginning of the Gospel his theological perspective on the whole of Jesus’ ministry. Since the exact meaning of the Johannine tradition was being controverted at the time of the third edition, in the Prologue we are immediately exposed to a number of convictions that are of considerable significance for the third author’s perspective. The concept of the flesh of Jesus is one of these.

In the second edition, the statement that the flesh is of no value is intended to affirm the importance of the possession of the Spirit and that human actions without the Spirit are useless. However, this emphasis on the importance of the Spirit raised the possibility that some would understand that the fleshly (earthly) actions of both Jesus and of the believer were not important.

In 1 John and the third edition, there is an emphasis on the importance of the fleshly actions of both: i.e., that the fleshly actions of Jesus are significant for salvation seems intended to balance and correct the possibility of misinterpretation.

Among the fleshly actions of Jesus stressed by the third author and by the author of 1 John, the most important is Jesus’ death for sins. In the Gospel, this is expressed by the description of Jesus as the Lamb of God, the one taking away the world’s sin (1:29); my flesh for the life of the world (6:51); … I lay down my life for the sheep (10:15); … but since he was high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was about to die for the nation … (11:51); No one has greater love than this, that a person lay down his life for his friends (15:13). In the Letters of John, it is expressed by a variety of phrases but most significantly by the affirmation of Jesus as having come in the flesh (1 John 4:2; 2 John 7). For the significance of the flesh in the Letters, see at 1 John 2:16.

and dwelled with us The word translated dwelled is based on the Greek word for tent (skēnē). It echoes Sir 24:8 where Wisdom is ordered to pitch her tent in Jacob (see also 1 En. 42:1; Bar 3:38). But Yahweh himself was often said to dwell among the people (e.g., Num 35:34; 1 Kings 6:13) and the glory of the Lord was said to be present in the Tent of Meeting (Exod 40:34), and this may be the basis of the mention of the glory of the Word in what follows.

glory One’s glory can be said to be one’s identity and reality as made manifest or perceptible. This glory as applied to Jesus is to be understood against the background of the Old Testament where it is understood as God’s visible manifestation to humans (Num 16:19, 42; Ps 102:16; Ezek 10:4). The appropriate human response is to give glory to God (Pss 22:23; 29:2; 86:9; Isa 66:5). In the Gospel, to see the glory of Jesus is to see the real Jesus and to believe appropriately.

To reveal the glory of Jesus is the purpose of the miracles (2:11; 11:4). Failure to see the glory of Jesus in a miracle results in inadequate belief. The disciples saw Jesus’ glory (2:11) but their perception needed further deepening (17:24). Isaiah could be said to have seen his glory because what he wrote of Jesus was true (12:38-41).

Jesus has his own glory, which he has had from before the beginning of the world (17:5, 24), yet throughout his ministry he does not seek his own glory (8:50, 54) nor a glory on a purely human level (5:41), but only the glory of God (11:4, 40), that is, a glory to be rendered to God (7:18).

Jesus was glorified by his public ministry (11:4; 12:28; 13:31); he is also glorified by the Passion (12:28; 13:32). Thus, his glory is revealed in both power and in suffering. In 17:22, it is said that Jesus gave his glory to the disciples.

During his ministry he revealed his glory but in 17:24 Jesus prays that the disciples may also see the further dimension of his glory as one preexistent and loved before the beginning of the world. In the present verse, a recognition of Jesus’ glory is said to include a recognition of the uniqueness of his sonship.

Although the Word had been made manifest to all, the world did not receive it, and so now it is (only) the we of the community that speaks of recognizing the glory of the Word.

unique This term is often (but incorrectly) translated only begotten. The Greek term monogenēs means one (monos) of a kind (genos), that is, unique. Although the term is related to the verb gennaō, etymology does not help in a correct understanding. This was convincingly argued by D. Moody ( ‘God’s Only Son’ ) who gave extensive evidence from lexicons and discussions of etymology as well as tracing the history of the use of unicus and unigenitus as translations of the Greek. For a recent attempt to argue for the earlier understanding, as well as for additional bibliography, see J. Dahms, Monogenēs and M. Theobald, Fleischwerdung. The most recent argument for the majority view is that of G. Pendrick, Monogenēs.

In the LXX, monogenēs is used to translate yāḥîd, only, beloved. Wisdom 7:22 (LXX) applies it in the sense of unique to Wisdom. In the earliest Latin translations (i.e., the Old Latin) it is translated unicus but Jerome translated it as unigenitus (but only in places where it refers to Jesus) possibly to counter the Arian heresy that Jesus was not begotten but made.

The term has a specific polemical meaning in 1 John and in the third edition of the Gospel. Confessing that Jesus is monogenēs affirms that the sonship of Jesus is unique and is not to be confused with the status of believers who are said to be born of God and to be children of God, terminology that could be (and evidently was) seen by some in the community as blurring the distinction between the status of Jesus and that of the believer. (See 3E-39. See also the discussion of Christology and anthropology in Vol. 1, Part 4, Section 1.3 and Section 9.3 and Vol. 3, Appendix 4 [The Crisis That Divided the Johannine Community.])

full of grace and truth Grace (Gk: charis) appears only here and in vv. 16, 17 within the Gospel. Elsewhere in the Johannine tradition, it appears only in the wish for blessings in 2 John 3. In that text, it functions as part of a stereotyped greeting formula (see at 2 John 3). Whether it had a special meaning for the readers of the hymn cannot be determined from the rest of the Johannine tradition and so we must presume that the readers understood it in its ordinary sense of graciousness.

Truth (Gk: alētheia) appears for the first time in the Gospel. The term is used more frequently in the Johannine writings than in any other New Testament writing. The noun appears twenty-five times in the Gospel (1:14, 17; 3:21; 4:23, 24; 5:33; 8:32 [twice], 40, 44 [twice], 45, 46; 14:6, 17; 15:26; 16:7, 13 [twice]; 17:17 [twice], 19; 18:37 [twice], 38); nine times in 1 John (1:6, 8; 2:4, 21 [twice]; 3:18, 19; 4:6; 5:6); five times in 2 John (1 [twice], 2, 3, 4); and six times in 3 John (1, 3, [twice], 4, 8, 12).

The adjective appears in two Greek forms: alēthēs and alēthinos. Alēthēs appears in John 3:33; 4:18; 5:31, 32; 6:55 (twice); 7:18; 8:13, 14, 17, 26; 10:41, 19:35; 21:24; 1 John 2:8, 27; 3 John 12. Alēthinos appears in John 1:9; 4:23, 37; 6:32; 7:28; 8:16; 15:1; 17:3; 19:35; 1 John 2:8; 5:20 (three times). The most extensive treatment of the theme of truth in the Johannine writings is that of de la Potterie, Vérité.

In the Gospel, God is true (3:33; 7:28; 8:26; 17:3) and his witness is true (5:32); his word is true (17:17). The witness of the Baptist is true (5:33; 10:41). Jesus is the truth (14:6); he is full of truth (John 1:14); he speaks the truth (8:40, 45; 16:7); he is the true light (1:9), the true bread (6:32), the true vine (15:1); his judgment is true (8:16) and bears witness to the truth (18:37) although the truth of his witness is challenged (8:13). The Spirit is the Spirit of Truth (14:17; 15:26; 16:13) and the witness of the BD is true (19:35) and is recognized to be true by the community (21:24). Jesus asks the Father to consecrate the disciples in truth (17:17). But there is no truth in Satan (8:44 [twice]); unbelievers do not know the truth (8:45); Pilate does not know the truth (18:38).

In the Letters, the followers of the author know the truth (1 John 2:21; 2 John 1); they are of the truth (1 John 3:19) but the opponents are not (1 John 2:21); believers walk in truth (2 John 4; 3 John 3, 4), but there is no truth in the opponents (implicit in 1 John 1:6, 8; 2:4).

The Johannine conception is built on the conviction that God himself is true, and what he has revealed through Jesus and what has been witnessed to by John the Baptist and by the BD is true. Believers will accept that truth, but those who follow Satan will not.

Here in the Prologue, the combination of grace and truth may well reflect not two distinct concepts but rather hendiadys (the expression of one idea by means of two words), i.e., gracious truth. The combination appears again in v. 17, where it is used to characterize that which is given to humanity through Jesus and where it contrasts with the Law that was given through Moses. This phrase is unique to the Prologue and we must suggest a general meaning in the light of our understanding of the Johannine tradition as a whole (see Interpretation).

V. 15 this is the one See at 1:30.

ranks above me The Greek expression is somewhat unusual but nevertheless good Greek (see BDAG 893).

he existed before me. The notion of preexistence affirms that the birth of Jesus into this world was not the beginning of his existence. John 1:1 affirms that the Word had existed even at the beginning of time. The association of this conviction with Jesus does not appear in the first two periods in the development of Johannine theology. It first appears, in somewhat different formulations, in 1 John (see at 1 John 1:2) where it is one of the features characteristic of the sonship of Jesus. It also appears in the third edition of the Gospel and in the Prologue. It had not yet reached articulation in the earlier stages of the written tradition. (For a full discussion see Vol. 1, Part 4, Section 1.4.3.)

V. 16 Because The Greek word hoti can mean either that or because. In the current text, it begins a sentence and makes little sense in this position. However, if v. 15 was not part of the original hymn (see Composition), the term follows immediately upon v. 14 and makes good sense as an explanation of how it is that the community is able to see the glory of the unique son.

fullness (Gk: plērōma) This term appears only here in the Johannine tradition. Because of the popularity of this term in Gnostic writings, its appearance here has been a prominent factor in suggesting to commentators that the Prologue is Gnostic. However, the term may simply be intended as the noun form of full that appeared in v. 14. It is intended to reflect the conviction that the qualities that Jesus possessed were possessed completely rather than in a limited sense.

indeed The Greek has and (kai) before the word grace. It is not intended to join the two parts but to identify the second as a specification of the first.

grace upon grace There is considerable disagreement about the meaning of this phrase and what it refers to. The word translated upon is anti. This particle typically means instead of, in place of. Here the idea is that more and more grace is given and so is translated upon. Barrett (Gospel 168-69), referring to Philo Post. 145, suggests that the idea is that one grace replaces the other as the circumstances require it. But not all would agree with this interpretation (e.g., Carson, Gospel 131-32). There are those who suggest that it refers to the epoch of Christ replacing that of the Law. But in v. 17 the two epochs are contrasted rather than seen as one building upon another. And there is no real Johannine evidence for speaking of the Law as a prior grace. Others would see it as referring to the grace that comes through Jesus being followed by the grace that comes through the Spirit. This is possible if it is understood in the light of the remainder of the Gospel. But there is nothing in the hymn that would prepare for this.

In v. 14, it was said that the Word was full of grace and truth. In the light of that, it would seem that the best contextual meaning is that grace upon grace (i.e., grace in its fullness) is what is given. Again it must be remembered that the difficulty of interpreting such phrases is due to the fact that the vocabulary and usage are unique to the Prologue.

V. 17 grace and truth As was said above, this phrase, which appears only in the Prologue, is used to summarize that which is given through Jesus.

Jesus Christ This designation appears as a single title only here and in 17:3 within the Gospel. In 20:31 (the first ending of the Gospel), the confession specifically links the two elements but not in a single title. For its appearance in 1 John, see 3E-23.

The name Jesus (Aram: Yeshu from Heb. Yēšûa‘, which was in turn a shortened form of the still earlier Yĕhôšû‘a, the name transcribed as Joshua, means Yahweh helps or May Yahweh help and was a common given name in first-century Judaism and into the second century. J. P. Meier speculates (Marginal 1:205-7) that, because the name was so associated with Christians, it fell out of use among Jews.

The title Christ is from the Greek Christos, a translation of the Hebrew māshîaḥ (messiah) and has the literal meaning: anointed. In the Old Testament, the verb occurs sixty-nine times, but only thirty-nine times in the noun form (statistics are from J. Fitzmyer, Messianism 76-77). Its basic denotation is that…a historical ruler is or was an anointed agent of God designated for the guidance, governance, or deliverance of His people (Fitzmyer, Messianism 76). In the Old Testament, primarily the king (e.g., 1 Sam 16:13), but at times the priest (e.g., Lev 4:3, 5) and later the prophets, were anointed as part of their installation ceremony. This anointing was seen to confer the Spirit of Yahweh upon these individuals in a special way. Later, it was thought that a figure anointed and sent by God would figure in the establishing of the new age.

Although there are various forms of expectation for the continuation of the Davidic line in post-Exilic Judaism, the messiah, as applied to a figure of future expectation, appears for the first time in Dan 9:25-26. Psalms of Solomon 17-18 express the hope for an anointed Davidic king who would be sent by God. As M. de Jonge has commented (Stranger 77-116), where messiah does appear, its meaning is to be derived more from the context in which it is used rather than from a previously-set conception.

Fitzmyer argues (Messianism 104-105) that the use of the term in the SDQ indicates a development beyond that of the Jewish Scriptures. In these documents, it is used of the prophets; it is used of a hoped-for figure sent by God; and it stands alongside other titles for such figures. In 1QS 9:11, the author speaks of an expectation of two messiahs, one priestly and one kingly. Thus, the use of the title for a figure of future expectation is not a Christian invention.

However, in Christianity, it rapidly became the preeminent title given to Jesus and was associated with other titles and functions (Lord, cf. Acts 2:36; Savior, cf. Luke 2:11; Son of God, cf. John 20:31; his suffering, cf. Luke 24:26, 46; his return at the Parousia, cf. 1 Thess 4:16-17). Thus, the most common confession was of Jesus (as the) Christ.

Although it almost certainly was meant as a traditional title in the earliest version of the Gospel, such a title was able to be interpreted by the authors of later editions in the greater sense in which they understood the term and so together with Son of God becomes a title that is found in all three editions of the Gospel (see also at v. 49). Because it was so widely applied to Jesus, as the understanding of the identity of Jesus developed, the meaning of Christos also changed. Thus, it is clear from the Johannine Gospel that at times it is understood in a way that is compatible with traditional Jewish expectations (low Christology) while at other times it was used to refer to Jesus in his divinity (high Christology).

It is also significant that, within the Johannine tradition, the believer is also said to have an anointing (e.g., 1 John 2:20, 27 [twice]). This is unique to the Johannine tradition.

V. 18 No one has ever seen God This is affirmed several times in the Gospel (1:18; 3:13, 31; 5:37; 6:46). In Deut 4:11-15, it is said that even Moses on Sinai did not see the face of God. In John 5:37, it is also affirmed that no one had heard God’s voice.

Jesus is set apart from everyone else by the fact that he has seen the Father (6:46; implicit in 3:11) and heard the Father (3:32; 8:38; 12:50, implicit in 5:37) and so speaks what he has seen and heard (3:11, 32; 8:38).

In 12:27-30 the voice of the Father is said to come in the presence of the crowd, who do not understand it and think it is either thunder or the voice of an angel.

the unique Son The UBS and Nestle texts prefer the unique God. Textual attestation is strongest for theos (P⁶⁶ א*B C*L syhmg; geo², Orgpt Did [P⁷⁵ and א² and others insert the article before monogenēs]). This, in addition to the general principle that the more difficult reading is to be preferred, has led the editors to prefer that reading. However, B. Ehrmann (Corruption 78-82) has recently argued persuasively that huios (A C³ θ ψ f¹.¹³ M) is to be preferred. Ehrmann notes that theos is confined to the Alexandrian tradition and that the discovery of P⁶⁶ and P⁷⁵ (of Alexandrian origin) simply confirm earlier suspicions that this reading was a favorite there. Elsewhere in the Gospel huios always appears with monogenēs. The notion of unique God (monogenēs theos) so close to the mention of the Father as God is so difficult as to be meaningless. Ehrmann thus argues that theos is in fact an orthodox corruption of the text, i.e., that it was meant to affirm the divinity of Jesus in the face of attempts to subordinate Jesus to the Father.

the bosom The description of the Son as being in the bosom of the Father is intended to connote intimacy. A similar expression describes the position of the Beloved Disciple (i.e., the disciple whom Jesus loved) in relation to Jesus at the Last Supper (13:23). Some commentators would see the verbal similarity as intended to reflect this text. This is possible. In Luke 16:22-23, Lazarus is said to be in the bosom of Abraham.

has made him known (Gk: exēgeomai) This is another of the terms unique to the Prologue. It affirms that Jesus is the one who has revealed God. This notion (but expressed in different terms) appears again and again in the Gospel, e.g., (T)he one seeing me sees the one who sent me (12:45); If you have known me, you will also know my Father (14:7); The one who has seen me has seen the Father (14:9); I have revealed your name … (17:6, 26).

THE COMPOSITION OF 1:1-18

The Prologue of the Gospel is certainly the worst place to begin in order to understand the composition of the Gospel as a whole. The foundational material of the Prologue is not the work of any of the three authors involved in the composition of the remainder of the Gospel. It is a hymnic composition modified in places and prefaced to the Gospel.¹ As a result, from a methodological point of view, it is best treated by itself, as a unique composition and literarily independent of the remainder of the Gospel.

Two distinct tasks confront the one who would understand the composition of the Prologue. First, it is necessary to distinguish as clearly as possible the original form of the Prologue from the later editing and then, second, to attempt to identify the added material with one or another edition of the Gospel.

Most scholars have noticed a number of distinctive literary features that set the Prologue apart from what follows it. As was mentioned above, these features indicate that the Prologue is based on material that originally formed a hymn used by the community.² Three types of features suggest this: (1) the individual clauses are quite short; (2) the clauses contain a rhythmic parallelism; (3) there is a repeated use of catchword connection (also called chaining or staircase parallelism) whereby a concept or term that is introduced in one clause is carried over to the next and serves as a catchword that links or chains the clauses together. At the same time, the second clause introduces a new concept that is first developed and then serves in turn as a link with the following clause.³

At the same time, as we shall see, a number of features associate the Prologue as a whole with the theology of the third edition of the Gospel — and with 1 John. But, precisely because both the original hymn and the later editing reflect similar points of view, it is difficult to be sure in every case that one has identified which parts belong to the original hymn and which are editorial additions.⁴ This is complicated by the fact that the parallelism does not always follow either the somewhat looser norms of Hebrew poetry or the more strict canons of Greek poetry.

That neither the original hymn nor the additions to it were composed by the author of the third edition is suggested by the large number of theologically significant words that appear in the hymn: logos (Word, used as a title for Jesus) v. 1 (3 times), 14; exousia (power)⁵ v. 12; eskēnōsen (tented, dwelled) v. 14; plērōma (fullness) v. 16; charin anti charitos (grace before grace) v. 16; and in the additions to it: phōtizei (shine upon) v. 9; ex haimatōn (of blood) v. 13; ek thelēmatos sarkos (from the will of the flesh) v. 13; ek thelēmatos andros (from the will of man) v. 13; plērēs (full) v. 14; charis (grace) v. 14; kolpos (bosom) v. 18; exēgēsato (made known) v. 18, but nowhere else in the Gospel.⁶

Yet, in spite of the problems connected with the understanding of the Prologue, it should be said that there is also considerable agreement among scholars about what constitutes the original hymn. In the following analysis, I will present my own proposal regarding the extent of the original hymn and the editorial additions, a view that is not radically different from the more common views today.⁷

Vv. 1-2 (H) Verses 1 and 2 contain an extended chiasm together with a catchword linkage and come from the original hymn. The chiasm can be diagrammed as follows:

1 In the beginning

was

the Word and

the Word

was

with God and

(God)⁸

was

the Word.

2 This one

was

in the beginning (with God).

In addition to this chiastic arrangement, the verses exhibit a neat parallelism and catchword connection. Verse 1 begins with two short clauses, parallel with one another and linked by the term Word. The second of these clauses is linked to the next clause by the word God and ends by returning to the mention of the Word. Verse 2 is linked with the last clause of v. 1 by the word God and reintroduces the word beginning, which completes the chiasm. However, there is no direct catchword connection to the next verse. This suggests that the first strophe ends here. When the context of vv. 1-2 is reviewed and compared with what follows, we see that the theme in vv. 1-2 is the Word in relation to time and in relation to God.⁹

Vv. 3-5 (H) The following three verses also belong to the original hymn as is indicated by the parallelism of clauses, by the series of significant contrasts and by catchwords. With v. 3, the topic turns to that of the relation of the Word to creation. In v. 3, we see another brief chiasm as well as parallelism. The chiasm can be diagrammed as follows:

3 All things

(through him) //came to be

and

without him // came to be

not one thing that has come to be.

In addition to this chiastic arrangement there are an obvious parallelism and contrast between the description of creation through him and without him.

Verse 4 contains yet another minor chiasm:

4 In him

was life

and

the life was

the light of all people.

This chiasm describes both the source and the effect of the life. Moreover, it is another example of the catchword connection that introduces the theme of life that, in turn, links the first part of v. 4 to the second part. The second part, in turn, introduces the theme of light.¹⁰

Verse 5 exhibits a close parallelism in the Greek:

5 And the light//(in the darkness)//shines;

and the darkness//(it)//did not overcome.

The verse takes up the theme of light from the previous verse and describes the activity of the light in relation to the darkness and then explains in neat parallelism that the darkness did not prevail against it. Again the use of catchwords is evident. The second strophe probably ends here.

Vv. 6-9 (Addition) In vv. 6-8, we notice a marked absence of the rhythm that has been present up to this point.¹¹ In addition, the material interrupts the flow of the surrounding material and switches from the abstract language of the hymn to specific historical events.¹² John the Baptist is mentioned only here and in v. 15, and in both cases the material interrupts the flow of the hymn. Yet, at the same time, it serves to tie the Prologue to the material concerning John the Baptist that will follow in 1:19.

It is more difficult to determine whether v. 9 is part of the original hymn. Many scholars think that it is part of the addition in vv. 6-8 and designed as a transition back to the material of the hymn.¹³ The verse is an awkward sequel to v. 5, and its temporal stance (i.e. the light is coming) is fully understandable only in the context of vv. 7-8 where the relation of the light to John is presented.

Vv. 10-12 (H) According to the survey by Rochais, v. 10 is unanimously accepted by scholars as part of the original hymn.

10 (in the world) he was and

the world//(through him)//came to be

and the world//(him)//did not know.

The verse is composed of the short rhythmic clauses arranged in parallel. This is typical of the hymn and describes the advent of the Word into the world and its ignorance of him.

Verses 11 and 12 restate the theme of v. 10 but do so in more concrete terms, expressing the extraordinary possibility of becoming children of God. The parallelism of the verses is obvious.

11 (into his own) He came

and his own (him) did not accept.

12 But as many as did accept him

he gave to them power (children of God) to become.

Verse 11 contains two short clauses and is one of the clearer examples of poetic parallelism within the Prologue. Verse 12 is linked to v. 11 by the theme of receiving (elabon) and explains the benefit that accrues to the believer. Both parts of this verse are also rhythmical.

Verse 12c is quite awkward due to the clumsy appendage of the phrase to those believing in his name. Although many would consider it an addition, I am inclined to think not. It can be noticed that throughout the previous parts of the hymn, there have been what might be called appendages at the end of units. There have been three examples up to this point (before God at the end of v. 2; that which came to be at the end of v. 3; and of men in v. 4). This same feature will be apparent also at the end of v. 14 in the appended full of grace and truth. While they appear awkward, the consistency of their appearance suggests they are deliberate features. This probably marks the end of the third strophe.

V. 13 (Addition) Verse 13 is almost universally thought to be an addition but the evidence again is not overwhelming. The vocabulary of v. 13 is quite different from that found anywhere in the remainder of the Gospel or 1 John. In content, the verse is an elaboration of v. 12b. The verse is in complete harmony with the Johannine tradition, affirming as it does that birth from God is totally different from natural birth and does not derive from any human desire or intention. I am inclined to see it as an explanatory expansion of v. 12b and not a part of the original hymn.

V. 14 (H) In v. 14, the community begins a description of its own reception of the Word. The verse is marked by two short clauses at the beginning (ending with and dwelled among us) and continues the parallelism typical of the hymn. The verse is not directly linked with what precedes it and this fact suggests that the verse constitutes the beginning of the fourth strophe.

The second part of the verse is more difficult to analyze, but there is a kind of chaining of terms throughout: glory… the glory as of a unique son… (a son) full of grace and truth. As a result, I would view the verse as an integral part of the original hymn.

V. 15 (Addition) Verse 15 interrupts this sequence with a second statement about John the Baptist, a statement that lacks the brevity, the parallelism, and the catchword-linking characteristic of the hymnic sections. Moreover, we shall see below that v. 16 resumes the sequence of v. 14 (rather than v. 15). This is a further indication that v. 15 has been added. The wording of the verse is almost exactly that of 1:30. It is difficult to think that v. 30 is modeled on v. 15. It is much more likely that the reverse is true. The theology expressed in the verse is typically Johannine as can be seen in the confession of preexistence as well as from its similarity to v. 30, which is from the third edition.

V. 16 (H) Verse 16, which begins by speaking of receiving from his fullness (plērōmatos), does not continue the thought of v. 15.¹⁴ However, with v. 15 removed, the phrase links well with the adjectival form full (plērēs) at the end of v. 14. The reference to receiving grace in v. 16 also resumes the reference to the grace that the Word, the unique Son of the Father possesses and that the believer receives. Except for the prior appearance of the term grace in v. 14, this is the only appearance of the term in the Gospel. Thus the considerable similarity of v. 16 to v. 14 indicates that v. 16 itself continues the hymn and at the same time suggests strongly that v. 15 is a later addition.

Vv. 17-18 (Addition) Verse 17 contains a contrasting parallel between the Law given through Moses and the grace and truth given through Jesus Christ. This parallelism between v. 17a and v. 17b is evident not only in the ideas expressed but also in its literary structure.

17 Because the Law//was given//through Moses;

grace and truth//came//through Jesus Christ.

This verse seems to imitate v. 16 by beginning with because (hoti). Indeed, the verse appears to be a more specific expansion of the thought of v. 16. As such it appears to be a later addition intended to articulate the thought of v. 16 but in language that is more specifically Johannine.

Verse 18 continues with the expression of ideas typical of the Gospel (and the Johannine tradition as a whole) but in language not typical of either the Gospel or the Letters. It expresses here, at the end of the Prologue, a distinct and independent idea: no one has ever seen God; the unique God, at the breast of the Father, has made him known. This verse has no verbal link to either v. 17 or to v. 16 but only to v. 14 where the Word is identified as the unique Son, a title that becomes central to v. 18’s contrast between Father and Son. The thought