Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Spotify | Email | RSS
This is the first in a series of podcasts dealing with how to interpret John 1:1-18. This famous Prologue to John’s gospel is unique in the New Testament. It is routinely read in light of Nicene-controvery-era concerns: the eternality and full deity of Christ, a multi-personal God, the pre-human Jesus as “involved in” the Genesis creation, the “incarnation” of the eternal Logos, wherein a divine nature gains a “complete human nature, rational soul and body.” Part of the interest of this passage stems from the fact that such things are not clearly taught in most of the rest of the New Testament; hence, this passage is viewed as a gold mine for trinitarian and “high christology” purposes.
But according to my guest in this new interview, Christadelphian independent scholar Dr. Andrew Perry, common interpretations of this passage are off track. In his view, yes, “the Word” is Jesus, but it is the man Jesus, not an alleged pre-human Son. And “the beginning” mentioned is the beginning of Jesus’s earthly ministry, not the time of the Genesis creation, although the author does clearly allude to the Genesis creation. In Dr. Perry’s view, Jesus is the second “God” mentioned in John 1:1, but here and in John 20:28 Jesus should be understand as the “God” over the new creation which God accomplished through him. (James 1:18)
Some have referred to this general type of interpretation of John 1 as “Socinian,” as those early modern unitarian Christians did develop and defend such interpretations. But as you’ll hear, Dr. Perry has his own take on several elements of this famous text. Among other things, he holds that there’s a reference to Jesus’s baptism here, as well as typological references to the Old Testament “Word of Yahweh” and to Abraham’s son Isaac.
Are you convinced that Dr. Perry has drawn out the author’s meaning?
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.
There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.
He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God.
And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth. (John testified to him and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.’”) From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son (or: It is an only Son, God, or It is the only Son) who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.
John 1:1-18, New Revised Standard Version
Links for this episode:
- John 1:1-18; 1 John 1:1-4; Mark 1:1; Genesis 1:1-5; 2 Corinthians 5:17; 1 Corinthians 8:6; John 20:24-29; Genesis 1:26-27; Romans 8:29; John 14:9; John 14:6; John 8:12; John 6:51; John 11:25; Philippians 2:5-11.
- Dr. Perry’s papers at Academia.edu
- “John 1: Jesus, Creator of an old creation or of a new one?”
- “Manifestation or Incarnation?”
- “Christological Monotheism: 1 Cor 8.6 and the Shema” (w/Thomas Gaston)
- Before He Was Born, 7th ed.
- podcast 258 – Who is the one Creator? – Part 1
- podcast 259 – Who is the one Creator? – Part 2
- podcast 97 – Dr. Michael Heiser on The Unseen Realm
- a reading of Philippians 2:5-11
- Racovian Catechism
- The New Testament, in An Improved Version
- This week’s thinking music is “Anoitecer (Nightfall)” by Guifrog.
So what he seems to be saying is:
In the beginning (of Jesus ministry) was the Word (of God in the person of Jesus), and the Word was with (or towards) God, and the Word was God (to us). He was in the beginning with God [this now makes sense]. All things (of the new creation) came into being through him, and without him not one (new) thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life (in the new creation), and the life was the light of all people. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.
There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.
He was in the world (of human society in 30AD), and the world came into being through him [not sure about this bit?]; yet the world did not know him (during his ministry). He came to what was his own, and his own people (of Israel) did not accept him. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God.
And the Word became flesh (rather than the word of the prophets but as a man. the man Jesus Christ) and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth (as a God to us). John testified to him and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.’” From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ [this now makes sense]. No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.
A similar reading of John 1 can be found here: https://www.postost.net/2018/12/when-exactly-did-word-become-flesh. The possible reference to Jesus’ baptism particularly seems a promising area of inquiry.
I went back and read Perry’s paper referenced in the interview. The most curious part of the paper to me was his statement: “The statement, ‘the Word was God’, makes a predication of the Word which suggests that the Word is a human person.” at first glance, I would see nothing that suggests that the Word is human in John 1:1. However, as I read it, Perry links the Word, Jesus, called “God” in John 1:1 with John 20:28, in which Thomas calls Jesus “my God.”
In the same vein, Exodus 4:16 describes Moses with the phrase, ” thou shalt be to him [Aaron] as God” (ASV). I noticed that Robert Bowman (http://bib.irr.org/was-moses-god-exodus-416-and-71) states that “the Hebrew word translated ‘as’ is the particle le…Although the particle could simply mark the words ‘mouth’ and ‘God’ as direct objects of the repeated verb ‘shall be,’ in context it may be taken as expressing comparisons.” What Bowman is admitting is that Moses is likened to God with grammar that could also be translated “thou shalt be God to him”.
Could it be argued that Moses was both “with God” (i.e. had direct interaction with the Father) and “was God” to Aaron (i.e. Moses spoke the word from the Father to his brother)? If so, could this smooth the difficulty which some have in seeing the human Jesus in John 1.1 “equated” with God?
Hello Dr. Tuggy. I have been listening to many of these podcasts for some weeks now, and have found them to be most illuminating and informative. Dr. Perry’s suggestion that John 1 is about the beginning of the gospel of Christ makes sense. I have also thought that the opening words take me to Mark’s opening. Verse 3 is a puzzle, but if it is connected to the chiasm of Colossians 1.16 where the all things created are the principalities and powers, it makes sense of John 1.1, directs the passage away from Genesis, and it has a scriptural confirmation. It also had the advantage of connecting the gospel to the regeneration of all things as promised by the prophets, which is a major theme of John’s Gospel as we all know. The “word was god/God” idea connects to the Jews challenging Jesus making himself equal to God, and his defence from Psalm 82.6 that Israelites are “gods, the children of the Most High”, and on to Thomas’s confession of Christ as god/God. My question is whether John’s Jewish readers would have made these connections intuitively or not. We are some distance mentally and in time from that generation, so it is a hard one to know for certain.
Roger,
A simpler explanation is simply to look at how the writer of the 4th Gospel used “all things” to refer to what Jesus himself had been given by God to do (John 3:35) and to say (John 4:25) during his public ministry and to further disclose to his disciples through holy spirit (John 15:15).
Hence, if Jesus is the one called “the Word” (John 1:1, 14), then “all” that came through him were the things that were revealed and accomplished on account of his public ministry. This is why he often spoke of doing the works of the Father, as well as speaking the word of the Father. These were all the things that the Father sent him to do, and by which he glorified the Father resulting in eternal life (John 17:3-4).
I really enjoyed this discussion with “independent” thinker Andrew Perry. It’s good to hear a significantly different view of the Prologue from a biblical unitarian perspective.
I also think that Dale Tuggy did a nice job of directing the conversation to most of the controversial sections of John 1:1-18 along with some good critcal questions.
Highly recommended!
I consider myself to be an independent thinker having escaped the template of “churchianity.” I am surprised you would refer to Andrew as an independent thinker since he holds to tradition and reads far too much into the text. John 20:28 is not a proof text for equating Jesus to “ho logos” or “ho theos” in John 1:1.
John 20:28 Does not translate “My Lord and my God.” The correct translation is: “The lord of me and the God of me” and this is precisely how a Greek speaking person refers to two different persons. Reading John’s account of Thomas’ confession any other way conflicts with John 20:31 and with Peter’s confession in Matthew. That’s just for starters. The traditional “churchianity” translation and interpretation of John 20:28 is in conflict with the Bible. Ho logos did not become Christos, Kyrios, Iesous, Jesus, Yahshua, Yeshua, Messiah, or any person. Ho Logos was placed into Jesus and he preached it. John 7:15; John 14:10; John 14:24; John 12:49-50. To say the word became Jesus goes way beyond the text and well past a simple personification in light of what the Bible teaches.
Comments are closed.