SEV Biblia, Chapter 1:1
¶ En el principio ya era la Palabra, y aquel que es la Palabra era con el Dios, y la Palabra era Dios.
Clarke's Bible Commentary - John 1:1
Verse 1. In the beginning] That is, before any thing was formed-ere God began the great work of creation. This is the meaning of the word in Gen. i. 1, to which the evangelist evidently alludes. This phrase fully proves, in the mouth of an inspired writer, that Jesus Christ was no part of the creation, as he existed when no part of that existed; and that consequently he is no creature, as all created nature was formed by him: for without him was nothing made that is made, ver. 3. Now, as what was before creation must be eternal, and as what gave being to all things, could not have borrowed or derived its being from any thing, therefore Jesus, who was before all things and who made all things, must necessarily be the ETERNAL God. Was the Word] Or, existed the Logos. This term should be left untranslated, for the very same reason why the names Jesus and Christ are left untranslated. The first I consider as proper an apellative of the saviour of the world as I do either of the two last. And as it would be highly improper to say, the Deliverer, the Anointed, instead of Jesus Christ, so I deem it improper to say, the Word, instead of the Logos. But as every appellative of the saviour of the world was descriptive of some excellence in his person, nature, or work, so the epithet logov, Logos, which signifies a word spoken, speech, eloquence, doctrine, reason, or the faculty of reasoning, is very properly applied to him, who is the true light which lighteth every man who cometh into the world, ver. 9; who is the fountain of all wisdom; who giveth being, life, light, knowledge, and reason, to all men; who is the grand Source of revelation, who has declared God unto mankind; who spake by the prophets, for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy, Rev. xix. 10; who has illustrated life and immortality by his Gospel, 2 Tim. i. 10; and who has fully made manifest the deep mysteries which lay hidden in the bosom of the invisible God from all eternity, ver. 18.
The apostle does not borrow this mode of speech from the writings of Plato, as some have imagined: he took it from the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and from the subsequent style of the ancient Jews. It is true the Platonists make mention of the Logos in this way:-kaq on, aei onta, ta genomena egeneto-by whom, eternally existing, all things were made.
But as Plato, Pythagoras, Zeno, and others, traveled among the Jews, and conversed with them, it is reasonable to suppose that they borrowed this, with many others of their most important notions and doctrines, from them.
And the Word was God.] Or, God was the Logos: therefore no subordinate being, no second to the Most High, but the supreme eternal Jehovah.
John Gill's Bible Commentary
Ver. 1. In the beginning was the word , etc.] That this is said not of the written word, but of the essential word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, is clear, from all that is said from hence, to ( John 1:14) as that this word was in the beginning, was with God, and is God; from the creation of all things being ascribed to him, and his being said to be the life and light of men; from his coming into the world, and usage in it; from his bestowing the privilege of adoption on believers; and from his incarnation; and also there is a particular application of all this to Christ, ( John 1:15-18). And likewise from what this evangelist elsewhere says of him, when he calls him the word of life, and places him between the Father and the Holy Ghost; and speaks of the record of the word of God, and the testimony of Jesus, as the same thing; and represents him as a warrior and conqueror, ( John 1:1,2,7 Revelation 1:2,9 19:11-16). Moreover this appears to be spoken of Christ, from what other inspired writers have said of him, under the same character; as the Evangelist Luke, ( Luke 1:2), the Apostle Paul, ( Acts 20:32 Hebrews 4:12) and the Apostle Peter, ( 2 Peter 3:5). And who is called the word, not as man; for as man he was not in the beginning with God, but became so in the fullness of time; nor is the man God; besides, as such, he is a creature, and not the Creator, nor is he the life and light of men; moreover, he was the word, before he was man, and therefore not as such: nor can any part of the human nature be so called; not the flesh, for the word was made flesh; nor his human soul, for selfsubsistence, deity, eternity, and the creation of all things, can never be ascribed to that; but he is the word as the Son of God, as is evident from what is here attributed to him, and from the word being said to be so, as in ( John 1:14,18) and from those places, where the word is explained by the Son, compare ( 1 John 5:5,7 Matthew 28:19). And is so called from his nature, being begotten of the Father; for as the word, whether silent or expressed, is the birth of the mind, the image of it, equal to it, and distinct from it; so Christ is the only begotten of the Father, the express image of his person, in all things equal to him, and a distinct person from him: and he may be so called, from some action, or actions, said of him, or ascribed to him; as that he spoke for, and on the behalf of the elect of God, in the eternal council and covenant of grace and peace; and spoke all things out of nothing, in creation; for with regard to those words so often mentioned in the history of the creation, and God said, may Jehovah the Son be called the word; also he was spoken of as the promised Messiah, throughout the whole Old Testament dispensation; and is the interpreter of his Fathers mind, as he was in Edens garden, as well as in the days of his flesh; and now speaks in heaven for the saints. The phrase, yyd armym , the word of the Lord, so frequently used by the Targumists, is well known: and it is to be observed, that the same things which John here says of the word, they say likewise, as will be observed on the several clauses; from whence it is more likely, that John should take this phrase, since the paraphrases of Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uzziel were written before his time, than that he should borrow it from the writings of Plato, or his followers, as some have thought; with whose philosophy, Ebion and Cerinthus are said to be acquainted; wherefore John, the more easily to gain upon them, uses this phrase, when that of the Son of God would have been disagreeable to them: that there is some likeness between the Evangelist John and Plato in their sentiments concerning the word, will not be denied. Amelius f6 , a Platonic philosopher, who lived after the times of John, manifestly refers to these words of his, in agreement with his masters doctrine: his words are these; and this was truly Logos, or the word, by whom always existing, the things that are made, were made, as also Heraclitus thought; and who, likewise that Barbarian (meaning the Evangelist John) reckons was in the order and dignity of the beginning, constituted with God, and was God, by whom all things are entirely made; in whom, whatsoever is made, lives, and has life, and being; and who entered into bodies, and was clothed with flesh, and appeared a man; so notwithstanding, that he showed forth the majesty of his nature; and after his dissolution, he was again deified, and was God, as he was before he descended into a body, flesh and man.
In which words it is easy to observe plain traces of what the evangelist says in the first four verses, and in the fourteenth verse of this chapter; yet it is much more probable, that Plato had his notion of the Logos, or word, out of the writings of the Old Testament, than that John should take this phrase, or what he says concerning the word, from him; since it is a matter of fact not disputed, that Plato went into Egypt to get knowledge: not only Clemens Alexandrinus a Christian writer says, that he was a philosopher of the Hebrews f7 , and understood prophecy f8 , and stirred up the fire of the Hebrew philosophy f9 ; but it is affirmed by Heathen writers, that he went into Egypt to learn of the priests f10 , and to understand the rites of the prophets f11 ; and Aristobulus, a Jew, affirms f12 , he studied their law; and Numenius, a Pythagoric philosopher f13 , charges him with stealing what he wrote, concerning God and the world, out of the books of Moses; and used to say to him, what is Plato, but Moses Atticising? or Moses speaking Greek: and Eusebius f14 , an ancient Christian writer, points at the very places, from whence Plato took his hints: wherefore it is more probable, that the evangelist received this phrase of the word, as a divine person, from the Targums, where there is such frequent mention made of it; or however, there is a very great agreement between what he and these ancient writings of the Jews say of the word, as will be hereafter shown.
Moreover, the phrase is frequently used in like manner, in the writings of Philo the Jew; from whence it is manifest, that the name was well known to the Jews, and may be the reason of the evangelists using it. This word, he says, was in the beginning; by which is meant, not the Father of Christ; for he is never called the beginning, but the Son only; and was he, he must be such a beginning as is without one; nor can he be said to be so, with respect to the Son or Spirit, who are as eternal as himself; only with respect to the creatures, of whom he is the author and efficient cause:
Christ is indeed in the Father, and the Father in him, but this cannot be meant here; nor is the beginning of the Gospel of Christ, by the preaching of John the Baptist, intended here: Johns ministry was an evangelical one, and the Gospel was more clearly preached by him, and after him, by Christ and his apostles, than before; but it did not then begin; it was preached before by the angel to the shepherds, at the birth of Christ; and before that, by the prophets under the former dispensation, as by Isaiah, and others; it was preached before unto Abraham, and to our first parents, in the garden of Eden: nor did Christ begin to be, when John began to preach; for Johns preaching and baptism were for the manifestation of him: yea, Christ existed as man, before John began to preach; and though he was born after him as man, yet as the Word and Son of God, he existed before John was born; he was in being in the times of the prophets, which were before John; and in the times of Moses, and before Abraham, and in the days of Noah: but by the beginning is here meant, the beginning of the world, or the creation of all things; and which is expressive of the eternity of Christ, he was in the beginning, as the Maker of all creatures, and therefore must be before them all: and it is to be observed, that it is said of him, that in the beginning he was; not made, as the heavens and earth, and the things in them were; nor was he merely in the purpose and predestination of God, but really existed as a divine person, as he did from all eternity; as appears from his being set up in office from everlasting; from all the elect being chosen in him, and given to him before the foundation of the world; from the covenant of grace, which is from eternity, being made with him; and from the blessings and promises of grace, being as early put into his hands; and from his nature as God, and his relation to his Father: so Philo the Jew often calls the Logos, or word, the eternal word, the most ancient word, and more ancient than any thing that is made f15 . The eternity of the Messiah is acknowledged by the ancient Jews: ( Micah 5:2) is a full proof of it; which by them is thus paraphrased; out of thee, before me, shall come forth the Messiah, that he may exercise dominion over Israel; whose name is said from eternity, from the days of old.
Jarchi upon it only mentions ( Psalm 72:17) which is rendered by the Targum on the place, before the sun his name was prepared; it may be translated, before the sun his name was Yinnon; that is, the Son, namely the Son of God; and Aben Ezra interprets it, b arqy , he shall be called the son; and to this agrees what the Talmudisis say f17 , that the name of the Messiah was before the world was created; in proof of which they produce the same passage. And the word was with God ; not with men or angels; for he was before either of these; but with God, not essentially, but personally considered; with God his Father: not in the Socinian sense, that he was only known to him, and to no other before the ministry of John the Baptist; for he was known and spoken of by the angel Gabriel before; and was known to Mary and to Joseph; and to Zacharias and Elisabeth; to the shepherds, and to the wise men; to Simeon and Anna, who saw him in the temple; and to the prophets and patriarchs in all ages, from the beginning of the world: but this phrase denotes the existence of the word with the Father, his relation and nearness to him, his equality with him, and particularly the distinction of his person from him, as well as his eternal being with him; for he was always with him, and is, and ever will be; he was with him in the council and covenant of grace, and in the creation of the universe, and is with him in the providential government of the world; he was with him as the word and Son of God in heaven, whilst he as man, was here on earth; and he is now with him, and ever will be: and as John here speaks of the word, as a distinct person from God the Father, so do the Targums, or Chaldee paraphrases; ( <19B001> Psalm 110:1) the Lord said to my Lord, is rendered, the Lord said to his word; where he is manifestly distinguished from Jehovah, that speaks to him; and in ( Hosea 1:7) the Lord promises to have mercy on the house of Judah, and save them by the Lord their God. The Targum is, I will redeem them by the word of the Lord their God; where the word of the Lord, who is spoken of as a Redeemer and Saviour, is distinguished from the Lord, who promises to save by him. This distinction of Jehovah and his word, may be observed in multitudes of places, in the Chaldee paraphrases, and in the writings of Philo the Jew; and this phrase, of the word being with God, is in the Targums expressed by, dq m rmym , the word from before the Lord, or which is before the Lord: being always in his presence, and the angel of it; so Onkelos paraphrases ( Genesis 31:22) and the word from before the Lord, came to Laban, etc. and ( Exodus 20:19) thus, and let not the word from before the Lord speak with us, lest we die; for so it is read in the King of Spains Bible; and wisdom, which is the same with the word of God, is said to be by him, or with him, in ( Proverbs 8:1-36 30:1-33) agreeably to which John here speaks. John makes use of the word God, rather than Father, because the word is commonly called the word of God, and because of what follows; and the word was God ; not made a God, as he is said here after to be made flesh; nor constituted or appointed a God, or a God by office; but truly and properly God, in the highest sense of the word, as appears from the names by which he is called; as Jehovah, God, our, your, their, and my God, God with us, the mighty God, God over all, the great God, the living God, the true God, and eternal life; and from his perfections, and the whole fulness of the Godhead that dwells in him, as independence, eternity, immutability, omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence; and from his works of creation and providence, his miracles, the work of redemption, his forgiving sins, the resurrection of himself and others from the dead, and the administration of the last judgment; and from the worship given him, as prayer to him, faith in him, and the performance of baptism in his name: nor is it any objection to the proper deity of Christ, that the article is here wanting; since when the word is applied to the Father, it is not always used, and even in this chapter, ( John 1:6,13,18) and which shows, that the word God, is not the subject, but the predicate of this proposition, as we render it: so the Jews often use the word of the Lord for Jehovah, and call him God. Thus the words in ( Genesis 28:20,21) are paraphrased by Onkelos; if the word of the Lord will be my help, and will keep me, etc. then the word of the Lord shall be, ahlal yl , my God: again, ( Leviticus 26:12) is paraphrased, by the Targum ascribed to Jonathan Ben Uzziel, thus; I will cause the glory of my Shekinah to dwell among you, and my word shall be your God, the Redeemer; once more, ( Deuteronomy 26:17) is rendered by the Jerusalem Targum after this manner; ye have made the word of the Lord king over you this day, that he may be your God: and this is frequent with Philo the Jew, who says, the name of God is his word, and calls him, my Lord, the divine word; and affirms, that the most ancient word is God f18 .
Matthew Henry Commentary
Verses 1-5 - The plainest reason why the Son of God is called the Word, seems to be that as our words explain our minds to others, so was the Son of God sent in order to reveal his Father's mind to the world. What the evangelist says of Christ proves that he is God. He asserts, Hi existence in the beginning; His coexistence with the Father. The Wor was with God. All things were made by him, and not as an instrument Without him was not any thing made that was made, from the highes angel to the meanest worm. This shows how well qualified he was for the work of our redemption and salvation. The light of reason, as well a the life of sense, is derived from him, and depends upon him. Thi eternal Word, this true Light shines, but the darkness comprehends is not. Let us pray without ceasing, that our eyes may be opened to behol this Light, that we may walk in it; and thus be made wise unt salvation, by faith in Jesus Christ.
Greek Textus Receptus
εν 1722 PREP αρχη 746 N-DSF ην 2258 5713 V-IXI-3S ο 3588 T-NSM λογος 3056 N-NSM και 2532 CONJ ο 3588 T-NSM λογος 3056 N-NSM ην 2258 5713 V-IXI-3S προς 4314 PREP τον 3588 T-ASM θεον 2316 N-ASM και 2532 CONJ θεος 2316 N-NSM ην 2258 5713 V-IXI-3S ο 3588 T-NSM λογος 3056 N-NSM
Vincent's NT Word Studies
1 (continued). He may have conceived of the Word as acting through the Messiah, but not as one with him. He is a universal principle. In John the Messiah is the Logos himself, uniting himself with humanity, and clothing himself with a body in order to save the world.The two notions differ as to origin. The impersonal God of Philo cannot pass to the finite creation without contamination of his divine essence. Hence an inferior agent must be interposed. John's God, on the other hand, is personal, and a loving personality. He is a Father (i. 18); His essence is love (iii. 16; 1 John iv. 8, 16). He is in direct relation with the world which He desires to save, and the Logos is He Himself, manifest in the flesh. According to Philo, the Logos is not coexistent with the eternal God. Eternal matter is before him in time. According to John, the Logos is essentially with the Father from all eternity (i. 2), and it is He who creates all things, matter included (i. 3).
Philo misses the moral energy of the Hebrew religion as expressed in its emphasis upon the holiness of Jehovah, and therefore fails to perceive the necessity of a divine teacher and Savior. He forgets the wide distinction between God and the world, and declares that, were the universe to end, God would die of loneliness and inactivity.
THE MEANING OF LOGOS IN JOHN
As Logos has the double meaning of thought and speech, so Christ is related to God as the word to the idea, the word being not merely a name for the idea, but the idea itself expressed. The thought is the inward word (Dr. Schaff compares the Hebrew expression "I speak in my heart" for "I think").
The Logos of John is the real, personal God (i. 1), the Word, who was originally before the creation with God. and was God, one in essence and nature, yet personally distinct (i. 1, 18); the revealer and interpreter of the hidden being of God; the reflection and visible image of God, and the organ of all His manifestations to the world. Compare Heb. i. 3. He made all things, proceeding personally from God for the accomplishment of the act of creation (i. 3), and became man in the person of Jesus Christ, accomplishing the redemption of the world. Compare Philip. ii. 6. The following is from William Austin, "Meditation for Christmas Day," cited by Ford on John:
"The name Word is most excellently given to our Savior; for it expresses His nature in one, more than in any others. Therefore St. John, when he names the Person in the Trinity (1 John v. 7), 8 chooses rather to call Him Word than Son; for word is a phrase more communicable than son. Son hath only reference to the Father that begot Him; but word may refer to him that conceives it; to him that speaks it; to that which is spoken by it; to the voice that it is clad in; and to the effects it raises in him that hears it. So Christ, as He is the Word, not only refers to His Father that begot Him, and from whom He comes forth, but to all the creatures that were made by Him; to the flesh that He took to clothe Him; and to the doctrine He brought and taught, and, which lives yet in the hearts of all them that obediently do hear it. He it is that is this Word; and any other, prophet or preacher, he is but a voice (Luke iii. 4). Word is an inward conception of the mind; and voice 9 is but a sign of intention. St. John was but a sign, a voice; not worthy to untie the shoe-latchet of this Word. Christ is the inner conception 'in the bosom of His Father;' and that is properly the Word. And yet the Word is the intention uttered forth, as well as conceived within; for Christ was no less the Word in the womb of the Virgin, or in the cradle of the manger, or on the altar of the cross, than he was in the beginning, 'in the bosom of his Father.' For as the intention departs not from the mind when the word is uttered, so Christ, proceeding from the Father by eternal generation, and after here by birth and incarnation, remains still in Him and with Him in essence; as the intention, which is conceived and born in the mind, remains still with it and in it, though the word be spoken. He is therefore rightly called the Word, both by His coming from, and yet remaining still in, the Father."
And the Word. A repetition of the great subject, with solemn emphasis. Was with God (hn pov ton Qeon). Anglo-Saxon vers., mid Gode. Wyc., at God. With (prov) does not convey the full meaning, that there is no single English word which will give it better. The preposition prov, which, with the accusative case, denotes motion towards, or direction, is also often used in the New Testament in the sense of with; and that not merely as being near or beside, but as a living union and communion; implying the active notion of intercourse. Thus: "Are not his sisters here with us" (prov hmav), i.e., in social relations with us (Mark vi. 3; Matt. xiii. 56). "How long shall I be with you" (prov uJmav, Mark ix. 16). "I sat daily with you" (Matt. xxvi. 55). "To be present with the Lord" (prov ton Kurion, 2 Cor. v. 8). "Abide and winter with you" (1 Corinthians xvi. 6). "The eternal life which was with the Father" (prov ton patera, 1 John i. 2). Thus John's statement is that the divine Word not only abode with the Father from all eternity, but was in the living, active relation of communion with Him.
And the Word was God (kai Qeov hn o logov). In the Greek order, and God was the Word, which is followed by Anglo-Saxon, Wyc., and Tynd. But qeov, God, is the predicate and not the subject of the proposition. The subject must be the Word; for John is not trying to show who is God, but who is the Word. Notice that Qeov is without the article, which could not have been omitted if he had meant to designate the word as God; because, in that event, Qeov would have been ambiguous; perhaps a God.
Moreover, if he had said God was the Word, he would have contradicted his previous statement by which he had distinguished (hypostatically) 10 God from the word, and logov (Logos) would, further, have signified only an attribute of God. The predicate is emphatically placed in the proposition before the subject, because of the progress of the thought; this being the third and highest statement respecting the Word - the climax of the two preceding propositions. The word God, used attributively, maintains the personal distinction between God and the Word, but makes the unity of essence and nature to follow the distinction of person, and ascribes to the Word all the attributes of the divine essence. "There is something majestic in the way in which the description of the Logos, in the three brief but great propositions of ver. 1, is unfolded with increasing fullness" (Meyer).
