The Eternality of Jesus

Sermon preached on June 18, 2023 – John 1:1-18 – The Eternality of Jesus

The Gospels are biographies of Jesus. They are “life writings” of Jesus. That’s what biography literally means; bios means life and graphia means writings, so a biography is a “life writing.”

Because biographies focus on the life of an individual person, they usually don’t cover a very large period of time. They usually only cover the time between the birth and death of the person being written about. On in many cases, a biography will only cover a portion of the time between the birth and death of the person being written about, such as their childhood or the years they spent in military service. Some biographers might add a little historical background and genealogical information so the reader can know something about the social context and family into which the subject of the biography was born, but beyond that, a biography typically only covers a short period of time.

And that’s pretty much what the Gospel writers do when writing about the life of Jesus. Matthew and Luke both begin their accounts with a genealogy of Jesus, then they proceed to write about His birth and childhood, and then they write about His ministry years and conclude with His resurrection. So both of their Gospels cover about 33 years. Mark skips Jesus’ birth and childhood entirely. He begins with Jesus’ baptism and concludes with His resurrection. So Mark’s Gospel only covers about 3 years of Jesus’ life.

Neither of these approaches are unusual for a biography. What is unusual, however, is John’s starting point. John begins his Gospel as far back as he could possibly go. He goes all the way back to the beginning of time. He goes all the way back to Genesis 1:1 and he asserts that when time and matter were first created, Jesus was already there. Look at verses 1 and 2…

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God.

The words in the book of John are very simple words. This is not only true in our English translations, but it’s true in the original language. First-year students of New Testament Greek customarily begin translation exercises right here in John 1. This is because the vocabulary John uses is very basic, and the grammar is straightforward.

But even though the vocabulary and grammar are very basic, the concepts that John is expressing are exceedingly profound. You might say the concepts are daunting. They stretch our minds beyond their capacity. They declare things that are too grand for us to comprehend in their fullness.

So as John sets out to write about the life of Jesus, he introduces one of these grand concepts in the very first verse; he begins by explaining that Jesus doesn’t have a beginning. “How can this be so,” you ask? John tells us very plainly. It’s because Jesus is God, and God has always been. As the second person of the Trinity, Jesus has existed from all eternity past.

Infinity is a difficult concept for us to wrap our minds around. And there’s two types of infinity. There’s the type that has a beginning but not an end, and then there’s the type that has neither a beginning nor an end.

This type that has a beginning but not an end is the easier type for us to understand. It’s easier because we encounter this type of infinity in creation. For example, when you study mathematics, you’ll learn about infinite numbers (or “non-terminating numbers,” as they’re sometimes called). Pi is a common example. It has a starting point but not an ending. It starts with the number 3. Then the 3 is followed by a decimal point and the digits 14159, but then the digits never end. They just keep going. There are an infinite number of digits in the number Pi.

This is also the type of infinity our Christian worldview teaches about the immortality of man. Every human being is eternal in the sense that we begin to exist at conception, and then we live for some number of days upon the earth before our body dies. But our soul never dies. And even our bodies are going to be resurrected and reunited with our souls. So human beings have a starting point, but there’s never an ending point. Every human being will continue to exist for all eternity in either heaven or hell.

The more difficult type of infinity for us to wrap our minds around is the other type; the one that has no beginning and no end. This is more difficult for us because there’s nothing in creation that has this characteristic. Only God has this characteristic. Only the three Persons of the Trinity are without beginning. Everything else has a beginning. Time has a beginning. Matter has a beginning. Heaven has a beginning. Hell has a beginning. The angels and demons have a beginning. But God never had a beginning. He has always existed.

So when John takes up the task of writing a biography of Jesus, he starts at the beginning; the beginning of time, that is. He starts at Genesis 1:1 and says, “Jesus was there. He was with the Father and the Spirit and He created everything that has been created.”

This is a much different starting point from where the other Gospel writers begin their biographies. But we don’t fault Matthew and Luke for starting with Jesus’ birth narrative, nor do we fault Mark for starting with Jesus’ baptism, because we understand that each of the Gospel writers were writing to a specific audience and for a specific purpose. Which is to say, the Gospels did not emerge in a vacuum. Each of them was written under the inspiration of God to address specific needs within the church.

For example, John tells us very clearly what the purpose of his gospel is. In 20:31, he says that he wrote these things so “you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.” John, therefore, records more of Jesus’ miracles than the other three Gospel writers do.

Not surprisingly, the most prominent theme in John’s Gospel is faith. John uses the Greek word for faith 103 times, which is more than all three of the other Gospel writers combined. Interestingly, however, John only uses the verb form of this word, which is translated into English as “believing.” John never uses the noun form, which is translated into English as “faith.” This shows us that John is not just focusing on faith, but he’s emphasizing the need for one’s faith to produce a living and active trust in Jesus Christ. It’s not just about having correct theology in your head, but that correct theology need to express itself through walking in commitment and obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Matthew’s Gospel is noticeably different. His is the most Jewish of the Gospels. Because he’s writing to a Jewish audience, Matthew uses more direct quotes and allusions to the Old Testament than the others three writers do. And the central theme of Matthew’s gospel is the kingdom. Not only does he use the word “kingdom” more than any of the other Gospel writers, but Matthew repetitively emphasizes the global impact Jesus’ kingdom is going to have on the world.

Mark is writing to a Roman audience who knows very little about Jewish culture. You’ll notice that Mark will often be guiding his readers to a better understanding of the “Jewishness” of the Messiah. For example, Mark translates some of the Aramaic words that are left untranslated in the other Gospels, and Mark’s is the only Gospel that includes Latin phrases.

Luke is also writing to a Gentile audience, but not as specifically define as Mark’s. Whereas Mark as writing to a Roman audience, Luke is writing to a Greek audience. Luke’s ambition is to write an orderly account of what Jesus has done, demonstrating that the good news of Jesus Christ is offered to everyone in the world. This is why we see Luke emphasizing Jesus’ ministry to outcasts, to women, and to Gentiles. And we notice that he writes with sensitivity to the questions Gentiles might ask, even going so far as to interpret some of the Jewish cultural expressions for his readers. For example, consider how differently Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ Olivet Discourse. Matthew, writing to a Jewish audience, records Jesus saying…

15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. (Mt 24:15-16)

Notice how Matthew adds a parenthetical statement at the end of verse 15. Jesus did not say, “whoever reads, let him understand.” Matthew added that. Matthew wants to signal to his Jewish readers that Jesus is speaking symbolically here. He wants his readers to recall what they know about Daniel’s prophecy of the abomination of desolation, and he wants them to apply that understanding to the events of their own day. So Matthew records the exact words that Jesus spoke, and then he adds the short parenthetical statement to signal to his readers that they need to interpret Jesus’ words symbolically.

Luke records the same discourse, but he knows that his readers aren’t familiar with Daniel’s prophecy about the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place. He knows that if he writes the exact words that Jesus spoke, then the vast majority of his Gentile audience is going to miss the point, so Luke takes the liberty of performing the interpretation for them. Luke writes…

20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains… (Lk 21:20-21)

Notice what Luke is doing here. When Jesus made reference to “the holy place,” Luke interprets this for the Gentiles, telling them to keep their eye on Jerusalem. And when Jesus spoke of the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place, Luke interprets this as armies surrounding Jerusalem. So the Gentiles readers of Luke’s Gospel understood that when they see the Roman armies gathering around Jerusalem, then they need to flee to the mountains.

Now, you’ve probably heard people claim that the Gospels are full of contradictions. They’ll say that when you compare one Gospel to another, you’ll see discrepancies between the different accounts. They’ll point to the different ways Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ Olivet discourse and ask, “Which is it? Did Jesus say to flee to mountains when you see the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place? Or did He say to flee when you see the armies surrounding Jerusalem?” Then they’ll assert, “At least one of these writers is misrepresenting what Jesus said. This is a contradiction, and because the Gospels contain so many of these contradictions, we can’t believe them. We can’t trust them.”

The Christian’s response to this assertion is to explain that this is not a contradiction because both writers are saying the same thing. Matthew records the actual words that Jesus used and then tells his readers to do the necessary interpretative work to understand their meaning, whereas Luke gives the meaning of Jesus’ words by doing the interpretive work on behalf of his readers. This is a not a weakness in the Gospels, this is a strength. Consider the following five points:

Having four Gospels gives us multiple perspectives. As has been already explained, each Gospel offers a unique perspective on the life, teachings, and ministry of Jesus Christ. While they’re all writing about the life of Jesus, each author emphasizes different aspects and events. Collectively, they present a more comprehensive and well-rounded picture of Jesus.

Second, have four Gospels provides a form of historical corroboration. When different authors independently record the events and teachings of Jesus, it adds credibility to the historical reliability of those accounts. In other words, it satisfies the biblical criteria of having two or three witnesses testify about these things.

Third, multiple Gospel accounts can help the reader piece together a more complete narrative of Jesus' life and ministry. For example, some events may be mentioned in one Gospel but not in the others. Reading through all four accounts helps fill in the gaps and provides a more detailed narrative of Jesus' life.

Fourth, the different themes and foci in the Gospels provide better theological insights. Theological themes such as faith, salvation, the kingdom, love, and discipleship are presented in the four Gospels from different angles. This allows deeper exploration and understanding of these teachings, resulting in better theological insights then we would gain from a more uniform approach.

And fifth, different individuals may find one or two of the Gospels more relatable than the others. The example I presented from Jesus’ Olivet Discourse makes this point. Because most of us think and process information more like the Greeks than the Jews, many of us will read Matthew’s Gospel and scratch our heads, wondering how we’re supposed to interpret the statement about the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place. This is not easily relatable to many of us. Yet Luke’s rendition is relatable. We can read what Luke has written and immediately understand it. So the variety of Gospel accounts allows different people from different backgrounds with different levels of biblical knowledge learn from the Gospel that speaks most directly to them. And that Gospel can act as a gateway to the other Gospel, helping better understand some of those difficult cultural components.

This is why I’m opting to preach through all four of the Gospels simultaneously. It’s a little more difficult for me to do it this way. It would be easier if I just picked one Gospel and preach systematically from the beginning to the end. But for the reasons I just cited, I’m convinced that it’s going to be more beneficial for us to go through all four of the Gospels simultaneously and chronologically. This is going to provide us with a more complete and better nuanced understanding of Jesus' life and teachings. This is going to help us know who Jesus is and what He came to do. And this is not a trivial consideration, brothers and sisters; it’s not a trivial consideration because John tells us in our sermon text that there are two kinds of people: (1) those who know Jesus, and (2) those who do not know Jesus. And the difference between knowing Jesus and not knowing Jesus is the difference between spending eternity in heaven or eternity in hell.

Of course, when John speaks about knowing Jesus, he’s not speaking of possessing an intellectual knowledge of a man named Jesus who used to walk around Judea with His disciples. Rather, John is saying the “know” Jesus is to recognize Him as the Word made flesh; as God incarnate; as the long-awaited Messiah who saves His people from their sins. Look at verse 10. Speaking of Jesus, John writes…

He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.

Notice how John repeats the word “world” three times in this verse. He clearly wants to draw our attention to the world’s relationship to Jesus. First, he says that Jesus was “in the world.” This refers to His incarnation; that God became a man who lived and walked amongst the people of this world. The point being, by becoming a man, Jesus was knowable. He was approachable. People could see Jesus, they could touch Jesus, they could talk Jesus, they could establish a personal relationship with Jesus. So God didn’t remain apart from His creation; invisible and distant. Rather, He came into in the world and dwelt as a man amongst other men. He made Himself knowable.

Second, John says that the world was made through Jesus. You might notice that John is using the same vocabulary here in verse 10 that he used in verse 3. Verse 3 says…

“All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.”

This is emphasizing Jesus’ divinity. Whereas John was emphasizing Jesus’ humanity when he wrote that Jesus was in the world, he’s emphasizing Jesus’ divinity when he writes that the world was made through Him. So John is showing us both sides of the same coin. He’s presenting the God-Man to us.

The third reference to the world explains the rejection of Jesus. John writes that “the world did not know Him.” Even though people came in contact with Jesus and were able to interact with the Person who had created them and every other thing that has ever been created, they did not know Him. That is, they did not recognize Him. And because they didn’t recognize Him, they didn’t receive Him. “The light shines in the darkness,” John writes in verse 5, “and the darkness did not comprehend it.” The creature met the Creator, and did not comprehend Him.

But John tells us that there’s another group of people who didn’t recognize Jesus, as well. Verse 11…

He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.

This is referring to the Jewish people. Jesus came to the Jewish people, but they did not receive Him.

If you’re reading from a reference Bible or a Study Bible, you might see a margin note indicating that the words “His own” can be translated as “domain” or “home.” So this alternative translation would say something like, “Jesus came to His own home, but His own household did not receive Him.”

There’s good support for this alternative translation. In Greek, it’s the exact same expression here in verse 11 that’s used in John 19:27. While was hanging on the cross and about to die, He said to John, “Behold, your mother.” John 19:27 then says, “And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home.” John “took her to his own home.” It’s the exact same expression that’s in verse 11 of our sermon text. So we understand verse 11 to be saying that when Jesus came into this world, He did not come as a stranger. Rather, He came to the house of His covenant people. He came to the people who should have known Him. He came to those who had been given all the advantages of God’s special revelation so they could recognize Him and receive Him, yet they did neither.

Hebrews 1:1 says that God spoke at various times and in various ways to the house of Israel. But then He sent His Son to them. This was superior to what God had revealed in various time and in various ways because Jesus is the brightness of glory and the expressed image of God the Father. But even then, the people of Israel did not receive Him, John writes at the end of verse 11.

The Greek verb that’s translated as “receive” is used to describe the act of taking another person into a close, loving, and personal relationship with oneself. For example, this verb is used in Matthew 1:20 and 24 to describe Joseph taking Mary as his wife. And it’s used in John 14:3 to describe Jesus taking believers to Himself in heaven. This was the kind of reception that the people of Israel should have given Jesus when He came to His own household. They should have received Him into a close, loving, and personal relationship with themselves. But they rejected Him. In fact, they did worse; they despised Him, and eventually murdered Him.

Yet John tells us that there were people who did receive Jesus into a close, loving, and personal relationship. He writes about them in verses 12 and 13…

12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Let me call your attention to three important words in these verses.

The first word is “gave.” John is saying that Jesus gave a gift to certain people, and that gift enabled them to receive Him and believe in His name.

The second word is “right.” John says that those who have been given the gift have the “right” to become children of God. They’ve been given full entitlement to status. And notice that John doesn’t say they have the right “to be” children of God, but “to become” children of God. This means that there’s a change in the person’s relationship to God. When the gift is given, that person goes from not being a child of God to being a child of God. And this brings us to the third important term John uses in verses 12 and 13, which is “children.”

When he writes about becoming children of God, he’s referring to people being adopted into the family of God. He’s referring to being made sons and daughters of the living God through faith in Jesus Christ. He’s referring to what Paul was writing about in Romans 8:14-17…

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15 For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, “Abba, Father.” 16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ…

But within the context of our sermon text, I think there’s something else John is driving at when he writes about becoming children of God. All throughout the Old Testament, the nation of Israel was known as “the children of God.” Yet John says in verse 11 that when Jesus came in the flesh, the people of Israel didn’t receive Him. Or as the alternative translation puts it, the people of His own household didn’t receive Him. Well, John is introducing another one of those grand concepts in verses 12 and 13. He’s telling us that Jesus is bringing Gentiles into His household. Jesus is giving everyone who receives Him and believes in His name the right to become children of God. Look again at verse 12…

But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name:

But the question still needs to be answered: who are these people who receive Jesus and believe in His name? John has already explained that the world did not know Jesus. And John has already explained that the Jews did not receive Him. So who are these people who receive Him and believe in His name?

Verse 13 supplies that answer. It’s everyone who has been born of God.

There can be no doubt about what John means when he writes about being born of God. In chapter 3, he’s going to tell of the conversation Jesus had with Nicodemus. Jesus told Nicodemus that he needed to be “born again.” That conversation developed into a distinction between the natural birth that we all experience when we’re born into this world, and the new birth a sinner experiences when he’s regenerated by the Spirit of God.

So when John writes about being “born of God” in verse 13 of our sermon text, he’s referring to being born again. He’s referring to the Spirit’s act of regeneration within the heart of a sinner. And to be avoid any confusion about who initiates and accomplishes this rebirth, John addresses three possible misunderstandings about the new birth.

First, he says it’s not being born of blood, meaning, it’s not your bloodline that causes you to be born a child of God. Nobody can say, “I’m a child of God because I have Abraham as my father.” Nor can anyone say, “I’m a child of God because my parents are Christians.” John is making it crystal clear that a person is not a child of God by being born of blood.

Second, he says it’s not of the will of the flesh. In other words, it’s not of good works. Nobody can say they’re a child of God because of the works they’ve done in the flesh.

And third, John says it’s not of the will of man. This is the error of the Arminians. Arminians say that Jesus Christ died a substitutionary death on the cross, making salvation possible for everybody, but His atonement is only effectual for those who choose Him according to their free-will. In other words, Arminianism teaches that the will of man determines who is and is not born again. But John is being very explicit here in verse 13. He says in explicit terms that the new birth is not determined by the will of man.

So if the new birth is not of blood, and it’s not of the will of the flesh, and it’s not of the will of man, then what is it of? It’s of God. John is declaring that it’s God who causes sinners to be born again. It’s God who initiates the new birth. And it’s God who gives a new heart with new affections and new loyalties to the rebellious sinner. And it’s only after the sinner has been born of God that he can, for the first time in his life, see the beauty of Jesus, and the loving kindness of Jesus. It’s only after the sinner has been born of God that he can believe in Jesus and receive Him as Lord and Savior.

This is the truth that Paul wrote about in Ephesians 1:4-6. As I read these three verses aloud, listen to who’s initiating man’s salvation. Listen to who’s will it is. Listen to who performs the adoption. And listen to who makes it all happen. Ephesians 1:4-6…

[The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ] chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.

Brothers and sisters, we cannot escape the clear biblical teaching that God designed our salvation, He initiates our salvation, He accomplishes our salvation, and it’s all performed according to the good pleasure of His will. It’s not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but it’s exclusively of the will of God. So John is teaching in our sermon text that from start to finish, salvation is in Jesus Christ. If you are saved, then that’s because you have been elected in Christ Jesus from before the foundations of the world.

This brings us back to that difficult concept of eternality. Before the events of Genesis 1:1, God the Father knew you. He had already elected you in Christ Jesus to be adopted into His household. In Christ, you had already been given the right to be a child of God. So if you’ve received Jesus as the eternal Word made flesh, and if you believe that there’s no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved, then this is evidence that you’ve been born of God. This is evidence that you’ve been regenerated by the Spirit of God.

So what should the response be? It should be praise. It should be an expression of our gratitude. It should be rejoicing in the eternal goodness and mercy of our triune God. And it should be wanting to know more about Him. It should be wanting to experience Christ Jesus to the fullest. This is why I made the statement earlier that it’s not a trivial consideration that we should chart a path through the Gospel that gives is the a more complete and better nuanced understanding of Jesus' life and teachings. Whether you already know Him as your Savior, or you need to know Him as your Savior, He is revealed to us in the written word of God. Which is to say, when we read and study and hear the preaching of these four biographies of Jesus, the Spirit applies this knowledge to those who have been elected in Christ so that it generates faith in us. But not just the noun form of faith; the Spirit produces the verb form of faith, as well. So we don’t gain knowledge of Jesus so we can expand our theology, we can knowledge of Jesus so we our expanded theology will express itself in greater commitment and obedience to Christ. So please join your hearts with mine as we ask the Lord to increase our knowledge of Jesus so we can know Him, receive Him, believe in Him, and walk more closely with Him.