Yeshua as Logos (John 1)
Bible Study • Sermon • Submitted • Presented
0 ratings
· 11 viewsNotes
Transcript
Introduction
Introduction
In the beginning was the Word. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
In the Septuagint, this word translates the majority of instances of Hebrew דָּבָר (dābār, “word”). Like the Hebrew word, logos has quite a large semantic range. Generally, it means a thing that is spoken, or a matter. In some cases, it simply means a word or a spoken word (e.g., Matt 22:46). At other times, it expresses the related meanings of a saying (e.g., John 12:38, 48) or an account (e.g., Rom 14:12; Heb 13:17)
But with the rise of the greek influence upon the world and Judaism, Logos took on some philosophical and techinical definitions.
Logos is arguably the most debated and most discussed word in the Greek New Testament.
Where does John get this idea of the “Logos” from?
Where does John get this idea of the “Logos” from?
Some options:
Gnosticism (2nd CE).
Early Greek Philosophers (6th BCE) & Stoics (334 BCE)
Philo (died 50 CE)
Targumim (1st to 5th CE)
Word, Wisdom & Torah
Gnosticism: A variety of second-century AD religions whose participants believed that people could only be saved through revealed knowledge, or γνῶσις (gnōsis). Gnostics also held a negative view of the physical or material world. Early church fathers, such as Irenaeus, deemed Gnosticism heretical.
Early Greek: 6th BCE Heraclitus - Greek Philoshpher -use of Logos ... four in the technical sense of being eternal, omnipresent, the divine cause, and so forth.
Stoics - 334 BCE - held that the, Logos, which is in practice identical to God’s reason, acts upon the material. This universal reason or mind was expressed by way of example in human minds. Cynic literature likewise praises Logos, or reason, as the soul’s guide.
According to Stoic ideas, only a wise man could discern between true and false impressions (Long, Stoic Studies, 87), so only a wise man could align his reason and understanding with the universe and its logos (Long, Stoic Studies, 101).
The Stoic cosmos was a unified whole of logic, physics, and ethics, so proper alignment of reason and understanding with the cosmos and its logos resulted in true understanding of nature, one’s fellow humans, and the most appropriate way to conduct one’s life. To the Stoics, the goal of logic was ethical living.
This thought evenutally impacted Roman law, and also Jewish thinkers, including Philo and others. So this had an indirect influence on John’s use of the word, but is not the direct background.
Whereas the Stoic Logos permeates the “world,” the Johannine Logos is opposed by the world (1:10). John’s Logos is also personal, in contrast to the abstract principle of Greek philosophy. As Manson points out, John’s interest is christological, not metaphysical.
Philo: Some scholars, especially in the first half of the twentieth century, opined that John probably derived his Logos doctrine from Philo.
In Platonic thought the sensory world is merely a copy of the real world of ideas, of eternal forms. The Stoics, by contrast, saw the Logos as immanent in the world of matter. Philo combines these strands of thought, following the syncretistic lead of middle Platonism in his day.
Philo sought to commend Judaism to the Greek intelligensia of Alexandria, while raising his own community’s level of Hellenistic education.
Another serious difference from John has to do with Philo’s philosophical usage and audience; as one writer puts it, “Philo’s dominating interest is metaphysical,” addressing mediation to the created world; John’s interest is the mediation of eternal life to an alienated humanity. Further, Philo emphasizes the “reason” nuances of the term Logos, whereas John emphasizes the “word” aspect.
Targumim: Aramaic translations of the Tanach. Was spoken as a translation to the people and only later written down. Difficutl to date.
The Targumim frequently employ the expression Memra, which some interpreters have regarded as the primary or an important background to John’s Logos.
From the beginning with wisdom the Memra of the Lord created and perfected the heavens and the earth. And the earth was waste and unformed / desolate of man and beast, empty of plant cultivation and of trees, and darkness was spread over the face of the abyss; and a spirit of mercy from before the Lord was blowing over the surface of the waters. And the Memra of the Lord said: “Let there be light”; and there was light according to the decree of his Memra. (Targum Neofiti, Gen 1)
The case for this is questionable, however. Does the Memra represent a personified concept? Or, is it a case of using concrete terminology to describse something abstract? And to what extent is the Memra merely a figurative expression, a verbal buffer, not distinct from God?
Also, it is difficult to say if this concept of Memra existed during John’s time, because the targumic evidence is too late to allow us to be certain that Memra was used in a particular manner in the first century.
Word, Wisdon & Torah: Word, Wisdom, and Torah were all personified in early Jewish circles. Here are a few exapmles from the LXX (200BCE-100BCE)
your all-powerful word leaped from heaven, from the royal throne, into the midst of the land that was doomed, a stern warrior
give me the wisdom that sits by your throne, and do not reject me from among your servants.
so they perished because they had no wisdom, they perished through their folly. Who has gone up into heaven, and taken her, and brought her down from the clouds? Who has gone over the sea, and found her, and will buy her for pure gold?
... I would like to propose that what marks the Fourth Gospel as a new departure in the history of Judaism is not to be found in its Logos theology at all but in it incarnational Christology, and that that very historical departure, or rather advent, is iconically symbolized in the narrative itself. When the text announces in v. 14 that "the Word became flesh," that announcement is an iconic representation of the moment that the Christian narrative begins to diverge… (Boyarin)
As you read John 1.1-2 what comes to mind?
As you read John 1.1-2 what comes to mind?
creation/gen 1.
Why the relation between John 1 and Gen 1?
Why the relation between John 1 and Gen 1?
In the beginning ‘God’....vs. In the beginning was the Logos.
John wants to emphasize the intimacy between the logos and God as the source of all creation.
A In the beginning
B was
C the word
D and the word
E was
F with God
F′ and God
E′ was
D′ the word
C′ This one
B′ was
A′ in the beginning with God
tn John uses ζωή (zōē) 37 times: 17 times it occurs with αἰώνιος (aiōnios), and in the remaining occurrences outside the prologue it is clear from context that “eternal” life is meant. The two uses in 1:4, if they do not refer to “eternal” life, would be the only exceptions. (Also 1 John uses ζωή 13 times, always of “eternal” life.)
John’s point is that there is no life outside of the will and action of the Logos.
It is important to skip to vs. 14 because for me this is the punchline - the logos became flesh and tabernacled among us. The source of all creation and life became flesh.
This is a remarkable claim in the first century. This is what shows that although Logos may have been used widely, John was doing something particular.
To say something like this you really have to beleive it. Many ancient authors at this time would opine about the logos representing ideas, but John jumps in and doesn’t just use the logos to represent a nice idea, he points to flesh and blood - a man in space and time and history - the man Yeshua of Nazareth.
What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of life—
sn The Greek word translated took up residence (σκηνόω, skēnoō) alludes to the OT tabernacle, where the Shekinah, the visible glory of God’s presence, resided. The author is suggesting that this glory can now be seen in Jesus (note the following verse). The verb used here may imply that the Shekinah glory that once was found in the tabernacle has taken up residence in the person of Jesus. Cf. also John 2:19–21. The Word became flesh. This verse constitutes the most concise statement of the incarnation in the New Testament. John 1:1 makes it clear that the Logos was fully God, but 1:14 makes it clear that he was also fully human. A Docetic interpretation is completely ruled out. Here for the first time the Logos of 1:1 is identified as Jesus of Nazareth—the two are one and the same. Thus this is the last time the word logos is used in the Fourth Gospel to refer to the second person of the Trinity. From here on it is Jesus of Nazareth who is the focus of John’s Gospel.
John also refers to Light - why?
John also refers to Light - why?
Light helps you to see. But it is not just physical sight. Gen 1 has light created on Day 1. God called the light day and the darkness night. But the sun, moon, and stars aren’t created until day 5.
John is referring to spiritual light. Yeshua is the source of spiritual light for mankind.
If you want spiritual sight, follow the source of Light.
Yeshua spoke to them again, saying, “I am the light of the world. The one who follows Me will no longer walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
Therefore Yeshua said to them, “The light is with you for a little longer. Walk while you have the light, so that the darkness will not overtake you. The one who walks in darkness doesn’t know where he is going. While you have the light, believe in the light so that you may become sons of light.” Yeshua spoke these things, then left and hid Himself from them.
Why bring up John the immerser at this point (vs 6)?
Why bring up John the immerser at this point (vs 6)?
John was known to be a prophet - and his testimony that Yeshua was sent from God was important witness.
sn Witness is also one of the major themes of John’s Gospel. The Greek verb μαρτυρέω (martureō) occurs 33 times (compare to once in Matthew, once in Luke, 0 in Mark) and the noun μαρτυρία (marturia) 14 times (0 in Matthew, once in Luke, 3 times in Mark).
What does only begotten mean in vs 14?
What does only begotten mean in vs 14?
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. We looked upon His glory, the glory of the one and only from the Father, full of grace and truth.
tn Or “of the unique one.” Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant., 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God, Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).
What should we make of vs 16-17? What is the point there?
What should we make of vs 16-17? What is the point there?
And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
Out of His fullness, we have all received grace on top of grace. Torah was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Yeshua the Messiah.
ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς πάντες ἐλάβομεν καὶ χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος·
Options:
love (grace) under the New Covenant in place of love (grace) under the Sinai Covenant, thus replacement;
grace “on top of” grace, thus accumulation;
grace corresponding to grace, thus correspondence.
John seems to be linking Ex 33 and 34 when Moses is on the mountain and asks to see God’s glory.
Exod 33:13 : “Now therefore, I pray you, if I have found χάρις (LXX) in your sight, let me know your ways, that I may know you, so that I may find χάρις (LXX) in your sight.” Favor is given to one who has already received favor.
Adonai answered Moses, “I will also do what you have said, for you have found favor in My sight, and I know you by name.”
When God revealed his glory to Moses it was incomplete - Moses only saw part of it. Back to John 1.14 In the Logos made flesh we looked upon his glory full of grace and truth.
And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. We looked upon His glory, the glory of the one and only from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John is emphasizing the quality of the divine revelation through God’s servants - the Torah was the revelation of God given through the mediator Moses, grace and truth is a way of describnig the fullness of the father’s glory (cf vs 14) which has come through Yeshua the Messiah.
Then he said, “Please, show me Your glory!”
Then Adonai passed before him, and proclaimed, “Adonai, Adonai, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, and abundant in lovingkindness and truth,
The hebrew there for lovingkindness and truth is וְרַב־חֶ֥סֶד וֶאֱמֶֽת. What Moses receives at this point are the Ten Words (Logoi) from God.
The Torah (words of God) - through Moses - brought for his people.
The grace and the truth - through Yeshua (the Word of God made flesh) - brought for his people.
The glory that Moses saw in part behind the cleft in the rock and only saw his back, we look upon in plain view. Yeshua has brought the full revelation of the Father.
The Gospel of John: A Commentary, Volumes 1 & 2 1E. Full of Grace and Truth (1:14)
Christ is the full embodiment of Torah, completing what was partial (but actually present) in Torah. Jesus Christ thus embodies the hope of Judaism. John does not encourage his community to forsake its Jewish past, but to recognize that in following Christ, the embodiment of Torah, his community fulfills the highest demands of Judaism. Conversely, the Jewish opponents, synagogue leaders who claim to speak for the Jewish community, have rebelled against the ultimate embodiment of Torah.
Moses couldn’t see God:
But He also said, “You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live.”
And John says:
No one has ever seen God; but the one and only God, in the Father’s embrace, has made Him known.
Much debate over ‘one and only God’ vs ‘one and only son’ as some manuscripts have it. Regardless, focus on the emphasis of the entire passage - the quality of the revelation allow us to know the Father even with our own eyes - it’s that tangible. Not as philosphers who opine all day on the abstract, but the abstract has come down in the form of a man Yeshua the Messiah.
Yeshua said to him, “Have I been with you for so long a time, and you haven’t come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?
A Reflection Upon the Quality of the Revelation.
A Reflection Upon the Quality of the Revelation.
At many times and in many ways, God spoke long ago to the fathers through the prophets. In these last days He has spoken to us through a Son, whom He appointed heir of all things and through whom He created the universe. This Son is the radiance of His glory and the imprint of His being, upholding all things by His powerful word. When He had made purification for our sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
Do You See a Chiasm in John 1:1-18?
Do You See a Chiasm in John 1:1-18?
If so, perhaps the centre is the call in vs. 12 to which his entire prologue drives:
But whoever did receive Him, those trusting in His name, to these He gave the right to become children of God.
STOP.
Is there a connetion here with Wisdom?
Is there a connetion here with Wisdom?
Word, Wisdon & Torah: Word, Wisdom, and Torah were all personified in early Jewish circles. Here are a few exapmles from the LXX (200BCE-100BCE)
your all-powerful word leaped from heaven, from the royal throne, into the midst of the land that was doomed, a stern warrior
give me the wisdom that sits by your throne, and do not reject me from among your servants.
so they perished because they had no wisdom, they perished through their folly. Who has gone up into heaven, and taken her, and brought her down from the clouds? Who has gone over the sea, and found her, and will buy her for pure gold?
And an example from Proverbs:
Proverbs 8:22–36 (TLV)
“Adonai brought me forth, the first of His way, before His works of old. From eternity I was appointed from the beginning, before the world began. When there were no depths, I was brought forth, when there were no fountains abounding with water.
Before the mountains were shaped, before the hills, I was brought forth. He had not yet made the land, the fields, or the first dust of the earth. When He set the heavens in place, I was there.
When He inscribed the horizon on the face of the ocean, when He established the skies above, when He securely fixed the fountains of the deep, when He set the boundaries for the sea, so that the waters never transgress His command, when He laid out earth’s foundations—
then I was the craftsman beside Him, I was His daily delight, always rejoicing before Him, rejoicing in His whole world, and delighting in mankind.
“So now, children, listen to me! Blessed are those who keep my ways. Heed discipline and be wise, and do not neglect it. Blessed is the one who listens to me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at my doorposts. For whoever finds me finds life and obtains favor from Adonai. But whoever fails to find me harms his life— all who hate me love death.”
It’s also interesting that wisdom is often depicted as created (as in here in Proverbs) and in early Jewish literature, but the Apostolic Scriptures don’t depcit Yeshua as created.
We will see that John connects this to Torah. Yeshua is the living Torah. For John, following Yeshua not only entails true observance of Torah; Yeshua himself is God’s Word, and thus no one can genuinely observe Torah without following Yeshua.
What’s intersting about this is that Wisdom is depicted as created. This is the case in other Jewish literature.
Wisdom was created before all other things, and prudent understanding from eternity.
Before the ages, in the beginning, he created me, and for all the ages I shall not cease to be.
The later rabbis also spoke of Torah as the first creation.
Now, let’s look at the charge against Yeshua in John’s Gospel:
The Judean leaders answered, “We aren’t stoning you for a good work, but for blasphemy. Though You are a man, You make Yourself God!”
Let’s look at the Lord’s Prayer:
Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world came to be.”
Was Yeshua Created?
Was Yeshua Created?
Some claim this but I can’t find anything conclusive in the Apostolic Scriptures to suggest this.
“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation.
tn Or “the beginning of God’s creation”; or “the ruler of God’s creation.” From a linguistic standpoint all three meanings for ἀρχή (archē) are possible. The term is well attested in both LXX (Gen 40:13, 21; 41:13) and intertestamental Jewish literature (2 Macc 4:10, 50) as meaning “ruler, authority” (BDAG 138 s.v. 6). Some have connected this passage to Paul’s statements in Col 1:15, 18 which describe Christ as ἀρχή and πρωτότοκος (prōtotokos; e.g., see R. H. Mounce, Revelation [NICNT], 124) but the term ἀρχή has been understood as either “beginning” or “ruler” in that passage as well. The most compelling connection is to be found in the prologue to John’s Gospel (1:2–4) where the λόγος (logos) is said to be “in the beginning (ἀρχή) with God,” a temporal reference connected with creation, and then v. 3 states that “all things were made through him.” The connection with the original creation suggests the meaning “originator” for ἀρχή here. BDAG 138 s.v. 3 gives the meaning “the first cause” for the word in Rev 3:14, a term that is too philosophical for the general reader, so the translation “originator” was used instead. BDAG also notes, “but the mng. beginning = ‘first created’ is linguistically probable (s. above 1b and Job 40:19; also CBurney, Christ as the Ἀρχή of Creation: JTS 27, 1926, 160–77).” Such a meaning is unlikely here, however, since the connections described above are much more probable.
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him.
Some groups would claim that it says here Yeshua was created as ‘firstborn’ of all creation.
tn The Greek term πρωτότοκος (prōtotokos) could refer either to first in order of time, such as a first born child, or it could refer to one who is preeminent in rank. M. J. Harris, Colossians and Philemon (EGGNT), 43, expresses the meaning of the word well: “The ‘firstborn’ was either the eldest child in a family or a person of preeminent rank. The use of this term to describe the Davidic king in Ps 88:28 LXX (=Ps 89:27 EVV), ‘I will also appoint him my firstborn (πρωτότοκον), the most exalted of the kings of the earth,’ indicates that it can denote supremacy in rank as well as priority in time. But whether the πρωτό- element in the word denotes time, rank, or both, the significance of the -τοκος element as indicating birth or origin (from τίκτω, give birth to) has been virtually lost except in ref. to lit. birth.” In Col 1:15 the emphasis is on the priority of Jesus’ rank as over and above creation (cf. 1:16 and the “for” clause referring to Jesus as Creator).