Sources consulted
| Achtemeier, Paul and Green, Joel, and Thompson, Marianne. Introducing the New Testament: Its literature and theology (2001. Grand Rapids Eerdmans.). |
| Adeney. W.F. The Theology of the New Testament fifth edition. (undated. Hodder and Stoughton. London ) |
| [1] Barnes, Albert Notes on the Bible Electronic edition |
| Barnett Paul. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity, A History of New Testament Times.(1999 Downers Grove. Inter-Varsity Press) |
| Barnett, Paul. The Truth about Jesus; the challenge of the evidence.(1994 Sydney.Aquila press.) |
| Barrett, C.K. The Gospel According to John; An introduction with commentary and notes on the Greek text (1975.London. SPCK.) |
| Blomber Craig. The Historical reliability of Johns Gospel ; Issues and Commentary. (2001 Leicester, England. Inter-Varsity Press) |
| Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. The Anchor Bible. (1982. New York. Geoffrey Chapman) |
| Bultmann,Rudolf. The Gospel of John, a Commentary.(1971 Oxford. Western Printing services.) |
| Burge, Garry. Baker Commentary on the Bible ed Elwell. Walther.(1989. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books). |
| Calvin, Jean. Institutes of the Christian Religion book 1, Chapter 13 section 11 pg 74 (2009 Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson). and electronic edition |
| Carson, D.A. Moo, Douglas and Morris, Leon An Introduction to the New Testament (,1999, Leicester, Apollos) |
| Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan). |
| Carter, Warren. John, Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist (2006 Peabody, Massachusetts Hendrickson) (pg 101) |
| Cummins. S.A. Book of John. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible |
| Gordley Matthew JBL 128, no4 (2009) |
| Henry, Matthew; Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible (1991. Hendrickson Publishers. Peabody. Massachusets) and electronic edition |
| Keener. Craig. The IVP Bible Background Commentary.(1993. Downers grove, Illinois.IVP academic) |
| Köstenberger. Andreas. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Fourth edition ed Beale. G.K. Carson. D.A. (2009.Grand Rapids Michigan. Baker Academic). |
| Lee. Dorothy. The Gospel of John and the Five Senses. (JBL 129, no1 (2010):115-127 |
| Lewellyn, Peter Exegesis. Paper presented for students completing Introduction to New Testament at Charles Sturt University residential St Marks National Theological Centre Canberra, 2-3 September 2010 |
| Macleod A.J The New Bible Commentary, Second edition. ed Davidson, F.( 1959.London. IVP.). |
| Morris L. The Gospel According to John Revised edition. The New international Commentary on the New Testament (1995.Grand Rapids Michigan. Eerdmans) |
| Morris. Leon Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2nd Edition. ed. Elwell, Walther.(2009 Grand Rapids Michigan) |
| Neville, David.Study Guide THL409.(2010.Charles Sturt University) |
| Newman, Kevin. Certain Old Testament Parallels in St John’s Gospel. (Downside review no 424 July 2003 pg 211-224) |
| Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge University Press). |
| O’Day. Gail. Toward a Narrative Critical Study of John. (Interpretation. April 1995 The Gospel of John). |
| Pawson. David. Sermon Series: John’s Gospel date unknown. |
| Piper, John. Sermon: John1:1-3.In the beginning was the word. September 21 2008. Accessed from http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/in-the-beginning-was-the-word |
| Raymond Brown The Gospel According to John.(The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982) |
| Tenney, Merrill C. “A. The Preincarnate Word (1:1-5)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 28. (1981.Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,). Electronic edition |
Introduction
John’s Gospel begins with a magnificent declaration of the Deity of the Son of God. It has profound implications for our theology of the trinity, and significantly focuses our attention on the splendor of the incarnation. Not only is it Doxology, it is also didactic in nature, emphasizing the distinctive Sitz im Leben of the fourth Gospel.
The Gospel of John’s primary concern is ontological,[1] and secondly didactic. At the heart of the Christian message is a God who reveals and a God who relates through love. (Prov 25:2, 1 John 4:8,16) Carson picks up this theme but emphasises Johns account as God being self revelatory in the person of Jesus. Jesper Tang Nielsen identifies a core structure at the heart of the Johanine narrative which “is the recognition of God through Jesus”[2]
I am indebted in particular to David Pawson, who presented a sermon series on John’s Gospel in the latter part of the last century, for many of the insights presented in this exegesis.
Contextual Analysis
This pericope occurs at the beginning of John’s Gospel. In many ways it functions much like an overture, setting the tone for what is to come and introducing themes to be expanded upon and explored later.[3] Many of the key words which feature strongly in John occur in this first chapter.[4]
John’s Gospel is distinctive enough to be analyzed quite differently from the Synoptic Gospels.[5][6] Commentators have said that it is more theological[7]. “St John, as we have seen, does not hesitate to insert his own reflections in the course of the narrative, and that with considerable freedom.”[8]
“It must be remembered that the gospels were presentations of Christ; not “biographies” in the modern sense of the term.”[9]
Much of the interpretation of John’s Gospel depends upon when the exegete believes the gospel was written. Scholars of Bultmann’s ilk and era tended to emphasise Gnostic influences in John’s Gospel, believing the Gospel to have a late composition date. Subsequent archaeological and textual evidence has pointed to an earlier composition, which lends itself to read the Gospel with a strongly Jewish subtext.[10] Broad consensus does suggest that John was written not only by an individual recalling an event in isolation. A close reading suggests it is the product of a collaborative effort produced in the context of community. [11]
“Today it is often argued that the earliest interpretations of the book of John are now embedded within the final form of the text, having occurred after several stages of its composition within a rather isolated and evolving late first century “Johannine community”[12]
In contrast Carson et al states “To think of the Johannine community as isolated and sectarian is to miss the grand vision of John 17, not to mention the fact that Johns Christology finds its closest parallels in the New Testament in the so called hymns (e.g. Phil 2:5-11; Col. 1:15-20) which suggests that the evangelist is more thoroughly in touch with the wider church.”[13]
Formal Analysis
A mixed pericope,[14] while Johns Gospel falls into the broad biographical genre, this pericope points to the poetic nature of the book, as well as to its didactic purpose. Many scholars have identified it as an early Christian hymn[15]. It also points to the liturgical function intended by the evangelist.[16] While following some biographical conventions, it forms a bridge between poetry[17] and narrative with strong Old Testament (and therefore Jewish) allusions.
“The shift toward a focus on the community revealed by the text was accompanied by a parallel shift away from emphasis on a predominantly Gnostic provenance and milieu of the fourth Gospel and toward a revitalized sense of Jewish provenance and milieu.”[18]
“The Gospel reflects Jewish and Palestinian origins It is steeped in Jewish scriptures and shows an extensive knowledge of the climate and topography of Judea and Jerusalem… as well as the religious, social and historical circumstances of the time it narrates.”[19]
Detailed analysis
The first verse sets the groundwork and tone for the next twelve verses. Due to its importance we will spend more time teasing out this one verse. “In the Hebrew Bible the first book Genesis is named by its opening words; therefore the parallel between the prologue and Genesis can easily be seen.”[20] “John evidently has allusion here to that place, and he means to apply to “the Word” an expression which is there applied “to God.” In both places it clearly means before creation, before the world was made, when as yet there was nothing.”[21]
Simultaneously it recalls relationship; “with” in the first verse is implicit of two individuals face to face, the underlying meaning here being a God who has in all eternity been relational in nature.[22]
This relational nature is continued through John’s description of Jesus as “Logos”.
“"Word" is the Greek logos, which has several meanings. Ordinarily it refers to a spoken word, with emphasis on the meaning conveyed, not just the sound. Logos, therefore, is an expression of personality in communication.”[23]
In contrast to modern conventions where words are viewed in a more passive light, eastern conceptions and particularly Jewish conceptions see words as active having not only a representative, but also a causative effect. It was by Gods Word that the universe was created in Genesis, this thread is continued in the New Testament.(Hebrew 4:12-13).
“Beginning with the use of the wisdom motif, the prologue is full of imagery having to do with revelation, instruction, wisdom, guidance, seeing and understanding.”[24]
“In short, God’s ‘Word’ in the Old Testament is His powerful self-expression in creation, revelation and salvation, and the personification of that “Word” makes it suitable for John to apply it as a title to God’s ultimate self-disclosure, the purpose of his own Son.”[25]
Several commentators have linked John’s use of Logos to Philo and having roots deeper in Greek philosophy.[26]“John did not superimpose the philosophical concept on the person of Christ, but he adopted the Greek term as the best medium of expressing the nature of Christ.”[27]While in many ways there are parallels with Philo’s logos, Carson points out several ways in which Philo’s Logos falls short, particularly with regard the Logos’ distinctive personality.[28]“We might say that Jesus is the narration of God”[29].
Of the phrase ‘and the Word was God’ C.K. Barrett writes; “John intends the whole of his gospel shall be read in the light of this verse. The deeds and words of Jesus are the deeds and words of God.”[30]
The Gospel goes on to say that all things were created both by Christ and for Him, that the Logos is life and light.[31] “Light is a common metaphor in the Hebrew Bible for God’s life-giving creative power (Gen1:1-5, 14-19) salvation (Psalm 27:1) and deliverance from oppressive powers (Isa 9:1-2).”[32]
While other Gospel writers take as their genesis the nativity narratives, or links to prophecy concerning His birth, or genealogies linking Him to Abraham or Adam, John takes one step further back, into the time before time.[33]
Following on from the first two verses, the passage continues to tease out the revelation of the word and its glory in the context of four specific relationships over eight verses.[34]
(1:3,4) We see the creator and his relationship to the creation. It echoes the Genesis account of the separation of light from dark (Gen 1v3,4) and harkens back to the three words beginning the chapter.[35]
Light is contrasted with the darkness which has not grasped it – the Greek word here has a similar double meaning to the word in English [36] This also parallels ‘Manifest’ (2:11).
“Prominent at the beginning of each Gospel is John the Baptist, the long awaited forerunner prophesied in the Old Testament who points to Jesus as the greater one who is to come, who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.”[37]
(1:6-9) Pick up a Johannine distinctive, paying special attention to the relationship between John the Baptist and the Light. John is seen as a witness to the light. Later pressed by the authorities to reveal who he was he described himself as a “voice”.
Ephesus, has been suggested as the place of the writing of John’s Gospel[38], and is believed to have been home to “disciples of John the Baptist who made too much of Him and too little of Christ”[39]. There is some suggestion that John’s gospel may have been written to address in part this practice.
Burge writes; “The fourth Gospel contains a polemic aimed at the followers of John the Baptist (see1-19-28; 35-42; 3:22-36; 10:40-42). Elsewhere in the book of Acts we learn about Paul encountering followers of John with deficient beliefs. Surprisingly, they too are located in Ephesus.”[40]
Jesus and John are contrasted and juxtaposed throughout John.[41]
(1:9) gives us a foretaste of the incarnational nature of the Christ spelled out clearly in (1:14).
The relationship between the Christ and humanity is under the microscope (1:10-13). Here there appears to be a distinction drawn between those who were his “own” who did not receive him and to those who did receive him. On this point Blomberg writes, John “speaks of Christ’s rejection by “his own” (1:11) which may derivatively apply to the majority of humanity but first of all refers to the general response of the Jewish people (Pryor 1990)”[42]
“The reference to believer’s right to become “children of God” in 1:12 clearly builds on the OT characterization of Israel as God’s children.”[43]
Throughout these verses there are strong indications of God’s instigation in all these relationships.
(1:14) is something of a climax which had its beginnings in (1:9).The tone here changes to emphasise not Christ’s divinity so much as his humanity pointing to the mystery of the incarnation.
“After the incarnation, only the privileged group of believers is able to see his glory. In the fundamental verse of incarnation (1:14) this particular group is marked out as ‘we’. The mark of identity is that they, unlike everybody else perceived his glory…One group did not receive him, another believed in his name. The latter were privileged in becoming God’s children.”[44]
“He dwelt among us, here in this lower world. Having taken upon him the nature of man, he put himself into the place and condition of other men.”[45]“‘Dwelt’ here is literally “tabernacled” which means that as God tabernacle with His people in the wilderness, so had the Word tabernacled among His people in Jesus.”[46]
Conclusion
We have examined this pericope in some detail and have noted that it is primarily concerned with Gods revelation of Himself in context of relationship. L.L. Morris, one of the greatest authorities on John’s Gospel summarized his Christology in this pericope as follows; “it is clear that God has taken action in Christ for revelation and for salvation”[47].
Essentially this pericope imputes to Christ the glory due to God. Matthew Henry defends the boldness of John when he writes;
“And why should John have hesitated to ascribe the Majesty of God to Christ, after saying in his preface that the Word was God?”[48]
Perhaps the final word should be left to Raymond Brown;
“In many ways John’s Gospel is the best example of realized eschatology. God has revealed himself in a definitive form, and seemingly no more can be asked.”[49]
Endnotes.
[1] Both Carson and Bultmann use revelation (or self-revelation) as the primary purpose and overall feature of the Gospel.
[1] Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (Journal of New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge university Press).
[1] Blomeberg, Craig. The Historical reliability of John’s Gospel; Issues and Commentary. (2001. Apollos. Grand Rapids, Michigan) pg 72
[1] (As with the didactic traditions of Jewish books such as Proverbs and Psalms, and mirrored in Hellenistic erudition these are frequently in dialectical opposition); darkness light; life, death; glory, grace, water, bread.
[1] Neville, David.Study Guide THL409. (2010.Charles Sturt University) pg 31.
[1] Although there is broad agreement that John was written subsequent to the synoptics, and with at least some direct dependence upon Mark. Morris L. The Gospel According to John Revised edition. The New international Commentary on the New Testament ( 1995.Grand Rapids Michigan. Eerdmans) pg 43-44.
[1] And therefore some have argued, less historical.
[1] Adeney. W.F. The Theology of the New Testament fifth edition.( Undated. Hodder and Stoughton London)
pg 235-236
[1] The New Bible Commentary, Second edition. ed Davidson,F.( 1959.London. IVP.).pg 865 One illustration on this point is that the Gospels place very little emphasis on the Christ’s internal motivations and thought life when compared with the modern obsession with psychology in biography.
[1] Lewellyn, Peter Exegesis. Paper presented for students completing Introduction to New Testament at Charles Sturt University residential St Marks National Theological Centre Canberra, 2-3 September 2010
[1] Brown in particular pays close attention to the layers and theories of compositon.(pg 87-103)
[1] Cummins. S.A. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. ed.Kevin J. VanHoozer. (Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books.2005.) (pg 394)
[1]Carson, D.A. Moo, Douglas and Morris, Leon An Introduction to the New Testament (Leicester, Apollos,1999)
[1] Brown takes the first 18 verses to be a hymn, interjected by commentary (with interjections at verses 6-9; 12b-13;15; 17-18) the case for this is persuasively argued by Gordley (JBL Vol 128 no 4 2009).
[1] Gordley Matthew JBL 128, no4 (2009) pg 781 Carson (pg112) warns “the term poem can only be applied to the prologue with hesitation.
[1] Similarly John’s Revelation was intended to be performed and sung (Llewelyn, Peter, CSU )
[1] Raymond Brown writes “The prologue is written in a carefully constructed, interlocking poetic pattern”(pg . xxiv) in his commentary The Gospel According to John.(The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982)
[1] O’Day. Gail. Toward a Narrative Critical Study of John. (Interpretation.April 1995 The Gospel of John).
[1] Paul Barnett. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity: A History of New Testament Times.(1999. Downers Grove Illinois. Inter-Varsity Press) Pg 313
[1] Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. (The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982)pg 4
[1] Barnes, Albert Notes on the Bible Electronic edition
[1] Pawson extrapolates the theological implications of this by pointing out that God is revealed as Love (1John 4:8;16). This also alludes obtusely to Christ’s humanity in that the Hebrew of Genesis two talks of the face to face relationship between God and man in the creation of mankind; God breathed His “ruach” into man’s nostrils.
[1] Tenney, Merrill C. “A. The Preincarnate Word (1:1-5)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 28. (1981. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), Electronic edition
[1]Achtemeier, Paul and Green, Joel, and Thompson, Marianne. Introducing the New Testament: Its literature and theology (2001. Grand Rapids Eerdmans.).
[1]Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan). Pg 116
[1][1] In particular Heraclitus
[1] Tenney, Merrill C. “D. The Incarnation of the Word (1:14, 16-18)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 33. (1981Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), Electronic Edition
[1] Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan).
[1] Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan).
[1] Barrett, C.K. The Gospel According to John; An introduction with commentary and notes on the Greek text (1975.London. SPCK.)( Pg 130)
[1]see Col 1: 15-17
[1] Carter, Warren. John, Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist (2006 Peabody, Massachusetts Hendrickson) (pg 101)
[1] Pawson. David. John’s et al
[1] The major commentators tend to group the verses (1-2), (3-5), (6-8), (9-14).
[1][1] Kostenberg ditto.
[1] Piper, John. Sermon: John1:1-3.In the beginning was the word. September 21 2008. Accessed from http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/in-the-beginning-was-the-word
[1] Barnett, Paul. The Truth about Jesus; the challenge of the evidence.(1994 Sydney.Aquila press.) (Pg 75)
[1] Barnett Paul. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity, A history of New Testament Times.(1999 Downers Grove.Inter-Varsity Press) (pg 311)
[1] Pawson. David, John et al
[1] Burge, Garry. Baker Commentary on the Bible ed Elwell. Walther.1989. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books. (Pg 843-844)
[1] Commentators point out the relationship of the interpolations into the hymn and their focus on John the Baptist. Commentators have picked up on the reluctance of John to describe himself (the I am nots) and Jesus’ “I am’s”
[1]Blomber Craig. The Historical reliability of Johns Gospel (2001 Leicester, England. Inter-Varsity Press) (Pg 72) quoting Pryor (1990)
[1] Köstenberger. Andreas. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Fourth edition ed Beale. G.K. Carson. D.A. 2009.Grand Rapids Michigan. Baker Academic. Pg421.
[1] Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge University Press). pg 355-356
[1]Henry, Matthew; Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible 991. Hendrickson Publishers. Peabody. Massachusets Pg 688 and electronic edition
[1] Keener. Craig. The IVP Bible Background Commentary.1993. Downers grove, Illinois.IVP academic
[1] Morris. Leon Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2nd Edition. ed. (Elwell, Walther. Grand Rapids Michigan.2009) pg 634
[1] Calvin, Jean. Institutes of the Christian Religion book 1, Chapter 13 section 11 pg 74 (2009 Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson). and electronic edition
[1]Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. The Anchor Bible. (1982. New York. Geoffrey Chapman) (introduction pg cxvii)
[1] Both Carson and Bultmann use revelation (or self-revelation) as the primary purpose and overall feature of the Gospel.
[2] Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (Journal of New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge university Press).
[3] Blomeberg, Craig. The Historical reliability of John’s Gospel; Issues and Commentary. (2001. Apollos. Grand Rapids, Michigan) pg 72
[4] (As with the didactic traditions of Jewish books such as Proverbs and Psalms, and mirrored in Hellenistic erudition these are frequently in dialectical opposition); darkness light; life, death; glory, grace, water, bread.
[5] Neville, David.Study Guide THL409. (2010.Charles Sturt University) pg 31.
[6] Although there is broad agreement that John was written subsequent to the synoptics, and with at least some direct dependence upon Mark. Morris L. The Gospel According to John Revised edition. The New international Commentary on the New Testament ( 1995.Grand Rapids Michigan. Eerdmans) pg 43-44.
[7] And therefore some have argued, less historical.
[8] Adeney. W.F. The Theology of the New Testament fifth edition.( Undated. Hodder and Stoughton London)
pg 235-236
[9] The New Bible Commentary, Second edition. ed Davidson,F.( 1959.London. IVP.).pg 865 One illustration on this point is that the Gospels place very little emphasis on the Christ’s internal motivations and thought life when compared with the modern obsession with psychology in biography.
[10] Lewellyn, Peter Exegesis. Paper presented for students completing Introduction to New Testament at Charles Sturt University residential St Marks National Theological Centre Canberra, 2-3 September 2010
[11] Brown in particular pays close attention to the layers and theories of compositon.(pg 87-103)
[12] Cummins. S.A. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. ed.Kevin J. VanHoozer. (Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books.2005.) (pg 394)
[13]Carson, D.A. Moo, Douglas and Morris, Leon An Introduction to the New Testament (Leicester, Apollos,1999)
[14] Brown takes the first 18 verses to be a hymn, interjected by commentary (with interjections at verses 6-9; 12b-13;15; 17-18) the case for this is persuasively argued by Gordley (JBL Vol 128 no 4 2009).
[15] Gordley Matthew JBL 128, no4 (2009) pg 781 Carson (pg112) warns “the term poem can only be applied to the prologue with hesitation.
[16] Similarly John’s Revelation was intended to be performed and sung (Llewelyn, Peter, CSU )
[17] Raymond Brown writes “The prologue is written in a carefully constructed, interlocking poetic pattern”(pg . xxiv) in his commentary The Gospel According to John.(The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982)
[18] O’Day. Gail. Toward a Narrative Critical Study of John. (Interpretation.April 1995 The Gospel of John).
[19] Paul Barnett. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity: A History of New Testament Times.(1999. Downers Grove Illinois. Inter-Varsity Press) Pg 313
[20] Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. (The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982)pg 4
[21] Barnes, Albert Notes on the Bible Electronic edition
[22] Pawson extrapolates the theological implications of this by pointing out that God is revealed as Love (1John 4:8;16). This also alludes obtusely to Christ’s humanity in that the Hebrew of Genesis two talks of the face to face relationship between God and man in the creation of mankind; God breathed His “ruach” into man’s nostrils.
[23] Tenney, Merrill C. “A. The Preincarnate Word (1:1-5)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 28. (1981. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), Electronic edition
[24]Achtemeier, Paul and Green, Joel, and Thompson, Marianne. Introducing the New Testament: Its literature and theology (2001. Grand Rapids Eerdmans.).
[25]Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan). Pg 116
[26][26] In particular Heraclitus
[27] Tenney, Merrill C. “D. The Incarnation of the Word (1:14, 16-18)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 33. (1981Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), Electronic Edition
[28] Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan).
[29] Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan).
[30] Barrett, C.K. The Gospel According to John; An introduction with commentary and notes on the Greek text (1975.London. SPCK.)( Pg 130)
[31]see Col 1: 15-17
[32] Carter, Warren. John, Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist (2006 Peabody, Massachusetts Hendrickson) (pg 101)
[33] Pawson. David. John’s et al
[34] The major commentators tend to group the verses (1-2), (3-5), (6-8), (9-14).
[35][35] Kostenberg ditto.
[36] Piper, John. Sermon: John1:1-3.In the beginning was the word. September 21 2008. Accessed from http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/in-the-beginning-was-the-word
[37] Barnett, Paul. The Truth about Jesus; the challenge of the evidence.(1994 Sydney.Aquila press.) (Pg 75)
[38] Barnett Paul. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity, A history of New Testament Times.(1999 Downers Grove.Inter-Varsity Press) (pg 311)
[39] Pawson. David, John et al
[40] Burge, Garry. Baker Commentary on the Bible ed Elwell. Walther.1989. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books. (Pg 843-844)
[41] Commentators point out the relationship of the interpolations into the hymn and their focus on John the Baptist. Commentators have picked up on the reluctance of John to describe himself (the I am nots) and Jesus’ “I am’s”
[42]Blomber Craig. The Historical reliability of Johns Gospel (2001 Leicester, England. Inter-Varsity Press) (Pg 72) quoting Pryor (1990)
[43] Köstenberger. Andreas. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Fourth edition ed Beale. G.K. Carson. D.A. 2009.Grand Rapids Michigan. Baker Academic. Pg421.
[44] Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge University Press). pg 355-356
[45]Henry, Matthew; Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible 991. Hendrickson Publishers. Peabody. Massachusets Pg 688 and electronic edition
[46] Keener. Craig. The IVP Bible Background Commentary.1993. Downers grove, Illinois.IVP academic
[47] Morris. Leon Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2nd Edition. ed. (Elwell, Walther. Grand Rapids Michigan.2009) pg 634
[48] Calvin, Jean. Institutes of the Christian Religion book 1, Chapter 13 section 11 pg 74 (2009 Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson). and electronic edition
[49]Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. The Anchor Bible. (1982. New York. Geoffrey Chapman) (introduction pg cxvii)
No comments:
Post a Comment