Sermon on John 1:1, The Word Was God

Many years ago, I think around 1990, a woman in my church came to me concerned about her niece.  Her niece, Christie, had converted to Jehovah’s Witnesses, and had corresponded with her aunt about it and their view that Jesus is not the Almighty God.  Her aunt did not know how to respond to her and defend the deity of Jesus, so she asked me to correspond with Christie about it.  I did, quite extensively.  Then, about five years ago I had a Jehovah’s Witness couple come to my door wanting to share their viewpoint with me.  I invited them in and we began a study of theirs in a little booklet of theirs.  We met for several weeks discussing the booklet.  I told them early on that I was disappointed in the booklet’s failure to honor Jesus properly, describing him as the highest created being in the universe, but not as God, and that this dishonored Jesus.  We debated particularly over John 1:1 and the rest of John’s Gospel, which clearly teaches that Jesus is God.  They had some clever arguments that contradicted that view.

What would you do if you had a friend who was Jehovah’s Witness and you wanted to help him understand that Jesus is God, not a created super-being?  Could you do it?  I want to help you to be able to do just that.  I want to show you the clear evidence today that John believed that Jesus is God.  Would you like to take that journey with me?  I ask that because it will require you to do some thinking about things you don’t normally think about, like grammar and parts of speech, and even about the Greek language.  That’s what it will take to accomplish this.   You don’t have to be Greek scholar or an English teacher to be able to grasp this, but you have to think carefully.  Are you ready to try it?  Will you try it with me?

Everything centers around John 1:1, so let’s turn there in our Bibles.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

That is the translation of John 1:1 by the vast majority of English and foreign language translations from the Greek original.  Here is the translation of Jehovah’s Witnesses New World Translation:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.

Bit of a difference, no?

• And it all hinges on one fact in the Greek original in that last clause, and that is that the word “God” does not have a definite article on it.
• The definite article is the word “the.”  We call it a particle because it is not a noun, it is not a verb, it is sort of like an adjective but not quite, so we label it a particle.  It serves a specific function to mark a noun as a specific or definite noun.
• There is a definite article on the word “God” in the second phrase, “and the Word was with (the) God.”  The definite article in Greek is on the word “God” (theos) and
• we don’t translate it, but it shows that John is referring to the one and only God, and in this case we would say, the Father.

Now to be fair, in last clause, “and the Word was God,”

• it doesn’t have the indefinite article with the word “God” either, the word “a,” it just doesn’t have any article, “a” or “the.”
• But the Greek doesn’t have an indefinite article “a” or “an.”  If a Greek speaker wanted to make something indefinite, he or she would simply leave off the definite article.

So, for example, in John chapter 1, we have in verse 6 the statement, “There was a man sent from God whose name was John,” that refers to John the Baptist.

• He was “a” man, not “the” man (the only man ever), sent from God.  John represents him as a non-specific man.  So there is no article in front of the word “man” in this sentence.
• But interestingly there is also no article on the word “God” in this sentence.  But we would not translate this sentence, “There was a man sent from a god.”  It is understood that John was not sent from a god but from the one and only true God.
• What this shows us is that just because a Greek speaker or writer did not use a definite article it didn’t mean that the noun so used was not definite.  It might very well be definite and context would show you that.  It is a matter of context.

But for a Greek speaker, there was another idea they could communicate by leaving off the definite article.

• Look at John 1:3, “In him was life, and the life was the light of men.”  In the first case, “life” does not have the article “the” with it, and in the second case it does.  By not putting the word “the” in front of “life” in the first instance, John is signifying that Jesus is the quality of life itself, light in its most general sense as the essence of all life.  Leaving off the article “the” suggests that it is the qualitative aspect of the word “life” that John is emphasizing.
• When John adds the definite article in the second use of “life” he is then referring to “that” life that he just described Jesus being.  Jesus is life itself, and that life itself is the light of men, the only light, true light, that enlightens humanity.

Unlike Greek, English has an indefinite article “a” (or “an” when used before a noun beginning with a vowel),

• but we don’t always use it or the definite article “the” when we are referring to some nouns, like “God.”  Though we haven’t used the definite article we still understand the noun “God” to be definite.
• We also, like the Greek speakers, sometimes leave off any article, definite “the” or indefinite “a,” so we can highlight the qualitative aspect of the noun.  Let me illustrate this!
• For example, if I say, “Death is the most serious difficulty of a man,” I’m trying to say that any particular man, or more likely, any human, faces their most trying time at death.
• But if I say, “Death is the most serious difficulty of the man,” in this case I’m talking about some particular man facing death.
• But if I say, “Death is the most serious difficulty of man,” I’m now talking about all human beings ever.  I’m emphasizing the qualitative aspect of the word “man,” “man” as a race, “man” as a society.  I mean by “man,” in essence, human nature.  I could rephrase, “Death is the most serious difficulty facing humans.”

And that is what I believe John is doing in John 1:1.  Would you like to know a little Greek?  You may already know a little Greek, you know, the guy down at the deli who fixes your baklava and hummus.  But I’m talking about a little bit of Greek language?  Will you indulge me a moment?

The Greek word for God is theos, and the Greek word for “word” is logos, and the Greek word for “the” is ho.  In John 1:1 John writes, “In the beginning was the Word (ho logos), and the Word (ho logos) was with God (ho theos), and the Word (ho logos) was God (theos, without the article ho).  Now let’s break down this verse a bit.

Now here is John 1:1 showing you the English and the Greek.  Let’s examine each phrase.

 

“In the beginning was the Word…”

 

When I say that in the beginning something was, what do I mean.

• When I say, “In the beginning of Ford Motor Company was Henry Ford, what am I saying?  I’m saying that Henry Ford was the beginning of Ford Motor Company.
• If I say, “In the beginning of my family was Mary Ann and me,” what am I saying?  I’m saying Mary Ann and I were the beginning of our family.
• When John says, “in the beginning,” what beginning is he talking about?  The beginning of the universe.  So when he says “in the beginning of the universe was Jesus” what does he mean? He means, Jesus was the beginning of the universe.  That’s the point he is trying to make right off the bat.
• He confirms that in what he says in verse 2:  All things came into being through him, and nothing that came into being came into being without him.  He is the Creator.

Now Jehovah’s Witnesses are happy to concede that God the Father Almighty used Jesus to create the world.  But is that really possible?  Can a created being create?

• Not in the same way the Creator creates.  A created being can take something already in existence and shape it or combine it or otherwise manipulate it to become something new.
• But only the Creator can make something exist that did not exist before.
• When John says “in the beginning” where does your mind go immediately?  Genesis 1:1?  “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”?  Of course it does, and it did for John’s readers, also.  John is clearly equating Jesus, the Word, with God in Genesis 1.  He is equating Jesus with the Creator of all things, not someone who shapes existing things but who brings what did not exist into existence.

But look at the next phrase in John 1:1.

 

“…and the Word was with God (ho theos)…”

 

How can the Word be the Creator God and yet be with the Creator God?  It makes them sound like two separate people.

• And that is exactly how Jesus, who is the Word, relates to his Father, as a separate person from Him.
• He prays to the Father.
• He talks about being sent by the Father.
• In John 5 he says his Father works and he too is working, that is, doing the same things as the Father, for which remarks the Jews want to stone him because he is claiming equality with God.
• He claims in John 17 to have shared the Father’s glory and that the Father is going to glorify him, indeed has glorified him already as he moves toward the crucifixion.  After his resurrection he says he is returning to his Father.
• They are two separate people.

Now look at what John says in the last clause of John 1:1.

 

“…and the Word was God.”

 

As I have already remarked, this time John does not put the article “the” in front of theos, God.  Instead  he leaves it by itself.

• Is he emphasizing the indefiniteness of this noun, and we should translate it “a god”?
• Or is he emphasizing the qualitative aspect of it, “God-ness” or “deity”?
• Or is he simply leaving off the article but still viewing the word “God” as definite, like he did in verse 6?
• Well let me ask you this.  Does John give any indication in his Gospel that he thinks Jesus is a lesser god than the true God?  Let’s think about it.
• As I mentioned, in John 5 he records Jesus’ statement that he is doing the same work as God the Father and the Jews want to stone Jesus for blasphemy.  Wouldn’t this be a good time for Jesus to correct, or for John to correct, that notion?  But they don’t.
• In John 10 when Jesus says “I and the Father are one”, and once again the Jews want to stone Jesus, kill him, why doesn’t Jesus or John correct the “mistake” by saying, “No, I don’t mean I am the God, I am a god”?  Because it is not a false impression.  John believes Jesus is God, not a god.
• In John 12 John speaks about Isaiah seeing Jesus’ glory.  What is he talking about?  He’s talking about the vision Isaiah had of Yahweh seated on his throne in the temple and the train of His might robe filling the temple and the angels singing, “Holy, holy, holy, is Yahweh God almighty.”
• And John records doubting Thomas, when he realizes Jesus has been resurrected, as falling on his knees before Jesus and declaring, “My Lord and my God.”  John is particularly keen to show us that Jesus is not a god but the one and only true God who is yet a distinct person from the Father and the Holy Spirit.

So why does John leave off the article ho (“the”) from theos (God) in John 1:1, the last clause?  He is emphasizing the qualitative and the definite aspect of the noun theos.

• We could translate this something like, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the true God, and the word was God-ness,” or deity.
• But it works equally for us to translate it exactly as most translations have done, “and the Word was God.”  That communicates the same thing to us.
• We understand that Jesus is a different person from the Father and the Spirit, but he is the same stuff as they are, deity.  Jesus is God the same way the Father is God and the Spirit is God.

Some of you may remember the message I brought from 2 Corinthians a few weeks ago, where Paul urges the Corinthians not to accept a false Jesus, nor a false Spirit, nor a false gospel.  And we clarified who the true Jesus is.  We made four statements:

• He is God yet a distinct person from the Father and the Holy Spirit;
• He is Man, so he has taken on an additional nature to deity;
• His two natures, divine and human, were not mixed;
• He is only one person

That first and second point is John’s focus here in John 1:1.

• Jesus possesses all deity, the same as the Father and the Spirit,
• but he is a distinct person from them, as they are from each other.
• God is one God, one essence, made up of three persons who share that one and the same essence.
• You are welcome, nay commanded, to address each of them as the eternal Creator God, to worship each as members of the divine Godhead.

We can illustrate it with this diagram of the Trinity.  The circle in the middle represents the one, undivided nature or essence of Deity that is shared equally by the Father, the Son and the Spirit.  The three points of the triangle represent the separate personages of the Father, the Son and the Spirit, who are equal yet distinct.  That is what John believed.  That is what John 1:1 is teaching.

So, how do you deal with a Jehovah’s Witness about this?

Well, first, if a Jehovah’s Witness comes to your door, I would recommend that you pray and ask God if He wants you to talk to them on this level or not, and if He gives you peace, politely explain your view of Jesus and send them on, or even just politely send them on.  But if, on the other hand, you are in relationship with a Jehovah’s Witness, say at work or a neighbor, and you are seeking to win them to the Savior, here is what you should do to help them see that John did not teach that Jesus is “a god”:

1.Tell them you understand that there is no definite article “the” in front of theos but that you know that to translate it as “a god” is wrong.

2. Have a note written in your Bible at John 1:1 that says John 8:54 (same construction, no definite article).

• What that means is that John 1:1 and 8:54 are the same construction in Greek, and in each case the definite article “the” does not appear before theos.
• Ask them how their translation, the New World Translation, translates John 8:54. Have them read it.  It makes God a capital G.  Ask them if they are sure that is the correct translation.  Let them repeat it.  Say, “Are you absolutely sure that you should translate God with a capital G there?”
• If they say yes, say, “Then why don’t you translate it with a capital G in John 1:1 since they are the exact same construction in the Greek?”

3. If they say the context lets them know to translate it “a god” in John 1:1,

• then ask them, “Doesn’t John indicate elsewhere that he believed Jesus is the true God, as Jesus himself believed?” and point them to this passage: John 8:58,59.
• John 8:58, is mistranslated by the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation, so you can ask them to read it from their translation. But tell them (make a note by the verse in your Bible) that the words Jesus utters must be translated, “I am,” and that their own translation translates those words that way in every other occurrence in John’s Gospel, “I am.”
• Ask, “So why do they translate it differently here?” Why translate it as they do, “Before Abraham was I have been”?  Because they are afraid to translate it correctly, “I am”
• Why would Jesus be saying, “I am” as a way of identifying his precedence over Abraham? The answer is in Exodus 3:14.  There Moses asks Yahweh, who has appeared to him in the burning bush, who he shall say sent him to Egypt and his people Israel to take them out of Egypt. Yahweh’s answer is, “The God of your fathers has sent me to you.”  But then Moses asks, “What is His name?”  and Yahweh answers, “I am who I am; tell them I am has sent me to you.”  The name, “I am” is Yahweh’s name, it is the name of the Lord God Almighty.  This is why the Jews are trying to stone Jesus.  He has uttered, in their estimation, blasphemy.  We would call it blasphemy and so would John if Jesus were not God.

4. If your Jehovah’s Witness friend tells you that Exodus 3:14 says God’s name is “I will become what I choose to become” and does not say “I am,” tell them that Jesus correctly interpreted what the divine name is right here in this passage and the Jews clearly understood it to be the divine name, and tried to stone him for blasphemy.

5. Now I must warn you.  It is not likely that your Jehovah’s Witness friend will be persuaded by this argumentation.  None of the Witnesses I’ve spoken to were persuaded.  But here’s what it might do.

• It might put a pebble in their shoe. It might just be that little piece of information that causes them to doubt whether they have really properly understood Jesus.  It might be that nudge to consider the truth.
• What might be equally important about your ability to explain this passage is what it will do for your own confidence that you have believed the truth. Jesus is the Almighty God.  He is equal to the Father and to the Holy Spirit.  He is every bit God as is the Father and the Holy Spirit.  And in your heart of hearts, you know that, and you are not ashamed, as Thomas the apostle was not ashamed, to fall on your knees before Jesus and declare, “My Lord and my God!”

Take Away

Rehearse the steps to demonstrating that John 1:1 teaches that Jesus is God.

1. “In the beginning was the Word…” clearly suggests that Jesus is the Creator.  No created being can create.
2. “…and the Word was with God” shows that Jesus and the Father are separate persons who have intimate relationship from all eternity
3. “…and the Word was God.”

• John 8:54 is the same Greek construction as John 1:1 and must be translated “God” not “a god”
• John 8:58 shows that Jesus considered himself Yahweh God, the great “I am” (Exodus 3:14), and thus, so did John

Be ready to show yourself a workman who does not need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.