The "pre-existence of Christ": the prologue of John 1 and other Johannine prooftexts (part 2 of 4)

Part 1: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/05/the-pre-existence-of-christ-biblical.html

     Understanding the prologue of the gospel of John

One of the most common prooftexts for both the deity and pre-existence of Christ is found in the prologue of John 1. The argument largely centers around four specific verses in this passage:

In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was what God was. This one was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through it, and apart from it not even one thing came into being that has come into being... And the word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw his glory, glory as of an only-begotten from a Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:1-3, 14)

Those who believe in the pre-existence of Christ interpret this passage by making “Jesus” numerically equivalent with “the word” (that is, interpreting it as though Jesus has always been a conscious being, one and the same as “the word”).

    However, as I argued in a previous post, the correct interpretation of this passage is not that the Word is a conscious being (the “pre-incarnate Christ”), but that the word of God refers to the impersonal divine word and wisdom which was embodied in Christ. This interpretation flows naturally from the literary background of Jewish “wisdom literature” in which it was written. It also finds precedent in the Old Testament, in the personifications of the impersonal aspects of God’s literal wisdom and utterances, not referring to any conscious person alongside Him (e.g. Ps. 33:6-9; Prov. 8:22-30; Isa. 55:11, etc.)

    This interpretation has been challenged on the grounds that the Bible should not be interpreted using extra-biblical works like the Jewish “wisdom literature” of this time. First of all, it is important to recognize that wisdom literature is not solely extra-biblical; the exact same themes and motifs appear in the Psalms and Proverbs, as I will show, and so this interpretation can be derived from the Bible alone. But even if this wisdom literature were only from extra-biblical sources, the clear and obvious parallels between wisdom literature and John 1 show that his audience would have perfectly understood him to be referring not to any conscious, pre-existent Christ, but to the impersonal wisdom of God by which He created all things.

    For the rest of this section, I will demonstrate that this must be what John had in mind, by showing the obvious parallels between wisdom literature (both biblical and extra-biblical) and John 1 (taking the prologue verse by verse). These parallels are largely taken from this presentation by Dale Tuggy.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was what God was. This one was in the beginning with God. (John 1:1-2)

He sends His command to the earth; His word runs very swiftly. (Ps. 147:15 NASB)

“The Lord created me [wisdom] at the beginning of His way, before His works of old. From eternity I was established, from the beginning, from the earliest times of the earth. When there were no ocean depths, I was born, when there were no springs abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills, I was born; while He had not yet made the earth and the fields, nor the first dust of the world.

“When He established the heavens, I was there; when He inscribed a circle on the face of the deep, when He made firm the skies above, when the springs of the deep became fixed, when He set a boundary for the sea so that the water would not violate His command, when He marked out the foundations of the earth; then I was beside Him, as a master workman; and I was His delight daily, rejoicing always before Him.” (Prov. 8:22-30 NASB)

All wisdom is from the Lord, and with Him it remains forever... Wisdom was created before all other things, and prudent understanding from eternity... “I [wisdom] came forth from the mouth of the Most High, and covered the earth like a mist.” (Sirach 1:1, 4, 24:3)

For while gentle silence enveloped all things, and night in its swift course was now half gone, Your all-powerful word leaped from heaven, from the royal throne, into the midst of the land that was doomed, a stern warrior carrying the sharp sword of your authentic command, and stood and filled all things with death, and touched heaven while standing on the earth. (Wisdom 18:14-16)

In these passages from both the Old Testament and intertestamental wisdom literature, the wisdom of God (which is clearly a personification of an aspect, as it is paralleled with “prudent understanding”) is considered interchangeable with the “word of God” (which is also clearly a personification of an aspect, as His word is paralleled with the “His command”). God’s wisdom, just as His word, came forth as the breath from His mouth (Sir. 24:3 cf. Ps. 33:6).

    And yet, in all of these passages, the same thing that is said of the Word in John 1:1 could easily be said of the impersonal divine wisdom and word in the Old Testament and wisdom literature. So far, John has not introduced anything that would have seemed odd to his original readers if they were familiar with this style of Jewish literature, or even if they were simply familiar with the Old Testament. They would have understood this to be referring to the personification of the impersonal attribute of wisdom.

All things came into being through it, and apart from it not even one thing came into being that has come into being. (John 1:3)

By the word of Yahweh the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their lights. He gathers the waters of the sea together as a heap; He puts the depths in storehouses. Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him. For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood firm. (Ps. 33:6-9 NASB)

Yahweh founded the earth by wisdom, He established the heavens by understanding. By His knowledge the ocean depths were burst open, and the clouds drip with dew. (Prov. 3:19-20 NASB)

It is His [God’s] knowledge that brought all into existence and his plans that guide all things, and nothing happens without him. (DSS 1QS 11:11)

“I [Solomon] learned both what is secret and what is manifest, for wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me.” (Wisdom 7:21-22)

“O God of my ancestors and Lord of mercy, who have made all things by Your word, and by Your wisdom have formed humankind to have dominion over the creatures You have made” (Wisdom 9:1-2)

In the beginning and in great wisdom, God created and finished the heavens and the earth. (Targum Neofiti 1:1)

Again, we find that John 1:3 would not be surprising to any Jew familiar with wisdom literature. Both the Old Testament and intertestamental Jewish literature present God’s word (a personification of an aspect, as it is paralleled with “breath of His mouth”) and wisdom (also a personification, as it is paralleled with “understanding” and “knowledge”) as the creator of all things, since God used His wisdom to form every thing that was created.

     Thus, so far, John has not presented anything that anyone familiar with the Old Testament and Jewish literature - which would likely make up most of his intended audience - would have been confused or shocked by. He is not saying that the “pre-incarnate Christ” was the one who created all things, but saying that all things were created by God’s impersonal word and wisdom, as his audience would have understood. This in no way contradicts the many passages presented in my previous post that show that God created the world apart from Jesus (who did not yet exist).

In it was life, and the life was the Light of mankind. And the Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not grasp it. (John 1:4-5)

Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path. I have sworn and I will confirm it, that I will keep Your righteous judgments. I am exceedingly afflicted; give me life, Yahweh, according to Your word.” (Ps. 119:105-107 NASB)

“For one who finds me [wisdom] finds life, and obtains favor from Yahweh.” (Prov. 8:35 NASB)

Whoever loves her [wisdom] loves life, and those who seek her from early morning are filled with joy. (Sirach 4:12)

For she [wisdom] is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness. (Wisdom 7:26)

She [wisdom] is the book of the commandments of God, the law that endures forever. All who hold her fast will live, and those who forsake her will die. Turn, O Jacob, and take her; walk toward the shining of her light. (Baruch 4:1-2)

The characterization of God’s word and wisdom as “life” and “light” is certainly not without precedent in the Old Testament and Jewish literature. This motif appears all throughout the biblical and extra-biblical wisdom literature. Again, it is clear that an impersonal aspect is being referred to, because the “word” or “wisdom” in these passages is repeatedly paralleled with the book of the Law (which was considered to be the ultimate expression of wisdom). Jesus, being the ultimate embodiment of the divine word and wisdom, is likewise the source of light and life (John 8:12; 11:25). Therefore, this is also something that John’s audience should have been very familiar with - he is not introducing anything new here.

    The next section of John’s prologue, vv. 6 - 8, is only concerned with John the Baptist, and neither does v. 9 introduce anything new (it merely reiterates the established fact that the word is the true light). We will therefore skip ahead to v. 10:

It [the word] was in the world, and the world came into being through it, and yet the world did not know it. (John 1:10)

“Because I [wisdom] called and you refused, I stretched out my hand and no one paid attention; and you neglected all my advice and did not want my rebuke” (Prov. 1:22-24 NASB)

“Alone I [wisdom] compassed the vault of heaven and traversed the depths of the abyss. Over waves of the sea, over all the earth, and over every people and nation I have held sway.” (Sirach 24:5-6)

She [wisdom] reaches mightily from one end of the earth to the other, and she orders all things well. (Wisdom 8:1)

The theme of wisdom being “in the world” and being rejected by the world is also a common motif in wisdom literature, both biblical and extra-biblical. And, as noted already, the theme of wisdom creating the world is also a common motif. Thus, John still has not introduced anything that would be incompatible with the “word” referring to the impersonal divine word and wisdom, nor anything that his audience should have been unfamiliar with.

It came to its own, and its own people did not accept it. (John 1:11)

Trinitarians and those who believe in the pre-existence of Christ often point to this verse as proof that the “word” cannot be an impersonal aspect, but a conscious being. Surely, they say, this must refer to the rejection of Jesus by the Israelites, and therefore the word in the previous verses must also refer to Jesus. However, again, we find a theme in wisdom literature of Wisdom coming to its own people (Israel) with limited success:

Then the Creator of all things gave me [wisdom] a command, and my Creator chose the place for my tent. He said, “Make your dwelling in Jacob, and in Israel receive your inheritance”... In the holy tent I ministered before him, and so I was established in Zion. (Sirach 24:8)

He [God] found the whole way to knowledge, and gave her to his servant Jacob and to Israel, whom He loved. Afterward she appeared on earth and lived with humankind. She is the book of the commandments of God, the law that endures forever. (Baruch 3:36-4:1)

[Our fathers in Egypt] had no faith in His word... they did not listen to the voice of Yahweh (Ps. 105:24-25 LXX)

Wisdom went forth to dwell among the sons of men, but she obtained not a habitation. Wisdom returned to her place, and seated herself in the midst of the angels. (1 Enoch 42:2)

In intertestamental Jewish thought, and even in the Old Testament, the giving of the Law is considered to be the “coming of God’s word” or “coming of God’s wisdom”, and because most of the Israelites throughout the Old Testament rejected the Law, it was said that they rejected God’s word. This is how John’s statement in John 1:11 would have been understood by his audience, not referring to Jesus’ coming, but referring to the coming and rejection of the divine word and wisdom (via the Law).

But as many as received it, to them it gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in its name, who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of a man, but of God. (John 1:12-13)

“He [a righteous man] professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord... and boasts that God is his father.” (Wisdom 2:13, 16)

In every generation she [wisdom] passes into holy souls and makes them friends of God, and prophets; for God loves nothing so much as the person who lives with wisdom. (Wisdom 7:27)

Blessed shall be the man who trusts in the name of the word of the Lord. (Targum Jerusalem on Genesis 40:23)

John’s statement that, by receiving the word and believing on its name, one can become a child of God also finds precedent in Jewish wisdom literature. This can be clearly seen in the Wisdom of Solomon which states that those who have the knowledge [wisdom] of God call themselves children of Yahweh, as quoted above. Therefore, nothing new has been introduced by John in this passage; this would have been understood by his audience as yet another reference to wisdom literature.

    Finally, we have arrived at v. 14, “the word became flesh”. This is considered by many Christian scholars to be the point at which John diverges from the wisdom tradition of his time, in order to demonstrate that Jesus is numerically identical with the word and wisdom, and has always been. But is this really what John meant? As a matter of fact, the idea of wisdom manifesting itself in human beings also finds precedent in the literature of the intertestamental period. Consider the following passages from Philo’s Life of Moses:

Perhaps, since Moses was also destined to be the lawgiver of his nation, he was himself long previously, through the providence of God, a living and reasonable law (Life of Moses I.162)

The king [Moses] is at once a living law, and the law is a just king (Life of Moses II.4)

Since the “word”, “wisdom”, and “law” were considered interchangeable in wisdom literature (for example, see Baruch 4:1; Sirach 24; Wisdom 9:1-2), Philo’s statement that Moses himself was a living law is extremely similar to John’s statement that Jesus is the word of God (John 1:14; Rev. 19:13). Obviously, Philo did not believe that Moses existed consciously prior to his own birth, and yet he had no problem stating that Moses existed “long previously” as a “living and reasonable law”.

    The same idea appears in the book of Sirach, and even in the Bible itself. Many scholars have noted that the book of Sirach appears to present the high priest Simon of Cyrene as the incarnation of Wisdom herself, by describing him with the exact same attributes as Wisdom (Sirach 50:8-12 cf. 24:12-17). Likewise, in the book of Proverbs, the ideal wife in chapter 31 is given the same attributes as Wisdom of chapter 8, and most commentators have recognized that Solomon meant to present her as the embodiment or ‘incarnation’ of Wisdom: “and Wisdom became flesh”.

    Since, based on the clear and obvious parallels between John 1:1-13 and wisdom literature, we know that John was writing this with the themes and motifs of wisdom literature in mind, we should regard v. 14 in the same way [1]. John did not mean to say that the word of God had always been Jesus, which would contradict the scriptures that present the word and wisdom as an impersonal attribute; rather, he meant to say that, in Jesus, the word and wisdom of God is perfectly embodied.

    This view of John 1:14 is supported by the rest of scripture, as we are elsewhere told that Jesus has become the wisdom of God (1 Cor. 1:24, 30) and that Jesus fulfills the Torah (Matt. 5:17). Since, as noted already, both the “wisdom” and “Torah” were used interchangeably with the “word” in wisdom literature, the logical conclusion is that Jesus has also become the embodiment or manifestation of the word of God. This does not mean that Jesus pre-existed His birth, or that He has always been numerically identical with the Word.

    But if John did not mean to demonstrate Christ’s “pre-existence” in this passage, what was the purpose of writing the prologue of the gospel of John? Well, it has been understood for a long time now that this prologue has a chiastic structure, which I believe shows what the intended meaning of John’s prologue is:

A. The word has an intimate relationship with the Father (vv. 1-3)

B. The word is the life and the light (vv. 4-5)

C. John the Baptist testifies about the word (vv. 6-8)

D. The word coming into the world, embodied in the Law (vv. 10-11)

E. Those who believe in the word become children of God (vv. 12-13)

D’. The word coming into the world, embodied in Jesus (v. 14)

C’. John the Baptist testifies about Jesus (v. 15)

B’. Jesus full of grace and truth (vv. 16-17)

A’. Jesus has an intimate relationship with the Father (v. 18)

From this structure, we can determine what John meant by writing his prologue. His point is not that Jesus is God, or even that Jesus existed prior to His birth. Rather, he is paralleling Jesus and the word/wisdom, showing that Jesus now has the exact same attributes that the word/wisdom had prior to Jesus, and therefore He is the ultimate and perfect embodiment of the word/wisdom [2]. And the central point of his prologue has nothing to do with the supposed deity or pre-existence of Christ, but is about how those who trust in God’s word, which now has been perfectly manifested in Jesus, may become children of God.

    In summary, the clear and extensive parallels between John’s prologue and wisdom literature (both biblical and extra-biblical) demonstrate that he was not trying to present the Word as the divine “pre-incarnate Christ”, contrary to the prevailing trinitarian and Arian interpretations, but presenting Jesus as the ultimate embodiment of God’s wisdom. This passage does not prove the pre-existence of Christ. In fact, it is far more conducive to Socinianism than Arianism, as it shows that something changed at the birth of Jesus in the way that God’s wisdom interacts with the world (which would not be as momentous if Jesus had always existed as the revealer of God, as in v. 18).

    Other prooftexts for pre-existence in the gospel of John

The other two main prooftexts for pre-existence, John 8:58 and 17:5, are beyond the purview of this post. I will deal with them in my next post, when I discuss the Jewish concept of predestination as it relates to those passages. However, there are still other “prooftexts” in the gospel of John that are often brought up in debate about the pre-existence of Christ, and I will deal with each of these in turn.

John testified about him [Jesus] and called out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who is coming after me has become before me, because he was before me.’” (John 1:15)

According to this passage, John testified that Jesus had become before him (i.e., become his superior) because He was before him. But what could this mean? Does it necessarily mean that Jesus existed before him [3], or could it mean something else?

    As a matter of fact, the word πρωτoς, translated here as “before”, can either mean before in time or before in status. This verse could just as easily be translated, “He who coming after me has become before me because He was my superior”. In fact, if what John meant is that Jesus existed before him, this statement would make little sense; why would Jesus’ current status above John be related to when He came into existence? Therefore, this passage does not prove the pre-existence of Christ, and it is impossible to derive such a doctrine from this verse unless one already has some preconceived notion about Jesus having existed long prior to John.

No one has ascended into heaven, except he who descended from heaven: the Son of Man. (John 3:13 NASB)

Is this passage saying that Jesus literally, physically descended from heaven? This is how most trinitarians and Arians interpret this verse. However, there is no reason to interpret this verse with such wooden literalness as they do. This language of “descending from heaven” is common in scripture, and simply refers to any good thing that comes from God:

Every good giving, and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the lights (Jas. 1:17)

Since, as demonstrated in the last post of this series, Jesus’ being “sent from God” and being “not of this world” simply refers to His being commissioned by God at the beginning of His ministry (John 17:16-18), His statement that He descended from heaven should be understood no differently.

    In Matthew 21:25, Jesus asks the Pharisees, “from where was the baptism of John - of heaven or of men?” If the baptism of John were “of heaven”, this would simply mean that his authority to baptize came from God, not literally that he or those whom he baptized came down out of heaven. Likewise, Jesus having “descended from heaven” simply means that He has been commissioned and given authority by God.

“for the bread of God is that which is coming down out of the heaven, and giving life to the world.” (John 6:33)

“I have come down out of the heaven, not that I may do my will, but the will of Him who sent me.” (v. 38)

“this is the bread that out of the heaven is coming down, that any one may eat of it, and not die. I am the living bread that came down out of the heaven; if any one may eat of this bread he shall live — to the age; and the bread also that I will give is my flesh, that I will give for the life of the world.” (v. 50-51)

“this is the bread that came down out of the heaven; not as your fathers did eat the manna, and died; he who is eating this bread shall live — to the age.” (v. 58)

Five times in chapter 6 of the gospel of John, Jesus describes Himself as the “bread that came down out of the heaven”. Like in John 3:13, both trinitarians and Arians take this to mean that Jesus literally came down out of heaven, as proof of the “pre-existence of Christ”.

    However, if we take Jesus’ words at face value as saying that the “bread” came down from heaven, we would have to conclude that Jesus bodily descended from heaven in the flesh, since Jesus says that the bread is His flesh in v. 51. Since no one believes that Jesus physically came down from heaven already in a body (except perhaps Docetists), we should instead recognize that Jesus is using a figure of speech here. As He said in John 17:16-18,

“Of the world they [Jesus’ disciples] are not, as I of the world am not... as Thou didst send me to the world, I also did send them to the world”

Jesus’ disciples are not of the world, and were sent into the world, in the same way that Jesus is not of the world and was sent into the world. Since the disciples were not sent from a heavenly pre-existence to be incarnated on earth, there is no reason to believe from figurative statements like the above that Jesus had a heavenly pre-existence either.

Many of his disciples having heard, said, “This word is hard; who is able to hear it?” And Jesus having known in himself that his disciples are murmuring about this, said to them, “Doth this stumble you? If then ye may behold the Son of Man going up where he was before? The spirit it is that is giving life; the flesh doth not profit anything; the sayings that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life” (John 6:60-63)

Trinitarians and Arians believe that Jesus, when He said that the Son of Man would go up where He was before, is referring to His ascension into heaven (which would mean that He had been in heaven before). However, the context shows that Jesus was not referring to His ascent into heaven, but to His death and resurrection.

    First of all, we need to ask what Jesus’ disciples thought was a “hard saying”. Were they referring to Christ’s supposed descent from heaven? This is very doubtful, because the disciples would have understood this to be a figurative statement, as it is used as such all throughout the Bible (Ps. 78:23-25; Mal. 3:10; Jas. 1:17; 3:15-17), and they would have known that Jesus did not physically descend from heaven in the flesh (which is what He would have been saying if taken literally, as noted above). Were they referring to His statement that they needed to eat His flesh and drink His blood (vv. 53-56)? This is possible, but also unlikely, as if that was their complaint, Jesus’ response about “going up [into their mouth?] where He was before” would be hardly intelligible.

    The only other “hard saying” in the vicinity of this passage, which Jesus’ disciples would have objected to, is that Jesus would be giving His flesh (i.e., dying) for the world (v. 51). Elsewhere, Jesus’ statements that He would die were highly controversial and even caused Peter to rebuke Him in one instance (Matt. 16:21-23; John 12:34 cf. 1 Cor. 1:23). But if this saying - that Jesus would die - is what caused His disciples to stumble, then we should interpret v. 62 not as saying that Jesus would ascend to heaven where He was before, but that He would ascend from death to life where He was before [4].

    This also makes sense of why Jesus goes on to talk about the spirit and life. If Jesus were referring to His ascension to heaven, this would make little sense and would seem to be a random tangent. But if Jesus was referring to His death and resurrection, then He would simply be continuing the discussion of resurrection, and how He will be given life (resurrected) by spirit, just as His disciples will be if they continue to follow Him. Therefore, since the context shows that John 6:62 is referring to Jesus’ death and resurrection, rather than His ascension to heaven, this cannot be considered a prooftext for Jesus’ supposed heavenly pre-existence.

Part 3: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/05/the-pre-existence-of-christ.html

______________________________

[1] Dr. Dustin Smith writes,

Proverbs 31:10-31 argues for the embodiment of Lady Wisdom in obedient and wise women, using a dozen textual connections to earlier references to the personification of God’s wise interaction with the world.

The Book of Sirach (180 BC) likewise depicts an actual human (i.e., Simon the High Priest) as the embodiment of Lady Wisdom with no less than eight textual connections. Sirach shows demonstrable influence from Proverb’s theology.

Therefore, to say that Jesus is “the enfleshment of the Logos” is nothing new or unique in Jewish theology, since other humans have been depicted as the enfleshment of Wisdom. The connection is closer once we recognize that Logos and Wisdom were near synonyms (cf. esp. Wisdom 9:1-2).

[2] You may note that this is exactly what Sirach does to demonstrate that the high priest is the embodiment of wisdom, and what Solomon does in Proverbs to show that the ideal wife is the embodiment of wisdom. John is no different, as he is trying to prove that Jesus is the embodiment of the word/wisdom by showing that He has the same attributes as the word/wisdom.

[3] Which would seem to be contradicted by the gospel account of Luke, which states that Jesus was begotten, or given existence, after John was (Lk. 1:24, 35).

[4] The same Greek word, αναβαινω, is used to describe resurrection in Job 7:9 (LXX; in the MT, the Hebrew equivalent alah is used). Therefore, whether one interprets this word as referring to Jesus’ ascension to heaven or resurrection is entirely based on the context. Grammatically, it could be taken either way.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Warnings against non-universalism

    Non-universalists, both annihilationist and infernalist, often point to passages that suggest a limited scope of salvation (e.g., Matt. ...