John 1:6

The evangelist designs to bring in John Baptist bearing an honourable testimony to Jesus Christ, Now in these verses, before he does this,

I. He gives us some account of the witness he is about to produce. His name was John, which signifies gracious; his conversation was austere, but he was not the less gracious. Now,

1. We are here told concerning him, in general, that he was a man sent of God. The evangelist had said concerning Jesus Christ that he was with God and that he was God; but here concerning John that he was a man, a mere man. God is pleased to speak to us by men like ourselves. John was a great man, but he was a man, a son of man; he was sent from God, he was God's messenger, so he is called, Mal 3:1. God gave him both his mission and his message, both his credentials and his instructions. John wrought no miracle, nor do we find that he had visions and revelations; but the strictness and purity of his life and doctrine, and the direct tendency of both to reform the world, and to revive the interests of God's kingdom among men, were plain indications that he was sent of God.

2. We are here told what his office and business were (Joh 1:7): The same came for a witness, an eye-witness, a leading witness. He came eis marturian - for a testimony. The legal institutions had been long a testimony for God in the Jewish church. By them revealed religion was kept up; hence we read of the tabernacle of the testimony, the ark of the testimony, the law and the testimony: but now divine revelation is to be turned into another channel; now the testimony of Christ is the testimony of God, Co1 1:6; Co1 2:1. Among the Gentiles, God indeed had not left himself without witness (Act 14:17), but the Redeemer had no testimonies borne him among them. There was a profound silence concerning him, till John Baptist came for a witness to him. Now observe, (1.) The matter of his testimony: He came to bear witness to the light. Light is a thing which witnesses for itself, and carries its own evidence along with it; but to those who shut their eyes against the light it is necessary there should be those that bear witness to it. Christ's light needs not man's testimony, but the world's darkness does. John was like the night watchman that goes round the town, proclaiming the approach of the morning light to those that have closed their eyes, and are not willing themselves to observe it; or like that watchman that was set to tell those who asked him what of the night that the morning comes, and, if you will enquire, enquire ye, Isa 21:11, Isa 21:12. He was sent of God to tell the world that the long-looked-for Messiah was now come, who should be a light to enlighten the Gentiles and the glory of his people Israel; and to proclaim that dispensation at hand which would bring life and immortality to light. (2.) The design of his testimony: That all men through him might believe; not in him, but in Christ, whose way he was sent to prepare. He taught men to look through him, and pass through him, to Christ; through the doctrine of repentance for sin to that of faith in Christ. He prepared men for the reception and entertainment of Christ and his gospel, by awakening them to a sight and sense of sin; and that, their eyes being thereby opened, they might be ready to admit those beams of divine light which, in the person and doctrine of the Messiah, were now ready to shine in their faces. If they would but receive this witness of man, they would soon find that the witness of God was greater, Jo1 5:9. See Joh 10:41. Observe, it was designed that all men through him might believe, excluding none from the kind and beneficial influences of his ministry that did not exclude themselves, as multitudes did, who rejected the counsel of God against themselves, and so received the grace of God in vain.

3. We are here cautioned not to mistake him for the light who only came to bear witness to it (Joh 1:8): He was not that light that was expected and promised, but only was sent to bear witness of that great and ruling light. He was a star, like that which guided the wise men to Christ, a morning star; but he was not the Sun; not the Bridegroom, but a friend of the Bridegroom; not the Prince, but his harbinger. There were those who rested in John's baptism, and looked no further, as those Ephesians, Act 19:3. To rectify this mistake, the evangelist here, when he speaks very honourably of him, yet shows that he must give place to Christ. He was great as the prophet of the Highest, but not the Highest himself. Note, We must take heed of over-valuing ministers, as well as of under-valuing them; they are not our lords, nor have they dominion over our faith, but ministers by whom we believe, stewards of our Lord's house. We must not give up ourselves by an implicit faith to their conduct, for they are not that light; but we must attend to, and receive, their testimony; for they are sent to bear witness of that light; so then let us esteem them, and not otherwise. Had John pretended to be that light he had not been so much as a faithful witness of that light. Those who usurp the honour of Christ forfeit the honour of being the servants of Christ; yet John was very serviceable as a witness to the light, though he was not that light. Those may be of great use to us who yet shine with a borrowed light.

II. Before he goes on with John's testimony, he returns to give us a further account of this Jesus to whom John bore record. Having shown in the beginning of the chapter the glories of his Godhead, he here comes to show the graces of his incarnation, and his favours to man as Mediator.

1. Christ was the true Light (Joh 1:9); not as if John Baptist were a false light, but, in comparison with Christ, he was a very small light. Christ is the great light that deserves to be called so. Other lights are but figuratively and equivocally called so: Christ is the true light. The fountain of all knowledge and of all comfort must needs be the true light. He is the true light, for proof of which we are not referred to the emanations of his glory in the invisible world (the beams with which he enlightens that), but to those rays of his light which are darted downwards, and with which this dark world of ours is enlightened. But how does Christ enlighten every man that comes into the world? (1.) By his creating power he enlightens every man with the light of reason; that life which is the light of men is from him; all the discoveries and directions of reason, all the comfort it gives us, and all the beauty it puts upon us, are from Christ. (2.) By the publication of his gospel to all nations he does in effect enlighten every man. John Baptist was a light, but he enlightened only Jerusalem and Judea, and the region round about Jordan, like a candle that enlightens one room; but Christ is the true light, for he is a light to enlighten the Gentiles. His everlasting gospel is to be preached to every nation and language, Rev 14:6. Like the sun which enlightens every man that will open his eyes, and receive its light (Psa 19:6), to which the preaching of the gospel is compared. See Rom 10:18. Divine revelation is not now to be confined, as it had been, to one people, but to be diffused to all people, Mat 5:15. (3.) By the operation of his Spirit and grace he enlightens all those that are enlightened to salvation; and those that are not enlightened by him perish in darkness. The light of the knowledge of the glory of God is said to be in the face of Jesus Christ, and is compared with that light which was at the beginning commanded to shine out of darkness, and which enlightens every man that comes into the world. Whatever light any man has, he is indebted to Christ for it, whether it be natural or supernatural.

2. Christ was in the world, Joh 1:10. He was in the world, as the essential Word, before his incarnation, upholding all things; but this speaks of his being in the world when he took our nature upon him, and dwelt among us; see Joh 16:28. I am come into the world. The Son of the Highest was here in this lower world; that light in this dark world; that holy thing in this sinful polluted world. He left a world of bliss and glory, and was here in this melancholy miserable world. He undertook to reconcile the world to God, and therefore was in the world, to treat about it, and settle that affair; to satisfy God's justice for the world, and discover God's favour to the world. He was in the world, but not of it, and speaks with an air of triumph when he can say, Now I am no more in it, Joh 17:11. The greatest honour that ever was put upon this world, which is so mean and inconsiderable a part of the universe, was that the Son of God was once in the world; and, as it should engage our affections to things above that there Christ is, so it should reconcile us to our present abode in this world that once Christ was here. He was in the world for awhile, but it is spoken of as a thing past; and so it will be said of us shortly, We were in the world. O that when we are here no more we may be where Christ is! Now observe here, (1.) What reason Christ had to expect the most affectionate and respectful welcome possible in this world; for the world was made by him. Therefore he came to save a lost world because it was a world of his own making. Why should he not concern himself to revive the light that was of his own kindling, to restore a life of his own infusing, and to renew the image that was originally of his own impressing? The world was made by him, and therefore ought to do him homage. (2.) What cold entertainment he met with, notwithstanding: The world knew him not. The great Maker, Ruler, and Redeemer of the world was in it, and few or none of the inhabitants of the world were aware of it. The ox knows his owner, but the more brutish world did not. They did not own him, did not bid him welcome, because they did not know him; and they did not know him because he did not make himself known in the way that they expected - in external glory and majesty. His kingdom came not with observation, because it was to be a kingdom of trail and probation. When he shall come as a Judge the world shall know him.

3. He came to his own (Joh 1:11); not only to the world, which was his own, but to the people of Israel, that were peculiarly his own above all people; of them he came, among them he lived, and to them he was first sent. The Jews were at this time a mean despicable people; the crown was fallen from their head; yet, in remembrance of the ancient covenant, bad as they were, and poor as they were, Christ was not ashamed to look upon them as his own. Ta idia - his own things; not tous idious - his own persons, as true believers are called, Joh 13:1. The Jews were his, as a man's house, and lands, and goods are his, which he uses and possesses; but believers are his as a man's wife and children are his own, which he loves and enjoys. He came to his own, to seek and save them, because they were his own. He was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, for it was he whose own the sheep were. Now observe,

(1.) That the generality rejected him: His own received him not. He had reason to expect that those who were his own should have bidden him welcome, considering how great the obligations were which they lay under to him, and how fair the opportunities were which they had of coming to the knowledge of him. They had the oracles of God, which told them beforehand when and where to expect him, and of what tribe and family he should arise. He came among them himself, introduced with signs and wonders, and himself the greatest; and therefore it is not said of them, as it was of the world (Joh 1:10), that they knew him not; but his own, though they could not but know him, yet received him not; did not receive his doctrine, did not welcome him as the Messiah, but fortified themselves against him. The chief priests, that were in a particular manner his own (for the Levites were God's tribe), were ring-leaders in this contempt put upon him. Now this was very unjust, because they were his own, and therefore he might command their respect; and it was very unkind and ungrateful, because he came to them, to seek and save them, and so to court their respect. Note, Many who in profession are Christ's own, yet do not receive him, because they will not part with their sins, nor have him to reign over them.

(2.) That yet there was a remnant who owned him, and were faithful to him. Though his own received him not, yet there were those that received him (Joh 1:12): But as many as received him. Though Israel were not gathered, yet Christ was glorious. Though the body of that nation persisted and perished in unbelief, yet there were many of them that were wrought upon to submit to Christ, and many more that were not of that fold. Observe here,

[1.] The true Christian's description and property; and that is, that he receives Christ, and believes on his name; the latter explains the former. Note, First, To be a Christian indeed is to believe on Christ's name; it is to assent to the gospel discovery, and consent to the gospel proposal, concerning him. His name is the Word of God; the King of kings, the Lord our righteousness; Jesus a Saviour. Now to believe on his name is to acknowledge that he is what these great names bespeak him to be, and to acquiesce in it, that he may be so to us. Secondly, Believing in Christ's name is receiving him as a gift from God. We must receive his doctrine as true and good; receive his law as just and holy; receive his offers as kind and advantageous; and we must receive the image of his grace, and impressions of his love, as the governing principle of our affections and actions.

[2.] The true Christian's dignity and privilege are twofold: -

First, The privilege of adoption, which takes them into the number of God's children: To them gave he power to become the sons of God. Hitherto, the adoption pertained to the Jews only (Israel is my son, my first-born); but now, by faith in Christ, Gentiles are the children of God, Gal 3:26. They have power, exousian - authority; for no man taketh this power to himself, but he who is authorized by the gospel charter. To them gave he a right; to them gave he this pre-eminence. This power have all the saints. Note, 1. It is the unspeakable privilege of all good Christians, that they are become the children of God. They were by nature children of wrath, children of this world. If they be the children of God, they become so, are made so Fiunt, non nascuntur Christiani - Persons are not born Christians, but made such. - Tertullian. Behold what manner of love is this, Jo1 3:1. God calls them his children, they call him Father, and are entitled to all the privileges of children, those of their way and those of their home. 2. The privilege of adoption is entirely owing to Jesus Christ; he gave this power to them that believe on his name. God is his Father, and so ours; and it is by virtue of our espousals to him, and union with him, that we stand related to God as a Father. It was in Christ that we were predestinated to the adoption; from him we receive both the character and the Spirit of adoption, and he is the first-born among many brethren. The Son of God became a Son of man, that the sons and daughters of men might become the sons and daughters of God Almighty.

Secondly, The privilege of regeneration (Joh 1:13): Which were born. Note, All the children of God are born again; all that are adopted are regenerated. This real change evermore attends that relative one. Wherever God confers the dignity of children, he creates the nature and disposition of children. Men cannot do so when they adopt. Now here we have an account of the original of this new birth. 1. Negatively. (1.) It is not propagated by natural generation from our parents. It is not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of corruptible seed, Pe1 1:23. Man is called flesh and blood, because thence he has his original: but we do not become the children of God as we become the children of our natural parents. Note, Grace does not run in the blood, as corruption does. Man polluted begat a son in his own likeness (Gen 5:3); but man sanctified and renewed does not beget a son in that likeness. The Jews gloried much in their parentage, and the noble blood that ran in their veins: We are Abraham's seed; and therefore to them pertained the adoption because they were born of that blood; but this New Testament adoption is not founded in any such natural relation. (2.) It is not produced by the natural power of our own will. As it is not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, so neither is it of the will of man, which labours under a moral impotency of determining itself to that which is good; so that the principles of the divine life are not of our own planting, it is the grace of God that makes us willing to be his. Nor can human laws or writings prevail to sanctify and regenerate a soul; if they could, the new birth would be by the will of man. But, 2. Positively: it is of God. This new birth is owing to the word of God as the means (Pe1 1:23), and to the Spirit of God as the great and sole author. True believers are born of God, Jo1 3:9; Jo1 5:1. And this is necessary to their adoption; for we cannot expect the love of God if we have not something of his likeness, nor claim the privileges of adoption if we be not under the power of regeneration.

4. The word was made flesh, Joh 1:14. This expresses Christ's incarnation more clearly than what went before. By his divine presence he always was in the world, and by his prophets he came to his own. But now that the fulness of time was come he was sent forth after another manner, made of a woman (Gal 4:4); God manifested in the flesh, according to the faith and hope of holy Job; Yet shall I see God in my flesh, Job 19:26. Observe here,

(1.) The human nature of Christ with which he was veiled; and that expressed two ways.

[1.] The word was made flesh. Forasmuch as the children, who were to become the sons of God, were partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same, Heb 2:14. The Socinians agree that Christ is both God and man, but they say that he was man, and was made a God, as Moses (Exo 7:1), directly contrary to John here, who saith, Theos ēn - He was God, but sarxegeneto - He was made flesh. Compare v. 1 with this. This intimates not only that he was really and truly man, but that he subjected himself to the miseries and calamities of the human nature. He was made flesh, the meanest part of man. Flesh bespeaks man weak, and he was crucified through weakness, Co2 13:4. Flesh bespeaks man mortal and dying (Psa 78:39), and Christ was put to death in the flesh Pe1 3:18. Nay, flesh bespeaks man tainted with sin (Gen 6:3), and Christ, though he was perfectly holy and harmless, yet appeared in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3), and was made sin for us, Co2 5:21. When Adam had sinned, God said to him, Dust thou art; not only because made out of the dust, but because by sin he was sunk into dust. His fall did, sōmatoun tēn psuchēn, turn him as it were all into body, made him earthly; therefore he that was made a curse for us was made flesh, and condemned sin in the flesh, Rom 8:3. Wonder at this, that the eternal Word should be made flesh, when flesh was come into such an ill name; that he who made all things should himself be made flesh, one of the meanest things, and submit to that from which he was at the greatest distance. The voice that ushered in the gospel cried, All flesh is grass (Isa 40:6), to make the Redeemer's love the more wonderful, who, to redeem and save us, was made flesh, and withered as grass; but the Word of the Lord, who was made flesh, endures for ever; when made flesh, he ceased not to be the Word of God.

[2.] 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. The Word might have been made flesh, and dwelt among the angels; but, having taken a body of the same mould with ours, in it he came, and resided in the same world with us. He dwelt among us, us worms of the earth, us that he had no need of, us that he got nothing by, us that were corrupt and depraved, and revolted from God. The Lord God came and dwelt even among the rebellious, Psa 68:18. He that had dwelt among angels, those noble and excellent beings, came and dwelt among us that are a generation of vipers, us sinners, which was worse to him than David's swelling in Mesech and Kedar, or Ezekiel's dwelling among scorpions, or the church of Pergamus dwelling where Satan's seat is. When we look upon the upper world, the world of spirits, how mean and contemptible does this flesh, this body, appear, which we carry about with us, and this world in which our lot is cast, and how hard is it to a contemplative mind to be reconciled to them! But that the eternal Word was made flesh, was clothed with a body as we are, and dwelt in this world as we do, this has put an honour upon them both, and should make us willing to abide in the flesh while God has any work for us to do; for Christ dwelt in this lower world, bad as it is, till he had finished what he had to do here, Joh 17:4. He dwelt among the Jews, that the scripture might be fulfilled, He shall dwell in the tents of Shem, Gen 9:27. And see Zac 2:10. Though the Jews were unkind to him, yet he continued to dwell among them; though (as some of the ancient writers tell us) he was invited to better treatment by Abgarus king of Edessa, yet he removed not to any other nation. He dwelt among us. He was in the world, not as a wayfaring man that tarries but for a night, but he dwelt among us, made a long residence, the original word is observable, eskēnōsen en hēmin - he dwelt among us, he dwelt as in a tabernacle, which intimates, First, That he dwelt here in very mean circumstances, as shepherds that dwell in tents. He did not dwell among us as in a palace, but as in a tent; for he had not where to lay his head, and was always upon the remove. Secondly, That his state here was a military state. Soldiers dwell in tents; he had long since proclaimed war with the seed of the serpent, and now he takes the field in person, sets up his standard, and pitches his tent, to prosecute this war. Thirdly, That his stay among us was not to be perpetual. He dwelt here as in a tent, not as at home. The patriarchs, by dwelling in tabernacles, confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on earth, and sought the better country, and so did Christ, leaving us an example, Heb 13:13, Heb 13:14. Fourthly, That as of old God dwelt in the tabernacle of Moses, by the shechinah between the cherubim, so now he dwells in the human nature of Christ; that is now the true shechinah, the symbol of God's peculiar presence. And we are to make all our addresses to God through Christ, and from him to receive divine oracles.

(2.) The beams of his divine glory that darted through this veil of flesh: We beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. The sun is still the fountain of light, though eclipsed or clouded; so Christ was still the brightness of his Father's glory, even when he dwelt among us in this lower world. And how slightly soever the Jews thought of him there were those that saw through the veil. Observe,

[1.] Who were the witnesses of this glory: we, his disciples and followers, that conversed most freely and familiarly with him; we among whom he dwelt. Other men discover their weaknesses to those that are most familiar with them, but it was not so with Christ; those that were most intimate with him saw most of his glory. As it was with his doctrine, the disciples knew the mysteries of it, while others had it under the veil of parables; so it was with his person, they saw the glory of his divinity, while others saw only the veil of his human nature. He manifested himself to them, and not unto the world. These witnesses were a competent number, twelve of them, a whole jury of witnesses; men of plainness and integrity, and far from any thing of design or intrigue.

[2.] What evidence they had of it: We saw it. They had not their evidence by report, at second hand, but were themselves eye-witnesses of those proofs on which they built their testimony that he was the Son of the living God: We saw it. The word signifies a fixed abiding sight, such as gave them an opportunity of making their observations. This apostle himself explains this: What we declare unto you of the Word of life is what we have seen with our eyes, and what we have looked upon, Jo1 1:1.

[3.] What the glory was: The glory as of the only begotten of the Father. The glory of the Word made flesh was such a glory as became the only begotten Son of God, and could not be the glory of any other. Note, First, Jesus Christ is the only begotten of the Father. Believers are the children of God by the special favour of adoption and the special grace of regeneration. They are in a sense homoiousioi - of a like nature (Pe2 1:4), and have the image of his perfections; but Christ is homousios - of the same nature, and is the express image of his person, and the Son of God by an eternal generation. Angels are sons of God, but he never said to any of them, This day have I begotten thee, Heb 1:5. Secondly, He was evidently declared to be the only begotten of the Father, by that which was seen of his glory when he dwelt among us. Though he was in the form of a servant, in respect of outward circumstances, yet, in respect of graces, his form was as that of the fourth in the fiery furnace, like the Son of God. His divine glory appeared in the holiness and heavenliness of his doctrine; in his miracles, which extorted from many this acknowledgment, that he was the Son of God; it appeared in the purity, goodness, and beneficence, of his whole conversation. God's goodness is his glory, and he went about doing good; he spoke and acted in every thing as an incarnate Deity. Perhaps the evangelist had a particular regard to the glory of his transfiguration, of which he was an eye-witness; see Pe2 1:16-18. God's calling him his beloved Son, in whom he was well pleased, intimated that he was the only begotten of the Father; but the full proof of this was at his resurrection.

[4.] What advantage those he dwelt among had from this. He dwelt among them, full of grace and truth. In the old tabernacle wherein God dwelt was the law, in this was grace; in that were types, in this was truth. The incarnate Word was every way qualified for his undertaking as Mediator; for he was full of grace and truth, the two great things that fallen man stands in need of; and this proved him to be the Son of God as much as the divine power and majesty that appeared in him. First, He has a fulness of grace and truth for himself; he had the Spirit without measure. He was full of grace, fully acceptable to his Father, and therefore qualified to intercede for us; and full of truth, fully apprized of the things he was to reveal, and therefore fit to instruct us. He had a fulness of knowledge and a fulness of compassion. Secondly, He has a fulness of grace and truth for us. He received, that he might give, and God was well pleased in him, that he might be well pleased with us in him; and this was the truth of the legal types.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Joh_1:6

There was a man sent from God whose name was John

The forerunner

I.

THE MISSION OF THE BAPTIST.

1. It was immediately connected with the appearance of the Word in the flesh.

2. It was of God. And as His mission so his name.

3. It had as its special end to testify of Christ.

4. Its aim was to bring sinners to believe in Christ. This was not merely Gods intention, but his own desire. All true ministers have the same object.

5. It contemplated all to whom he addressed himself.

II. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN CHRIST AND JOHN.

1. A current error was corrected. Men thought John the Christ. He confessed himself only the friend of the Bridegroom, the witness-bearer of the Light.

2. This correction vindicated the proper glory of Christ. All honour to the witness, but the glory of the light cannot be given to another.

3. In the marked distinction between the forerunner and Him who coming after him was preferred before him, overweening thoughts of mere instruments, however valuable, are reproved.

4. Johns honour consisted in his proclamation of his Masters glory. Nor was this honour denied him. Ministers are esteemed for their works sake.

5. The distinction in Christs case from John and all His ministers is that He is the true Light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. (A. Beith, D. D.)

The mission of John and of Christ

I. THE TRUE NATURE OF A CHRISTIAN MINISTERS OFFICE.

1. Ministers are not priests or mediators.

2. They are not agents into whose hands men may commit their souls, and carry on their religion by deputy.

3. They are witnesses (Act_1:8; Act_2:40; Act_20:21).

II. ONE PRINCIPAL POSITION WHICH OUR LORD OCCUPIES TOWARDS MANKIND. As light.

1. He is the centre and source of all spiritual illumination, warmth, life, health, growth, beauty, and fertility.

2. He shines for the common benefit of mankind--for high and low, rich and poor, Jew and Greek.

3. He is free to all.

III. THE DESPERATE WICKEDNESS OF MANS NATURAL HEART.

1. Christ was in the world invisibly long before He was born Col_1:17). Yet He was neither known nor honoured.

2. But Christ came visibly into the world when He was born at Bethlehem and fared no better. His own rejected Him.

IV. THE VAST PRIVILEGES OF ALL WHO RECEIVE CHRIST AND BELIEVE ON HIM.

1. The privileges are those of children.

2. These privileges are to be possessed by faith (Gal_3:26).

3. Are we sons of God? Have we the marks of Sonship.

4. Do we desire to be sons of God? Then we must receive Him as Saviour. (Bp. Ryle.)

The ministry of men

I. A special way whereby Christ shineth to the world, and helpeth the world to know Him, is the MINISTRY OF MEN; whereby

1. He condescendeth to our weakness, who could not endure more glorious instruments.

2. Trieth our obedience and acknowledgment of His authority in the weak messengers.

3. Maketh manifest that the excellency of the power whereby they do so great things is of Him.

II. MINISTERS OF CHRIST MUST NOT RUN UNSENT, but ought to have a calling from God, either extraordinary (in extraordinary times and cases) or ordinary; as being that which will afford them matter of courage in undertaking their work, of comfort under difficulties, and of hope of success; for so John was a man sent from God; to wit, in an extraordinary way, as Christs forerunner.

III. MINISTERS WILL IN A MOST LIVELY WAY PROCLAIM THAT GRACE OF GOD BRINGING SALVATION WHO HAVE THEMSELVES OBTAINED GRACE AND FAVOUR BY IT. And it is a sweet thing when men prove answerable to these names and titles which Scripture giveth them because of their Christian profession; for this forerunners name was John, a name given by the angel, which signifieth one to whom the Lord had been gracious that he might actively proclaim the same to others, and a name to which Johns carriage was answerable.

IV. THE CHIEF AND SPECIAL END OF A MINISTRY, is to point out Christ in His excellences and usefulness to lost men, to declare Him in His person, offices, and benefits, how He should be believed in, served or suffered for; John came to bear witness of Christ in His glorious excellency, and as He is the light of dark man, in his comforts and directions.

V. MINISTERS ARE TO PREACH CHRIST WITH PLAINNESS AND FIDELITY in not adding or diminishing with boldness and constancy.

VI. THE END AND SCOPE OF A MINISTERS WITNESSING and preaching, is, and should be, to bring self-condemned sinners to believe in Christ; his preaching of the law and wrath is in order to that, and to bring men to see their need of Christ, and should be joined with the doctrine of the gospel; his preaching of the doctrine of sanctification and holiness should be joined with the doctrine of faith in Christ, from whom virtue floweth for that end. (G. Hutcheson.)

The witness of the Light

I. His APPEARANCE. There came--suggesting origination, commencement, dependence, mutability, decay, in opposition to the Word whose creature He was (verse: 3).

II. His NATURE. A man. Parted from the Word who was God: although honoured by the near relationship in which he stood to the Word as instrument, minister, herald, and forerunner.

III. His NAME. Jehovah is gracious--a fitting designation of one whose birth was a gift of grace (Luk_1:18), whose manhood was the flower and fruit of grace (Luk_1:80), and whose life work was to be a publisher of grace (Luk_1:76).

IV. His MISSION.

1. In its character, prophetic.

2. In its authority, Divine.

3. In its work, witness-bearing.

4. In its object, saving.

V. His RELATION TO THE LIGHT.

1. Negatively.

2. Positively (Joh_1:8). (T. Whitelaw, D. D.)

The personality of John

I image to myself a man of calm, saintly look, with eyes that seemed, to pierce the invisible, moving men not by his wild gesticulations, but by the deep solemnity of his spirit, the simple, fearless truth he spoke, and his appeal to the Messianic longings and hopes which then prevailed. Withdrawn from the luxurious world, with its enervating and selfish influences, he had lived to the age of thirty among the mountains west of the Dead Sea, preparing in solitude for the brief but great work of his life. He is, however, no hermit cut off from his fellowmen and taking no interest in their affairs, but a keen observer and discerner; and at the appointed hour he steps suddenly forward, crying to the nation, Repent, Behold the Lamb of God! (J. Culross, D. D.)

The character of John

The Baptist was characterized by

I. STRENGTH. If ever there was a man unlike the little reed that gives itself to be tossed by the wind (Mat_11:7) it was John. Your strong man is self-conscious. He has presided over the slow and painful elaboration of his character. He has looked on with satisfaction at the stiffening of his moral fibre into steel, and knows what it is worth. Humility has never been a feature of strong Jewish natures. Yet this strong man says, He that cometh after me is stronger (ισχυρότερος) than I.

II. INDEPENDENCE. Yet like David in Gods presence declaring, I will be base in my own sight, so the Baptist exclaims, Whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose.

III. Above all, PURITY. An effective moral teacher must in purity of manhood stand upright. Never could he have brought men to repentance if he had not himself repented. The words generation of vipers would have been a mere scream of impotent rage if he had not crushed the serpent in his own heart. Yet, in the presence of Jesus, that pure soul seems black like the waters of a mountain lake in the neighbourhood of the newly fallen snow. The baptism of water he knew; of the baptism of fire, searching and sifting to the marrow, he recognized the need--I have need to be baptized of Thee. (Bp. Alexander.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 1:6-9. There was a man sent from God — The introducer of a new dispensation, the morning star, preceding the rise of the Sun of righteousness; whose name was JOHN — That is, grace; a name fitly given to the Messiah’s forerunner, who was sent to proclaim the immediate accomplishment of God’s gracious intentions toward men, the expectation of which had been raised in them by all his preceding dispensations. The same came for a witness — Εις μαρτυριαν, for, or, in order to give, a testimony of an infinitely important kind; to bear witness of the light — Ινα μαρτυρηση περι του φωτος, that he might testify concerning the light: namely, the light mentioned above, Christ, the light of the world; that all men through him — Through his testimony; might believe — In Christ, the light. He — John, though an extraordinary messenger of God, was himself not that light, but was merely sent to bear witness of that light — And thereby to draw men’s attention to it, and induce them to believe in it; namely, in the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world — Both as he is their Maker, who has put into their minds the light of reason and conscience, and as he visits and strives with them by his Spirit, and is the author of that revelation, which was not intended to be confined to the single nation of the Jews, but to be communicated to all mankind.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

SECOND SECTION

The personal Light or Christ in His pre-historical Presence in the World, especially in His Old Testament Advent, testified by the Old Covenant as it is represented by John the Baptist

Joh_1:6-13

CONTENTS

(1) The Representative Of The Coming Of Christ, John The Baptist, Joh_1:6-8. (2) The Coming Of Christ Into The World, In Its General Groundwork And Its Historical Genesis, Joh_1:9 (3) The Relation Of Christ To The World And The Conduct Of The World Towards Him, Or The General Groundwork Of His Advent, Joh_1:10. (4) The Relation Of Christ To Israel, And Israel’s Conduct Towards Him, Or The Imperfect, Symbolical Advent, Joh_1:11. (5) Christ’s Gradual Breaking Through In The World In The Contrast Of The Elect To The Less Susceptible, Embodied—(a) In Faith, As The Beginning Of The Real Advent, Joh_1:12; (b) In The Consecration Of Birth And The Being Born Of God; The Development Of The Real Advent, Joh_1:13.

6There was [became, arose]47 a man sent48 from God, whose name was John 7 The same came for a [omit a] witness [testimony, εἰς μαρτυρίαν], to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe: 8He was not that [the] Light, 9but was sent [came, Lange: he was] to bear witness of that [the] Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man, that cometh into the world. [The true Light which lighteth (lighteneth, Shineth upon) every man, was coming (ἦν ἐρκόμενον) 10into the world.]49 He [It] was in the world, and the world was made by him [it]50, and the world knew him not [Lange: did not recognize it in him]. 11He came unto his own [his own possessions or inheritance, τὰ ἴδια], and his own [his own people, οἱ ἴδιοι]51 received him not. 12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons [children, τέκνα] of God, even to them that 13believe on [in] his name: Which [Who] were born, not of blood [bloods, ἐξ αἱμάτων], not of the [natural] will of the flesh, nor of the [moral] will of man, but of God.52

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Joh_1:6. There was a man.—Ἐγένετο [fiebat], arose, came into being; not ἦν [erat], was, absolutely [comp. Joh_8:58, Greek. The Logos was from eternity, Abraham and John began to be in time.—P. S.]—Chrysostom: ἐγένετο ἀπεσταλμένος. The life of John, so to speak, was lost in his mission (see Joh_1:23; comp. Isa_40:3).53 The appearance of John in this place is striking, and has been variously interpreted (see Meyer).54 In the introduction of the Baptist in this passage we see a representation of the whole prophetic testimony concerning Christ in concentrated, personal form, after the manner of this Gospel. The Baptist was the final recapitulation of all prophetic voices concerning Christ. The Old Testament had two sides—a hidden and a visible. The hidden side was the rise of the genealogical life of Christ itself, His Christological advent; the visible side was the prophetic testimony concerning this advent. And as the verbal prophecy anticipated the real prophecy, in the nature of the case, so the fulfilment of the verbal prophecy in John preceded the fulfilment of the real prophecy in Christ. John therefore here stands in the right place, the auroral radiance of the essential Light; the great witness of the advent of Christ; the forerunner.

[Whose name (was) John, i.e., Jehovah is merciful, from the Hebrew יוֹחָנָן for יְהוֹחָנָן, Ἰωάννης ; comp. the Greek Θεόδωρος. This significant name was given to the forerunner of our Saviour by divine direction, Luk_1:13. The evangelist laid stress on his own name, and saw in it a symbol of his relation to Christ as the disciple “whom Jesus loved,” Joh_20:2; Joh_21:20. Comp. Lampe and Hegstenberg.—P. S.].

Joh_1:7. The same came for witness.—Testimony: stronger here than preaching; stronger even than prophecy, as hitherto existing. John appeared first as a preacher, a preacher of repentance. But the preacher showed himself at the same time a prophet, announcing under divine impulse the approach of the Messianic kingdom. And then, in the miraculous manifestation at the baptism of Jesus, through the testimony of God, he became a witness of the person of Jesus of Nazareth, that He is the Messiah; so to speak, an apostle before the apostolate. As a prophet who, by divine commission, pointed to the Messiah, he completed the Old Testament prophecy in testimony. And for this testimony he was come. His mission rose into the office of forerunner. And even his martyrdom in the strict sense is in keeping. He sealed his preparatory preaching of repentance with his death (see Joh_1:33).

That [ἴνα, the aim of John’s testimony] all men through him might believe.—“Through John, not through the Light (Grotius), or through Christ (Ewald):” Meyer.55 In the divine purpose John was to lead over the faith of Israel to Christ.56 This Christ also signifies Joh_5:33 [where he calls John “the burning and shining light,” or candle rather, λύχνος, not φῶς.—P. S.] Through the unbelief of the Jews this gracious design failed; though in the truly devout, first of all in the noblest of John’s own disciples (Joh_1:35 sqq.) it was fulfilled; through them in all believers.

Joh_1:8. He was not the light.—[ἦν is emphatic and contrasted with μαρτυρήσῃ. The article before φῶς is likewise emphatic, the Light of the world, the Light of lights, comp. ὁ προφήτης, Joh_1:29; ὁ ἄρτος, Joh_6:32 ff.—P. S.] This is certainly not said merely with reference to the unbelieving disciples of John.57 But in the wider sense the nation itself was an unbelieving disciple of John, contenting itself with the brightness of the Baptist, instead of going through him to the true Light itself, Joh_5:35. So far, therefore, as it is implied that many, even the leaders, made the Baptist rather a hindrance than a help to faith, the words are written even against the disciples of John.

But (he was).—De Wette takes the ἀλλ’ ἵνα but in order to, imperatively; Lücke supplies ἦν, was; Meyer, ἠλθεν, came Since the preceding verse strongly pronounces that the whole prophetic existence of John was intended to rise into a testimony for the Messiah, we give Lücke the preference: “He was, that he might bear witness.” [So also Alford and Godet. Baümlein supplies ἐγένετο, γίνεται, “or the like;” which is not so strong. I prefer with Meyer to supply ἦλθε from Joh_1:7, since the phrase, εἶναι, ἵνα instead of εἷναι εἰς τό is quite unusual.—P. S.]

Joh_1:9. The true Light—was coming [ἦν τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν—ἐρχόμενον].—Various interpretations: (1) He (the Logos) or it (the Light) was the true Light; so the older expositors and Luther [E. V., which supplies τοῦτο before ἦν, that was the true light.—P. S.] But τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν must be subject, not predicate; for in Joh_1:8 John was the subject. [So also Meyer.] (2) Ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον (coming into the world) is connected with πάντα ἄνθρωπον (every man), not with ἦν (was); Origen [Syr., Euseb., Chrys., Cyril, Vulg., Aug, [and most of the ancients, Luther,58 Calvin [E. V.], etc., Hölemann, Meyer.59 [This would make either ἄνθρωπον or ἐρχδμ. superfluous.] Meyer observes that it could not be connected with ἦν; for the Logos was already in the world when John appeared. But the Evangelist here evidently goes back to the entire relation of Christ to mankind, especially goes back to Joh_1:4. He had before spoken of the witness of the advent of Christ—now he depicts the advent itself. This is divided into two parts: (1) The relation of the coming Logos to man in general; (2) His relation to Israel. Hence we interpret: He was (from the beginning and in conflict with the darkness, Joh_1:5) coming, was on His advent to mankind. Therefore not (a) was come [ἦν ἐρχόμενον=ἐλθόν]: Schöttgen, etc.; (b) just came (when John appeared): De Wette, Lücke [Alford]; (c) future: was on the point of coming [venturum erat]: Tholuck; or (d) was destined to come: Luthardt; desired to come: Ewald;60 nor (e) was coming then, in the time before His baptism: Hilgenfeld, who even here would mix Valentinian Gnosis into the anti-Gnostic Gospel;—but in a purely historical sense [=ἦλθε, came], instead of the imperfect: Bengel, Bleek, Köstlin [Hengstenberg, with reference to Mal_3:1]; and with the peculiar Johannean significance: He was continually coming, continually on his way.61 Hence the participial form. The essence of this universal advent is to be recognized in the fact, that the Logos shines in every man in his religious and moral nature and experience, as the λόγος σπερματικός. That the expression “every man” needed not the addition: that cometh into the world, is evident. And the phrase: “to come into the world,” is not used of the natural birth of an ordinary man, but is reserved for Christ.

[Which lighteth (enlightens, illuminates) every man—ὃφωτίζειπάνταἄνθρωπον.—There is much force in the singular. Quisquis illuminatur, ab hac luce illuminatur (Bengel). Different interpretations: 1. The light of reason and intelligence (Cyril of Alex.). Better: Both the intellectual and moral light (reason and conscience) given to all men, as distinct from the spiritual light of saving grace given to believers. The former is the basis of the latter.62 2. The inward spiritual light given to all (Quakers). 3. The light of grace given to believers only, or to every one to whom Christ was preached (Crosby). 4. Intellectual and spiritual light sufficient for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles, though the majority are so blinded by sin as not to see Him. “Christ enlightens all as far as in Him lies” (Chrysostom, Hom. 8). Christ gives sufficient light to every man to leave him without excuse, but not sufficient to save (Arrowsmith, Ryle).—Comp. Joh_3:19 : “light is come into the world;” Joh_12:46 : “I am come a light into the world;” Joh_6:14 : “that prophet that should come into the world;” Joh_18:37.—P. S.]

The true [veritable, genuine] Light [τὸφῶςτὸἀληθινόν].—The real, essential Light in distinction from the outward, cosmical light, which, nevertheless, is His token and symbol. (See Milton’s Paradise Lost: the greeting to the light. Comp. Joh_8:12; Joh_9:5.)

[There is a nice difference between ἀληθής (wahr), true in opposition to false, and ἀληθινός (wahrhaftig), true in opposition to borrowed or imitated. This difference is obliterated in the E. V. The one expresses the harmony between thought and reality, word and fact; the other implies a contrast between the perfect original and a copy more or less imperfect. Ἀληθινός is a favorite term with Plato and John to signify that which is genuine, archetypal, original, true to the idea. It occurs eight times in the Gospel, ten times in the Apocalypse, three times in the first Epistle of John, but elsewhere only five times in the N. T. In this passage it stands in contrast not so much to the cosmical light (Dr. Lange), as to the borrowed intellectual and moral light of the Baptist and other human teachers; comp. Joh_5:35; Mat_5:14, where believers generally as members of Christ are called the light of the world. It is lumen illuminans, as distinct from the lumen illuminatum.—P. S.]

Joh_1:10. It was in the world.—Not pluperfect (Herder [Tholuck, Olsh.]); nor “in the person of Jesus, when John was testifying” (Meyer); but referring to His infinite presence in mankind (Baumgarten-Crusius). The repetitions of the idea of the world (κόσμος) are to be distinguished thus: In the first case the word combines the material and the moral world in one; in the second, it means the material or visible world alone, up to the roots of its moral conduct; in the third, the moral world alone, but considered as resting upon and representing the visible. Meyer well says: (1) The world might have known Him (constitutional affinity); (2) it should have known Him (according to His claim). [Comp. Rom_1:19 ff., where Paul fully proves the guilt of Gentiles and Jews in rejecting the light of nature and the preparatory revelation of the O. T.—P. S.]

Knew him not.—The whole verse strictly reads: “It was in the world, and the world was made by it [or Him, δ ι’ αὐτοῦ], and the world knew Him (αὐτόν) not.” The change of gender is highly significant. In the light of the world, the world should have known the personal founder of the world, the Logos. The gradation in the three clauses is also expressed by the repetition of “and.” The world of heathenism knew not the light, still less Him, the personal character of the light. It took the divine for something impersonal, and sough to heal the wrong by fragmentary personifications, its gods [the altar at Athens “to the unknown God,” Act_17:23.—P. S.]

Joh_1:11. He came unto his own house or inheritance [τὰ ἴδια, comp. Joh_16:32; Joh_19:27].—Here the discourse is no longer of the universal advent of Christ in the world (Corn. a Lapide, Kuinoel, etc.);63 but of the theocratic advent in Israel (Erasmus, Calvin, etc., Lücke, Meyer); yet of this advent considered as intended for mankind. Israel is God’s own people in the special sense, Exo_19:5; Deu_7:6; Sir_24:7 ff. It is not, however, the historical New Testament coming of Christ in Israel, which is here spoken of. The expression He came, as denoting the historical moving of the Logos in the history of the world, determines us against the more general conception of the “own.” Yet it must be kept well in mind, that in John particularly Israel stands not for itself alone, but as the medium for the entrance of Christ into the whole world. See Joh_10:16.

And his own people [οἱἴδιοι, comp. Joh_13:1]—i.e., the Jews. See Isaiah 6; Matthew 13; Joh_12:41; Acts 7; Act_23:25; Romans 9 [The transfer of the relation of Jehovah to Israel as His peculiar people upon Christ, implies that, in the view of John, Christ was the Jehovah of the Old dispensation; comp. Joh_12:41; Joh_8:56.—P. S.]

[Received him not—οὐπαρέλαβον, stronger than οὐκἔγνω, which is said of the world in general, Joh_1:10. The fact that the Jews were the peculiar inheritance of Jehovah, doubled their guilt in rejecting the Messiah. Comp. the οὐκἠθελήσατε , Mat_23:37; also Isa_1:3; Rom_10:21; and Joh_12:37. The negative expression here, as Joh_1:10 and Joh_1:5, reveals a holy grief on the part of John.64 Remember the tears of pity which the Saviour shed over unbelieving Jerusalem.—P. S.]

Joh_1:12. But as many as received him—[ὅσοι, whosoever, whatsoever persons, denotes the universality of Christ’s benefit without distinction of race, nationality or condition.—P. S.] No contradiction of the preceding words. His own, His people, as a whole, received Him not, but individuals. See Galatians 3, 4. The antithesis: οὐπαρέλαβον and ἔλαβον should be observed. The Jews should παραλαμβάνειν, take Him in addition to the Old Testament, receive Him in pursuance of the true traditions. This they did not. Thus others’ receiving Him became the absolute λαμβάνειν, contrary to the outward, false tradition. Λαμβάνειν in John and Paul is a strong word, denoting the moral act of faith, comp. Rom_5:11.*

To them gave he power.—Opposed to the descent from Abraham and the relative sonship with God, of which the Jews boasted, John 8. ’Ἐ ξουσία is neither merely [the possibility (De Wette, Tholuck), nor the ability (Brückner, Heng., Godet),65 nor] the dignity or advantage, (Erasmus, etc.), nor the right, or privilege (Meyer),66 but the real power, the spiritual faculty (Lücke), and, at the same time, the real title. Sonship with God was growing, in its formation-state, in the Old Testament; there were only incipient sons of God, Gal_4:1, but there were such really, and progressively, according to the advancing inwardness and depth of the Old Testament faith. This sonship with God, too, is connected indeed with a semen arcanum electorum et spiritualium (contrary to Meyer, see Joh_1:9); but this must be understood neither in a Gnostic sense, nor in a Hegelian, but in a Johannean, Joh_3:21. This incipient regeneration is also most certainly ethical, but not merely ethical; it is also substantial, though the antithesis between the eternal μονογενής and the regenerate τέκναθεοῦ by all means remains perfect, even after the advance of the latter to υἱοὶ θεοῦ. The distinctions: ethical theogony in John (according to Hase), legal adoption in Paul; υἱοθεσία first appearing in the kingdom of the Messiah in the Synoptists (Meyer), are of little use; unless it may be said that John emphasizes the ideal begetting, Paul the historical new creation. The Messianic kingdom begins with the children of God, not they with it. [To become—γενέσθαι.—Christ is the eternal, only begotten Son of God by nature; men become children of God by regeneration or a celestial birth; comp. Joh_3:3; 1Jn_3:9; Gal_3:26; 1Pe_1:23. Alford thinks that τέκνα θεοῦ is a more comprehensive expression than υἱοὶ τ. θ., as it involves the whole generation and process of our spiritual life and our likeness to God (1Jn_5:5-7), while the other brings out rather our adoption and hope of inheritance (Rom_8:14 if.)—P. S.]

To them that believe in his name.—[Πιστεύουσιν, not πιστεύσασιν; faith being a continued act and habit of the children of God. Mark also the distinction between believing Christ, that He is, and believing in Christ, in His name, His revealed being, in His person, εἰς τὸ ὄνομα;the former is purely intellectual and historical, the latter is moral and implies trust in and appropriation of Christ as our Saviour. The same difference holds with regard to the existence of God, comp. Jam_2:19 : καὶ τὰ δαιμόνια πισ τεύουσιν.—P. S.]—Not “ætiological” [quippe qui credunt, Meyer], but “explicative;” for faith is not the cause of the gift of Christ, but the organ, causa instrumentalis [the subjective condition]. The clause describes λαμβάνειν. Faith in the name of the Logos [εἰςτὸὄνομααὐτοῦ] is faith in Christ, more definitely, in His name (Act_2:36; Act_3:16; Act_4:12); and this definiteness of faith, in the evangelical acknowledgment of the personal truth in Christ, makes it saving, makes it the medium of the saving power of Christ, because the name of Christ denotes the concentrated expression of His nature in His gospel, in which truth and personal fact are one.67 So the name of God is to be understood: the revelation of God as a personal introduction of Himself to us. So the devout of the old covenant believed in the name of the Logos, in the essential contents and subject of the Messianic promises, Joh_2:23; Joh_3:18, etc.

Joh_1:13. Who were born, not of bloods.—It is confusing to ask whether οἴ refers to τέκνα θεοῦ68 or πιστεύοντες. The subject is in both cases the same. It is the πιστεύοντες in the historical sense who are spoken of. The Evangelist introduces the antithesis of the natural generation and regeneration, yet regarding the natural generation itself as advanced from the purely physical to the religiously consecrated theocratic generation. He first states the antithesis in general: οὐκἐξαἱμάτων,not of bloods. Augustine explains the plural from the twofold sex of man and woman;69 Hölemann refers it to the successive begettings of the theocratic genealogy; Meyer finds that the plural is the same as the singular.70 We find in the plural a premonition of an ethical distinction of αἵματα. In ethical matters αἷμα and αἷμα are not one and the same. And this the succeeding climax proceeds to say. According to Augustine [Theophyl., Schott, Olshausen] and others, θέλημα σαρκός denotes woman in distinction from man (ἀνδρός). [This would require rather the disjunctive οὔτε—οὔτε, neither—nor, than the adjunctive οὐδέ—οὐδέ, nor—nor yet; besides flesh is never used synonymously with woman.—P. S.]71 Mosheim distinguishes native Jews and proselytes; others, natural children and adopted (Starke);72 Lücke takes ἀνήρ as no more than ἄνθρωπος;73 Meyer regards the sentence as a rhetorical progress to greater definiteness: the term σαρκόζ referring to the sexual instinct, ἀνδρός to the procreative will of the man.74If this distinction be followed up, we must come involuntarily upon the track of the true interpretation. The common sensual desire knows nothing of procreative will, yet it doubtless has its θέλημα. Baumgarten Crusius, therefore, rightly asserts that the progress is from the sensual to the most noble;75 and we see here a progress from the sensual begettings of the heathen world to the theocratically consecrated begettings, which introduce a sacred theocratic genealogy (see Lange’s Leben Jesu iii. 558, and Posit. Dogm. pp. 514, 532). In this passage is reflected the Scripture doctrine of hereditary blessing. Of course the Evangelist tells us also that the consecrated births may indeed exhibit an approach to regeneration, and be the instrument of it, but that they are not able to effect it, and that regeneration, as a heavenly generation, forms a counterpart to the earthly.

[The difference between αἴματα, σάρξ and ἀνήρ is not very clear, but the conjunction οὐδέ—οὐδέ (nor—nor yet), as distinct from οὔτε—οὔτε (neither—nor, comp. Winer, p. 454 f., 7th ed.), indicates a rising climax from the general (αἵματα) to the particular, and here again from the lower and physical agency (δάρξ) to the higher and moral (ἀνήρ), although θέλημα is ascribed to both. In Mat_16:17; 1Co_15:50; Eph_6:12; Gal_1:16, flesh and blood together signify human nature in its weakness. In Joh_3:6 we have the same contrast between the natural birth from the flesh, and the supernatural birth from the Spirit. The threefold denial of all human agency in regeneration gives emphasis to the affirmation of the divine agency, which is expressed by but of God, ἀλλ’ ἐκ θεοῦ. This does not exclude mediate instrumentalities, through which, ordinarily, men are regenerated and converted. The affirmation may be analyzed so as to correspond to the three members of the negation: 1) not of blood, but of the seed of God (1Jn_3:9), which is the word of God (1Pe_1:23 : ἀναγεννημένοι … διά λόγου ζῶντος θεοῦ; Jam_1:18 : ἀπεκύησεν ἡμᾶς λόγῳ ἀληθείας; 2) nor of the will of the flesh, but of the Spirit (Joh_3:6 : γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος; 3) nor yet of the will of man, but of the will of God (Jam_1:18 : βουληθεὶς ἀπεκύησεν ἡμᾶς ὁ θεός; Eph_1:5 : κατὰ τὴν εὐδοκίαν τοῦ θελήματος αὐτοῦ. Bengel analyzes differently: 1) ex cœlesti Patre; 2) ex amore divino; 3) ex Spiritu sancto. Grace does not descend through the channel of nature in any form, but a new creative act of God is necessary in every regeneration. Barnes, in his notes on Joh_1:13, confounds regeneration with conversion. Regeneration is an act of God, and may take place in infancy (think of John the Baptist leaping in the mother’s womb); conversion or change of mind (μετάνοια) is the act of man, by which, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, he turns, in conscious repentance and faith, from sin and Satan to God.—P. S.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1.The fact that a man (John) was designated the messenger of God even, so to speak, in his origin, Luk_1:15; Luk_1:44, announced the coming of another, in whom no issue between birth and new birth should exist. Yet the distinction is as clear as the connection. John, as man, became the messenger of God; the Logos, as messenger of God, Joh_3:31; 1Co_15:25, became man. In John and Mary appear the two summits of the Old Testament spirit, the highest aspiration of human nature in the train of the Spirit of God; in Mary the summit of fervent, humble, receptive piety; in John the summit of energetic, prophetic piety in the official service of the law. Yet in them the higher spirit works from below upward under the drawing from above. In Christ the divine is before, and in Him the nisus is from above downward under the drawing of the human longing, the need of life and salvation below. The Baptist is strongly conscious of this distinction, Mat_3:11; Joh_3:31. And in accordance with this nature of Christ is the nature also of Christianity, the righteousness of faith in a righteous life.

2. The same came for witness, John the Baptist, the last, most distinct form of the Old Testament prophecy, and as such the witness of Christ in the history of the world, at the same time in his freedom from jealousy a witness to the Holy Ghost in the Old Testament. The death of John a martyrdom (witness-bearing) to his fidelity as forerunner.

3. Through John His noblest disciples came to believe, through them all succeeding disciples and Christians, (See Schleiermacher, Predigten I., p. 18.)

4. He was not the Light. An antithesis applying not only to the Old and New Testaments, but also to Christ, the fountain of light, and the Apostles and Christians, with the prophets, as receivers and bearers of the light.

5. The true Light was coming. The pre-Christian Advent. (1) Founded (a) in the nature of Christ: “The true Light, which lighteneth every man,” i.e., shines into him from within through the fundamental laws of personal, mental life, from without through nature and history; (b) in the nature of the world: Made by the Logos, standing by His presence. (2) Unfolding itself (a) in a general invisible force: The shining in the darkness, the lighting of every man; Christ’s being in the world [primordial religion]; (b) in historical theocratic form: Education of Israel for His possession, and His coming to His own (the Old Testament religion in its development).

6. Received Him not. The obduracy, a self-estrangement, as well as a hostile bearing towards the admission of the yearning Householder. The obduracy of Israel in its historical development and completion; the great warning to the Christian world; warning, and alas, still more, Mat_24:38.

7. That believe in His name.—Respecting the name, see above in the exegesis of this passage. Appearance of the name of the Logos, in the more definite sense, with the Old Testament revelation (the Angel of the Lord and the Messiah). Faith in the objective Messiah was in the subject, incipient sonship. In the righteousness of faith lay a point of union between the word of God and the heart of man, a quickening germ of personal children of God, therefore the power to become sons. But this could be brought to decision and contemplation only by the historical appearance of Christ and by the redemption accomplished in Him. As the revelation of God strove from the first towards concentration in the Name, the making Himself personally, perfectly known, so true faith strives from the beginning after the concentrated receiving of a distinct personal life. Centripetal faith, living faith; centrifugal faith, dying or dead faith.

8. Who were born not of blood. The truth and the insufficiency of inherited privilege. The Biblical doctrine of covenant grace not yet duly received in the church. Its antagonism to the unchurchly conception of the relation between nature and spirit, and even to the Augustinian overstatement of original sin. Its antagonism to Pelagianism. (See Posit. Dogmatik., p. 514 sqq.)

9. But of God. First the righteousness of faith present; then circumcision as the symbol of regeneration. The idea of real regeneration develops itself with the idea of the personal Messiah. Its development or genesis is reciprocal with that of repentance, faith, the experience of grace, in the saving process as it advances from the outward to the inward.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

John the Baptist, the Old Testament Evangelist of the Light. (1) In his mission and his name; (2) in his testimony and his work; (3) in his retirement and disappearance before the Light itself.—The Old Testament Advent of Christ: 1. In its ultimate basis (He was in the world); 2. in its historical manifestation (He came to His own); 3. in its earnest of victory (As many as received Him); 4, in its last attestation (There was a man).—John and Christ, or the personal manifestation of the saving Light: 1. John, the attester of the Light; 2. Christ, the attested Light.—The Old and New Testaments, one light of revelation: 1. The Old in the day-light of the New; 2. The New in the dawn-light of the Old.—John and Christ, or the kernel of revelation, personal life.—The Son of God as the nameless Name: 1. The namelessness of the name, (a) in the world in general, (b) in Israel in particular; 2. the name of the nameless, (a) in its silent development (He was in the world; He came), (b) in its great works.—The Advent of Christ in the world, mistaken and yet perceived: Mistaken (a) by the heathen, (b) by the Jews. Yet perceived (a) by the yearnings of the devout in all the world, (b) by the hope of the faithful in Israel.—The name of the Light, its complete personal revelation in Christ.—Christ the name: 1. The name of the life in the world; 2. the name of the light in mankind; 3. the name of the salvation in the children of God.—Those who are becoming believers, are becoming children of God.—The power to become, or the freedom of the spirit, the groundwork of the new birth and nature.—The being born of blood and born of God considered: 1. In their antagonism; 2. in their essential distinction; 3. in their congenial connection; 4. in the Mediator of their union.—He who believes in the pollution of birth according to the Scriptures, must believe also according to the Scriptures in the consecration of birth.—The beginnings of the regeneration in the Old Covenant, a fore-shadowing of the eternal new birth of Christ from heaven.

Starke: Jesus alone had a fore-runner.—Like the aurora before the sun, so John, according to the word of prophecy, must bear himself before Christ.—Hedinger: Teachers and all Christians are indeed lights also, in virtue of their divine calling, fellowship with God, and holy living, yet their main object is to bear witness of the light in Christ, to lead to it by precept and example.—O glorious nobility! to be born of God, His child and heir!—Behold, what manner of love! 1Jn_3:1.—Osiander: What is due to Christ alone, must not be attributed to any man.—The eternal light sends forth rays in the hearts of all men. He who is not enlightened, must ascribe it to himself and the dominion of darkness.—Canstein: Noble family helps not to sonship and salvation, but only the being born anew of God.—Mosheim : Men in the state of nature are not children of God, and therefore have no right to salvation.

Gerlach, after Augustine: Corrupt men are called the world, because they love the world more than its Creator. By love we dwell in a thing with the heart, and we have therefore deserved to bear the name of that wherein we dwell by love.

Heubner: John must prepare the way for the reception of the Light.—The light must came gradually, else it blinds.—The nobility of the children of God is attained only through the Spirit, through birth from God, through a proper spiritual generation.

[Joh_1:6. John the Baptist, the greatest of men before Christ, because he was nearest to Christ, and comprehended all the light of the preparatory revelations of Moses and the prophets.

Joh_1:7. Every minister only a borrowed light to lean men to Christ, the true Light.

Joh_1:8. Christ is the sun of the soul, the source of spiritual light, life and growth.—P. S.]

[Joh_1:9. Arrowsmith: Christ is the true Light; 1. The undeceiving Light, in opposition to all the false lights of the Gentiles ; 2. The real Light, in opposition, to ceremonial types and shadows; 3. The underived Light, in opposition to all borrowed light; 4. The supereminent Light, in opposition to all ordinary light.

Joh_1:10. Hengstenberg: The creature should shout for joy, if its Creator comes to redeem it.

Joh_1:11. It is disgraceful if the creature despises the creature; it is doubly disgraceful if the people of the Covenant despise the Lord of the Covenant.]

[Joh_1:13. The new (celestial, divine) birth constitutes the true nobility of grace, as contrasted with the aristocracy of natural birth, the aristocracy of money, the aristocracy of merit, the aristocracy of fame.—Regeneration: 1. Its origin; 2. Its growth; 3. Its manifestation; 4.Its end (the final resurrection).—The children of God the salt of the earth, the light of the world, the benefactors of the race.—Comp. the admirable description of Christian life in the Epistle to Diognetus, ch. v. and vi., composed soon after the Apostolic age. Christians in the world are there compared to the soul in the body: they are scattered through the world and dwell in the world, yet are not of the world: they are hated by the world, yet love and benefit it; they are imprisoned in the world, yet preserve it from corruption, they are sojourners in the perishing world, looking for an incorruptible dwelling in heaven.—P. S.]

Footnotes:

[47]Joh_1:6. [The Greek here is ἐγένετο (became), which differs from ἦν (was), Joh_1:1, as the German ward (or geworden) does from war, but it cannot be well rendered in English. It is the antithesis between temporal or created existence which has a beginning, and implies previous non-existence, and eternal or uncreated existence, which has neither beginning nor end. The same distinction—Joh_8:58 : πρὶν ̓Αβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγώ εἰμι.—P. S.]

[48]Joh_1:6. [ἀπεσταλμένος does not belong to ἐγένετο=ἀπεστάλη (Chrysostom, Hom. 6 p. 42, and Hengstenberg), but to ἄνθρωπος.—P. S.]

[49]Joh_1:9. [So Lange, Ewald somewhat differently: Ja das wahrhaflige Licht, welches jeden Menschen erleuchtet, kam stets in die welt. Others translate: that was the true Light which, coming into the world, lighteth every man. ἐρχόμενον may be connected with ἄνθρωπον Vulg.: hominem venientem, Luth., E. V.), or better, with ἦν (Lange, Ewald). See the Exeg. Notes. In the latter case a comma should be made after ἄνθρωπον, as is done by Tischendorf, eighth ed.—P. S.]

[50]Joh_1:10. [δἰ αν̓τον͂. Cod. א* read δἰ αν̓τόν, probably an error of the copyist.—P. S.]

[51]Joh_1:11. [The E.V. obliterates the distinction between the neutral τὰ ἴδια, das Seine, his own things, possessions, inheritance, and the masculine οίἴδιοι, die Seinen, his own people, servants, subjects.—P. S.]

[52]Joh_1:13. The difficulty of the passage has occasioned the omission of ον̓δὲ ἐκ θελ. σαρκ. in Cod. E and others; and of ον̓δὲ ἐκ θελ. ἀνθρ. in Cod. B. and others. Others, as Augustine, have transposed the clauses. [See Tischend. Oct. VIII. p. 743.]

[53][Hengstenberg adopts the construction of Chrysostom, which would have been more naturally expressed by ἀπεστάλη, and defends it by referring to Mal_3:1; Mal_3:13 : “Lo, I am sending my messenger,” etc., compared with the words of the Baptist, Joh_3:28 : ἀπεσταλμένος εἰμὶ ἔμπροσθεν αν̓τοῦ. I prefer the usual connection of ἀπεσταλμένος with ἄνθρωπος.—P. S.]

[54][The Baptist is mentioned in the Prologue to confirm the reality of the historical appearance of Christ: Brückner; as a brilliant exception from the terrible darkness spoken of Joh_1:5 : Ewald; to explain the rejection of Christ by His own people, Joh_1:10-11 : Meyer; to introduce the historic manifestation of the word: Alford. He is mentioned rather as the personal representative of the whole O. T. revelation in whom the law and the promise, Moses and Isaiah, were united and pointed directly to Christ. See Lange in the text.—P. S.]

[55][In the fifth edition of Meyer the reference to Ewald is omitted. In his Commentary, Ewald translates δἰ αν̓τοῦ durch ihn without explaining whether ihn is meant of John or of Christ.—P. S.]

[56][Ryle: “One of those texts which show the immense importance of the ministerial office through which the Holy Spirit is pleased to produce faith in man’s heart.—P. S.]

[57][Meyer denies the reference to the disciples of John entirely. Godet, on the contrary, defends it, and justly so, in view of Joh_1:20; Joh_3:25; and in view of the Gnostic sect of the Disciples of John in the second century, who held that John the Baptist was the true Messiah. (Clementis Rom. Recognitiones l. I. c. 54 and 60. Comp. the articles of Petermann, Mendüer and Zabier, in Herzog’s Encyclop. Vols. IX. p. 318 and XVIII. p. 341.) Only we must not suppose either that John wrote expressly, or exclusively against this error. See Dr. Lange above.—P. S.]

[58][In the first ed. Luther translated: “Das war ein wahr-haftig Licht, welches alle Menschen erleuchtet durch seine Zukunft in die Welt,” i.e., “which, coming into the world, lighteneth all men.” In the later editions he followed the Vulgate.—P. S.]

[59][Meyer, however, lays the emphasis on ἧν aderat, which is put first, and translates: “Vorhanden war das Licht das wahrhaftiqe, welches erleuchtet jeden Menschen, der in die Welt kommt,” the true light was in existence, etc. But there is no good reason why ἧν should be emphasized rather than ἀληθτνόν, and then ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἡν, Joh_1:10, would be a repetition of Joh_1:9. The old usual interpretation is preferable to Meyer’s, but both are to be rejected, because the phrase to come into the world for to be born, though Rabbinical (בָּעוֹלַםבֹּל בָּאֵי=all men), is not Scriptural, as applied to common men, but is reserved exclusively for the Messiah with the implied sense of præ-existence, Joh_3:19; Joh_3:3; Joh_6:14; Joh_11:27; Joh_12:46; Joh_18:37. Bengel: “Apud Hebræos frequens est periphrasis hominis, הבִא בִעולם veniens in mundum, sed in N. T. et. præcipue in in hoc libro id at solo Christo dicitur, sublimi significatu. Erat enim, ante etiam, quam veniret.”—P. S.]

[60][In his Commentary Ewald explains somewhat differently. He connects Joh_1:9 with Joh_1:4 : es kam damals immer in die Welt, it was at that time always coming into the world, so that every mortal, if he would, might have been guided by the light.—P. S.]

[61][Keim: “er war in stetem Kommen in die Welt.” Similarly Ewald, see preceding foot-note. ἦν ἐρχόμενον is stronger than ἦν, and implies a continued action, like the English, was coming, as distinct from came. Comp. ἦν βαπτίζων, Joh_1:28. Hengstenberg accounts for this circumlocution of the simpler imperf. by the emphasis laid on ἐρχόμενος as a term of the Messiah; comp. Mat_3:11 : ὁ ὀπίσω μον ἐρχόμενος; Joh_11:3; Joh_1:15; Joh_1:27; Joh_1:30.—P. S.]

[62]

[Comp. the lines of Göthe:

“War nicht das Auge sonnenhaft,

Wie könnten wir das Licht erblicken?

Lebt’ nicht in uns des Gottes eigne Kraft,

Wie könnt’ uns Göttliches entzücken?”—P. S.]

[63][There is no Scripture proof that ἴδια (viz., δώματα, οἰκήματα) means the world, and ἴδιοι mankind in general; both expressions refer to Israel as the peculiar people of God, ἴδια to the nation as a whole, ἴδιοι to the individuals. George Campbell (on the Gospels). Alford and Barnes would understand τα ἴδια of Palestine or Judea, and οί ἴδιοι of its inhabitants.—P. S.]

[64]

[Something of this feeling of sadness, in view of the ingratitude of the world to Christ, pervades the hymn of the noble Novalis:

Wenn alle untreu werden,

So bleib ich Der dock treu,”

especially the second stanza:

I could weep night and morning

That Thou hast died, and yet

So few will heed Thy warning,

So many Thee forget.

O loving and true-hearted,

How much for us didst Thou!

Yet is Thy fame departed,

And none regards it now.—P. S.]

[65][Godet translates: “elle (la Parole) les a mis en position de devenir enfants de Dieu” and explains ἐξονσὶα to mean essentially the same with the Pauline νἱοθεσὶα, the filial relation to which man is restored by faith, yet not identical with regeneration, but a condition to it. “Car Dieu ne peut communiquer sa propre vie par le πνεν͂μα qu'ὰun homme avec qui il est reconcilié.… Mais une fοie que l' adoption a eu lieu, la regénération doit suivre… et c ést la le second privilège, resultant, du premier, que saint Jean exprime dans ces mots: ‘Devenir enfants de Dieu.’” But the second is rather explanatory of the first (ἐξονσὶα).—P. S.]

[66][In the fifth ed. Meyer explains: er ermätchtigte sie, he empowered them. Comp. Joh_5:27; Joh_17:2.—P. S.]

[67][Arrowsmith, quoted by Ryle: “The word ‘name’ in the Scripture is often put for person. The receivers of Christ are said to believe on His name, because the direct object of their faith is the person of Christ. It is not the believing that Christ died for all, or for me, or for the elect, or any such proposition, that saveth. It is believing on Christ. The person, or name of Christ, is the object of faith.”—P. S.]

[68][So Meyer, constructio κατα σύνεσιν, as in 2Jn_1:1; Phm_1:10; Gal_4:19. But Lange is right.—P. S.]

[69][“Ex sanguinibus enim homines nascuntur maris et feminæ ?” Tract. II. § 14. Ewald translates the plural aus Blut und Blut, and explains: durch blosse Missching voun Zeugungs-stoffen. Wordsworth: human commixtures.—P. S.]

[70][The plural usage of αἶμα in the sense of this passage occurs only in Euripides, Ion John 705: ἄλλων τραφεὶς ἀφ̓ αἱμάτων, but often in the sense of murder, in the classics and in the LXX. See quotations in Meyer.—P. S.]

[71][Augustine, In Joh. Tract. II. § 14, quotes Gen_2:22 and Eph_5:28-29 to show that caro may be used for uxor; bur these passages (as also Judges 7) are not to the point. Flesh here means human nature, male and female. “What is born of the fiesh is flesh,” Joh_3:6.—P. S]

[72][So Albert Barnes; “adopted by a pious man.” Without a shadow of proof. Ryle and Crosby refer “flesh” to man’s own and “man” to any foreign human agency. But this could have been much more clearly expressed.—P. S.]

[73][So also Alford, who quotes, with Lücke, the Homeric πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε. But Meyer denies that ἀνήρ is ever generalized into ἄνθρωπος, least of all here where the act of generation is spoken of.—P.S.]

[74][Similarly God t: The will of the flesh is la volonté dominée par p imagination sensuelle, the will of man la volonté plus independante de la nature, la resolution virile.—P. S.]

[75][Nature (αἵματα), desire (σάρξ), will (ἀνήρ). But the difficulty is that θήλημα is used in the second as well as the third clause.—P. S.]

[76]Joh_1:14. [Or, pitched his ten; Meyer, Ewald: zeltete; Godet: a dressé sa tente. The verb ἐσκήνωσεν (from σκηνή, tent), which John uses also of God’s dwelling with His people on the new earth (Rev_21:3), was chosen in allusion to the Shekinah (שׁבִינָה, or שְׁבִינָא, a Rabbinical theological term from שָׁכַו to dwell), i.e., the indwelling or glorious presence of Jehovah in the holy of holies of the tabernacle and the temple, which typically pointed to the incarnation. This allusion is evident from the correspondence of the letters (Bengel: “eædem literæ in שכיה et σκηνὴ"), and from the following ἐθεασάμεθα τὴ δόξαν αὐτοῦ comp. Exo_25:8 (where Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion translate שָׁבַנְתִּי by σκηνώσω; Exo_40:34; Lev_26:11-12; Eze_37:27; Hag_2:8; Rev_7:15; Rev_21:3. In the Apocryphal books the Shekinah was especially ascribed to the Sophia (Sir_24:8 : ἐν ̓Ιακὼβ κ́ατασκήνωσον), and the Logos. The humanity of Christ became the Shekinah of His divinity—P. S.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

TESTIMONY OF JOHN THE BAPTIST

Joh 1:6-51. “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, that he may testify concerning the Light, in order that all may believe through him. He was not that Light, but that he may testify concerning that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” John the Baptist clearly and powerfully preached the gracious possibility of universal salvation, involving the saving efficiency of Christ from the foundation of the world. Darkness here means sin, and light means grace. Hence, you see that the true, saving grace of God in Christ is actually given to every human being, of all ages and nations, Pagan, Mohammedan, Papist, and Protestant.

Christ died for all, and by His Spirit shines on all. Hence, none will have an excuse for their own damnation, as all they have to do is to walk in the light God gives, and in that case, “the blood cleanses from all sin.” (1Jn 1:7) Hence, people are only lost for rejecting the light, as God only requires all to be true to the light and the grace given.

“He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not.” The Savior was unknown, misunderstood, falsely accused, unjustly condemned, and cruelly put to death. Two hundred millions of martyrs have added their blood to His for the same reason; i.e., because the World knew them not. Jesus and the martyrs suffered condemnation and death as malefactors, while they were the best people in the world. Such will always be the case till our Lord comes in His glory. The people of this wicked world will never understand God’s true people. When they understand and appreciate you, an awful suspicion arises that you have gotten wrong. “He came unto His own, and His own received Him not;” i.e., He came to the Jews, His own consanguinity, and given to Him in an everlasting Covenant. Because they were carnal and worldly, they misunderstood, disowned, and killed Him. If He had been carnal, like themselves, they would have received Him all right, as they did several false Christs within forty years after His crucifixion. But in that case, He could not have saved them, but must have failed, like all of those false Christs.

“But so many as received Him, unto them gave He the privilege to become the children of God, to them that believe on His name, who were born, not of bloods, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” In this wonderful and beautiful passage, setting forth so clearly and gloriously the great fundamental doctrine of regeneration, the word translated “power” in E.V. is exousia, signifying, not only power, but more properly, privilege, right, authority. The word most prevalent in the New Testament and translated “power” is dunamiz — i.e., dynamite, an infinitely stronger word than exousia. It means the very omnipotence of the Almighty; whereas, exousia here means the right or the privilege of every one that receives Christ to become the children of God through faith, salvation being optionary with the recipient; i.e., you can all believe and be saved, or disbelieve and be lost. The specification here given on the negative side is exceedingly valuable, as it is God’s Warning against Satan’s delusion. “Not from bloods.” Until the date of this Scripture, all Church services consisted in bloody sacrifices. Hence the conclusion, that no one can be regenerated by water baptism, the eucharist, good works, or ritual ceremonies of any kind; nor “from the will of the flesh” — i.e., you can not receive the Divine birth by the carnal will. “The Ethiopian can not change his skin, nor the leopard his spots.” Wonderful force in this Scripture! The black man may exercise all the power of his will, and put forth the greatest possible resolution to become a white man, and yet his skin remains black as an Ethiopian sky ever tanned. This certifies the utter impossibility of regeneration superinduced by everything we can possibly do. “Nor from the will of man.” The pope of Rome, and all the interceding priests on the face of the whole earth, and you may add to them all the apostles, if they were risen from the dead, can not possibly impart life to the dead soul of the sinner. As inspired John here well says, none but Cod can possibly do this work. When God calls you from death to life, He always reveals to you the glorious fact. How few, comparatively, have the witness of the Spirit that they are born of God!

“The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten with the Father, full of grace and truth.”

As depravity, in all its forms and phases, is antithetical to grace, it is impossible for any one to be full of the latter and contain any of the former. A bucket is not full of water if it has a quantity of rock or dirt at the bottom. Hence, we see this statement annihilates a dogma somewhat now afloat; i.e., that Jesus had depravity, having inherited it from His mother.

“For we have not a High Priest who is not able to sympathize with our infirmities; He also having been tempted in all things, in like manner, without sin.” (Heb 4:15.)

This Scripture sweeps all controversy from the field. They argue that the fact of His temptation is a proof that He had depravity. You see this Scripture covers all the ground, though He was tempted in all things as we are, yet He was without sin. The Word of the Lord is the end of all appeal. Consequently this question is settled. Sin and error are Siamese twins, which always live and die together. Jesus was full of grace; therefore He had no sin, and no depravity, which is but another word for sin. Neither did He have any infirmity, which is the normal effect of sin. He was full of truth; therefore He had no error.

“John testifies concerning Him, and cried, saying, This is He of whom I spoke; He that cometh after me was preferred before me, because He was before me.” While John the Baptist stood before the people as the forerunner and introducer of Jesus, he is very emphatic in his testimony to His uncreated eternity. “Of His fullness, we all receive grace upon grace,” or grace in addition to grace; i.e., the grace of sanctification in addition to the grace of justification. “Because the law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” The law never had any power to save, but only to convict, and thus prepare people for the saving grace and truth which God gave in Christ.

“No one hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, being in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him.” Did not Moses stand face to face with God on Mt. Sinai? Did not the Lord visit Abraham’s tent at Mamre, and eat with him? These, like the “Form of the Fourth,” seen by Nebuchadnezzar in the fiery furnace, were all manifestations of Christ, the Jehovah of the Old Testament being identical with the Christ of the New, and the incarnate manifestations to Moses, Abraham, and Nebuchadnezzar being adumbrations of His first coming, like His appearing to Paul near Damascus and in the temple at Jerusalem, anticipatory of His second advent.

Joh 1:19-22. Here John relates the history of the Jews sending priests and Levites to John the Baptist, to interview him directly with reference to a problem much agitated among them; the learned clergy and theologians standing on the desert sand hours together, straining their eyes, looking over the long rolls of prophecies, diagnosing and investigating the phenomena of John’s ministry, and trying to settle the question whether he is the Christ; but finally sending their delegation to interrogate him in presence of the multitude, “Art thou the Christ or do we look for another?” John the Baptist puts a final quietus to all their inquiry by a candid and unequivocal negation, responding,

“I am not the Christ, but the voice of one roaring in the desert, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, as Isaiah the prophet said.” (Isa 40:3.)

Here, as recorded by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, John the Baptist certifies constantly and repeatedly that his office is to roar out the warning to the people to repent and make straight ways to the Lord; — i.e., get rid of all their crookedness, so the Lord can come into their hearts.

Joh 1:28. “These things took place in Bethany, beyond the Jordan, where John was baptizing.” E.V. has here Bethabara, which is incorrect; Bethany, which means “house of dates,” being the correct reading. “The town of Bethany was ten miles up the Jordan in Perea, on the other side, the Baptist having moved thither since our Savior’s baptism.”

Joh 1:29. “The following day, John sees Jesus coming to him, and says, Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world.” This occurred the day following the transactions of the preceding verses, and after Jesus had been baptized and gone away into the wilderness, spent the forty days and more, and has now returned to the scene of John’s baptism, ten miles up the river, and on the other side, at the town Bethany. O that all the world would take this good, solid, Baptist doctrine! John the Baptist preaches no shoddy gospel, but entire sanctification all the time. He does not represent Jesus as suppressing sin or conquering it, and leaving it, like a rattlesnake, coiled up. and hidden in the deep subterranean regions of the fallen soul; but he describes Him as taking it away, world without end. The world is full of counterfeit salvation, multitudes standing in the pulpit and preaching a counterfeit Savior, who does not take away sin. Remember that sin here is in the singular number, not meaning simply sinful acts, but the sin principle; i.e., the body of sin, root, branch, germ, and seed, the entire entity, without any exception. It is the sin peculiar to the world — i.e., the depravity — which, though operating in different ways, is identical with all races, colors, sexes, and nationalities. If you could leap through the earth, and jump out in China, you would find sin there just what it is here. Jesus came, not to wash, dress, educate, and control it, but to take it away. This is simple, unmistakable gospel truth, preached by holy John the Baptist. Good Lord, help us all to receive it and preach it to others! O how few this day stand up and cry, “Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world!” Here, again, John asserts the priority of Jesus.

Joh 1:31. “And I did not know Him; but in order that He may be manifest to Israel, on this account I came baptizing with water. John testified, saying, That I saw the Spirit descending like a dove from heaven, and He remained on Him. I did not know Him, but the One sending me to baptize with water, He said to me, On whom you may see the Spirit descending and abiding on Him, the same is the One baptizing with the Holy Ghost. And I have seen, and I have testified that He is the Son of God.” We are not to conclude from these statements that John was utterly unacquainted with Jesus before the baptism, as they were related by consanguinity and the families acquainted. But God had revealed to John that he should have the indisputable confirmation of our Lord’s identity by the descension of the Holy Ghost on Him and His abiding there, thus revealing to John, and all the people, that He is truly the Christ, the only One in all the universe who baptizes with the Holy Ghost; John, His precursor and introducer, faithfully preparing the people by not only preaching to them a genuine, evangelical repentance, which was to be perseveringly perpetuated “unto remission of sins,” but it was his office also to symbolize the baptism of Jesus with the Holy Ghost and fire by the baptism with water. You see here in verse 34 that John, like Mark, omits the fire in the record, Matthew and Luke giving it, illustrating and confirming the fact, as attested by Paul (Eph 5:4) — i.e., the unity of baptism — the fire being a concomitant of the Spirit, and the water the symbol.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 3

THE BAPTISTS TESTIMONY.

There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for witness, that he might bear witness of the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came that he might bear witness of the light.... John beareth witness of Him, and crieth, saying, This was He of whom I said, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for He was before me. For of His fulness we all received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him. And this is the witness of John, when the Jews sent unto him from Jerusalem priests and Levites to ask him, Who art thou? And he confessed, and denied not; and he confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elijah? And he saith, I am not. Art thou the prophet? And he answered, No. They said therefore unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said Isaiah the prophet. And they had been sent from the Pharisees. And they asked him, and said unto him, Why then baptizest thou, if thou art not the Christ, neither Elijah, neither the prophet? John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: in the midst of you standeth One whom ye know not, even He that cometh after me, the latchet of whose shoe I am not worthy to unloose. These things were done in Bethany beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing. On the morrow he seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world! This is He of whom I said, After me cometh a Man which is preferred before me: for He was before me. And I knew Him not; but that He should be made manifest to Israel, for this cause came I baptizing with water. And John bare witness, saying, I have beheld the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven; and it abode upon Him. And I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, He said unto me, Upon whomsoever thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon Him, the same is He that baptizeth with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen, and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.- Joh_1:6-8; Joh_1:15-34.

In proceeding to show how the Incarnate Word manifested Himself among men, and how this manifestation was received, John naturally speaks first of all of the Baptist. There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for witness ... that all might believe through him. The Evangelist himself had been one of the Baptists disciples, and had been led to Christ by his testimony. And to many besides, the Baptist was the true forerunner of the Messiah. He was the first to recognise and proclaim the present King. John had come under the Baptists influence at the most impressible time of his life, while his character was being formed and his ideas of religion taking shape; and his teachers testimony to the dignity of Jesus had left an indelible print upon his spirit. While his memory retained anything it could not let slip what his first teacher had said of Him who became his Teacher and his Lord. While, therefore, the other Evangelists give us striking pictures of the Baptists appearance, habits, and style of preaching, and show us the connection of his work with that of Jesus, John glances very slightly at these matters, but dwells with emphasis and iteration on the testimony which the Baptist bore to the Messiahship of Jesus.

To us, at this time of day, it may seem of little importance what the Baptist thought or said of Jesus. We may sympathise rather with the words of the Lord Himself, who, in allusion to this witness, said, I receive not testimony from man. But it is plain that, at any rate from a Jewish point of view, the witness of John was most important. The people universally accepted John as a prophet, and they could scarcely think him mistaken in the chief article of his mission. In point of fact, many of the most faithful adherents of Jesus became such through the influence of John; and those who declined to accept Jesus were always staggered by Johns explicit indication of Him as the Christ. The Jews had not only the predictions of prophets long since dead, and descriptions of the Christ which they could perversely misconstrue; they had not merely pictures of their Messiah by which they might identify Jesus as the Christ, but of which it was also quite possible for them to deny the likeness; but they had a living contemporary, whom they themselves acknowledged to be a prophet, pointing out to them another living contemporary as the Christ. That even such a testimony was to a large extent disregarded shows how much more the inclination to believe has to do with our faith than any external proofs.

But even to us the testimony of a man like John is not without importance. He was, as our Lord bore witness, a burning and a shining light. He was one of those men who give new thoughts to their generation, and help men to see clearly what otherwise they might only dimly have seen. He was in a position to know Jesus well. He was His cousin; he had known Him from His childhood. He was also in a position to know what was involved in being the Messiah. By the very circumstance that he himself had been mistaken for the Messiah, he was driven to define to his own mind the distinctive and characteristic marks of the Messiah. Nothing could so have led him to apprehend the difference between himself and Jesus. More and more clearly must he have seen that he was not that light, but was sent to bear witness of that light. Thus he was prepared to receive with understanding the sign (Joh_1:33) which gave him something more than his own personal surmises to go upon in declaring Jesus to the world as the Messiah. If there is any mans testimony we may accept about our Lord it is that of the Baptist, who, from his close contact with the most profligate and with the most spiritual of the people, saw what they needed, and saw in Jesus power to give it; the business of whose life it was to make Him out, and to arrive at certain information regarding Him; a man whose own elevation and force of character made many fancy he was the Messiah, but who hastened to disabuse their minds of such an idea, because his very elevation gave him capacity to see how infinitely above him the true Christ was. Seen from the low ground the star may seem close to the top of the mountain; seen from the mountain-top it is recognised as infinitely above it. John was on the mountain-top.

Of Johns person and work nothing need here be said save what serves to throw light on his witness to Christ. Going from the comfortable home and well-provided life and fair prospects of a priests family, he went to the houseless wilderness, and adopted the meagre, comfortless life of an ascetic; not from any necessity, but because he felt that to entangle himself with the affairs of the world would be to blind him to its vices, and to silence his remonstrance, if not to implicate him in its guilt. Like thousands besides in all ages of the worlds history, he felt compelled to seek solitude, to subdue the flesh, to meditate undisturbed on things Divine, and discover for himself and for others some better way than religious routine and the good wine of Mosaic morality turned to the vinegar of Pharisaism. Like the Nazarites of the earlier times of his country, like the old prophets, with whose indignation and deep regret at the national vices he was in perfect sympathy, he left the world, gave up all the usual prospects and ways of life, and betook himself to a life of prayer, and thought, and self-discipline in the wilderness. When first he went there, he could only dimly know what lay before him; but he gathered a few friends of like disposition around him, and, as we learn, taught them to pray. He formed in the wilderness a new Israel, a little company of praying souls, who spent their time in considering the needs of their fellow-countrymen, and in interceding with God for them, and who were content to let the pleasures and excitements of the world pass by while they longed for and prepared themselves to meet the great Deliverer.

This adoption of the rôle of the ancient prophets, this resuscitation of their long-forgotten function of mourning before God for the peoples sin, and addressing the nation authoritatively as Gods voice, was outwardly shown by his assumption of the prophets dress. The rough skin for a cloak; the long, uncared-for hair; the wiry, weather-beaten frame; the lofty, calm, penetrating eye, were all eloquent as his lips. His whole appearance and habits certified his claim to be the voice of one crying in the wilderness, and gave him authority with the people. Slightly altering what has been said of a great modern, we may much more truly say of the Baptist,-

He took the suffering human race, He read each wound, each weakness clear: He struck his finger on the place, And said, Thou ailest here, and here. He looked on (Isrels) dying hourOf fitful dreams and feverish power,And said, The end is everywhere,(Christ) still has truth, take refuge there.

He was listened to. It is so always, in our own day as in others; the men who are unworldly and have the good of their country or of any class of men at heart, the men who are saintly and of few desires, these are listened to as the commissioned messengers of heaven. It is to these men we look as the salt of the earth, who preserve us still from the corrupting, disintegrating influence of doubt. To these men, no matter how different they be from us in creed, we are forced to listen, because the Holy Spirit, wherever He is, is the Spirit of God; and all men instinctively acknowledge that those who are themselves in the kingdom of God have authority to summon others into it, and that those who are themselves unworldly have alone a right to dictate to worldly men. There is no power on earth like the power of a holy, consecrated life, because he who is leading such a life is already above the world, and belongs to a higher kingdom. There is hope for our country, or for any country, when its young men have something of Johns spirit; when they school the body until it becomes the ready instrument of a high and spiritual intention, fearless of hardship; when by sympathy with Gods purposes they apprehend what is most needed by men, and are able to detect the weaknesses and vices of society, and to bear the burden of their time.

But the Baptists equipment for the most responsible office of proclaiming the Messiahship of Jesus was not completed by his own saintliness of character and keen perception of the peoples needs, and knowledge of Jesus, and incorruptible truthfulness. There was given to him a sign from heaven, that he might be strengthened to bear this responsibility, and that the Messiah might never seem to be only of the Baptists appointing and not of Gods. Some degree of disappointment may be felt that external signs should have intruded on so profoundly spiritual and real an occasion as the baptism of Christ. Some may be ready to ask, with Keim, Is it, or was it ever, the way of God, in the course of His spiritual world, above all upon the threshold of spiritual decisions affecting the fate of the world, and in contradiction to the wise economy of revelation pursued by His supreme ambassador Himself, to take away from seeking and finding souls the labour of deciding their own destiny? But this is to suppose that the signs at the baptism of Jesus were mainly for His encouragement, whereas John describes them as being given for the certification of the Baptist. I knew Him not-that is, I did not know He was the Messiah-but He that sent me to baptize with water, He said unto me, Upon whomsoever thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon Him, the same is He that baptizeth with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen, and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.

The baptism of Jesus was, in fact, His anointing as the Messiah; and this anointing by which He became the Christ was an anointing, not with a symbolic oil, but with the Divine Spirit (Act_10:38). This Spirit descended upon Him in a bodily shape (Luk_3:22), because it was not one member or faculty or power which was communicated to Jesus, but a whole body or complete equipment of all needful Divine energies for His work. God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto Him; there is no gauge, no metre checking the supply. Now for the first time can the whole Spirit be given, because now for the first time in Jesus is there room to receive it. And that the Baptist may confidently proclaim Him as King the sign is given,-not the outward sign alone, but the outward sign accompanying and tallying with the inward sign; for it was not said to the Baptist, Upon whomsoever thou shalt see a dove descend, but, upon whomsoever thou shalt see the Spirit descend.

This anointing of Jesus to the Messiahship occurred at the moment of His truest identification of Himself with the people. John shrank from baptizing One whom he knew to be already pure, and to have no sins to confess. But Jesus insisted, identifying Himself with a polluted people, numbered with transgressors. It was thus He became true King and Head of mankind, by identifying Himself with us, and taking upon Him, through His universal sympathy, all our burdens, feeling more shame than the sinners self for his sin, pained with the suffering in all their pain. It was the Divine Spirit of universal love, attracting Him to all sorrow and suffering, which identified Him in the mind of His first confessor as the Christ, the Son of God. This to the Baptist was the glory of the Only-begotten, this sympathy which felt with all, and shrank from no sorrow or burden.

Thus equipped, the Baptist gives his testimony with confidence. This testimony is manifold, and uttered on several occasions,-to the Sanhedrims deputation, to the people, and to his own disciples. It is negative as well as positive. He repudiates the suggestions of the deputation from Jerusalem that he himself is the Christ, or that he is in their sense Elijah. But the most remarkable repudiation of honours which could be rendered to Christ alone is found recorded in Joh_3:22-30, when the growing popularity of Jesus excited the jealousy of those who still adhered to the Baptist. Their complaint was the occasion of calling up clearly in the Baptists own consciousness the relation in which he stood to Jesus, and of prompting the most emphatic enouncement of the unrivalled dignity of our Lord. He says to his jealous disciples, If I do not gather a crowd of followers while Jesus does, this is because God has appointed to me one place, to Him another. Beyond Gods design no mans destiny and success can extend. What is designed for me I shall receive; beyond that I desire to receive and I can receive nothing. Least of all would I covet to be called the Christ. You know not what you say in even remotely hinting that such a man as I could be the Christ. It is no mere unworldliness or purity which can raise a man to this dignity. He is from above; not to be named with prophets, but the Son of God, who belongs to the heavenly world of which He speaks.

To make the difference between himself and Christ clear, the Baptist hits upon the happy figure of the Bridegroom and the Bridegrooms friend. He that has and keeps the Bride is the Bridegroom. He to whom the world is drawn, and on whom all needy souls lean, is the Bridegroom, and to Him alone belongs this special joy of satisfying all human needs. I am not the Bridegroom, because men cannot find in me satisfaction and rest. I cannot be to them the source of spiritual life. Moreover, by instigating me to assume the Bridegrooms place you would rob me of my peculiar joy, the joy of the Bridegrooms friend. The function of the bridegrooms friend, or paranymph, was to ask the hand of the bride for the bridegroom, and to arrange the marriage. This function the Baptist claims as his. My joy, he says, is to have negotiated this matter, to have encouraged the Bride to trust her Lord. It is my joy to hear the glad and loving words that pass between Bridegroom and Bride. Do not suppose I look with sadness on the defection of my followers, and on their preference for Christ. These crowds you complain of are evidence that I have not discharged the function of paranymph in vain. To see my work successful, to see Bride and Bridegroom at length resting in one another with undisturbed, self-forgetting confidence, this is my joy. While the Bridegroom cheers the Bride with His voice, and opens to her prospects which only His love can realize, shall I obtrude myself and claim consideration? Is it not enough for one life to have had the joy of identifying the actually present Christ, and of introducing the Bride to her Lord? Has not that life its ample reward which has been instrumental in achieving the actual union of God and man?

Probably, then, the Baptist himself would think we waste too much emotion over his self-sacrifice and magnanimity. After all, it not being possible to him to be the Messiah, it was no small glory and joy to be the friend, the next, to the Messiah. The tragic character of the Baptists death, the despondent doubt which for a time shook his spirit during his imprisonment, the severe life he had previously led, all tend to make us oblivious of the fact that his life was crowned with a deep and solid joy. Even the poet who has most worthily depicted him still speaks of

John, than which man a sadder or a greaterNot till this day has been of woman born.

But the Baptist was a big enough man to enjoy an unselfish happiness. He loved men so well that he rejoiced when he saw them forsake him to follow Christ. He loved Christ so well that to see Him honoured was the crown of his life.

Besides this negative repudiation of honours that belonged to Jesus, the Baptist emits a positive and fivefold testimony in His favour, (1) to His dignity (Joh_1:15; Joh_1:27; Joh_1:30), He that cometh after me is preferred before me; (2) to His pre-existence (Joh_1:15; Joh_1:30), which is adduced as the reason of the foregoing, for He was before me; (3) to His spiritual fulness and power (Joh_1:33), He baptizeth with the Holy Ghost; (4) to the efficacy of His mediation (Joh_1:29), Behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world; (5) to His unique personality (Joh_1:34), this is the Son of God.

1. Three times over the Baptist declared the superiority of Jesus; a superiority so immense that language failed him in trying to represent it. The Rabbis said, Every office which a servant will do for his master a scholar should perform for his teacher, except loosing his sandal-thong. But this exceptionally menial office the Baptist declares he was not worthy to perform for Jesus. None so well as the Baptist himself knew his limitations. He had evoked in the people cravings he could not satisfy. There had gathered to him a conscience-stricken people, longing for renewal and righteousness, and demanding what he had no power to give. Therefore, not merely his explicit enouncements from time to time, but his entire ministry, pointing to a new order of things which he himself could not inaugurate, declared the incomparable greatness of Him that was to come after him.

2. This superiority of Christ was based on His pre-existence. He was before me. It may appear unaccountable that the Baptist, standing on Old Testament ground, should have reached the conclusion that Jesus was Divine. But it is at any rate evident that the Evangelist believed the Baptist had done so, for he adduces the Baptists testimony in support of his own affirmation of the Divine glory of the Incarnate Word (Joh_1:15). After the wonderful scene at the Baptism, John must have talked closely with Jesus regarding both His work and His consciousness; and even if the passage at the close of the third chapter is coloured by the Evangelists style, and even by his thought, we must suppose that the Baptist had somehow arrived at the belief that Jesus was from above, and made known upon earth the things which He, in a pre-existent state, had heard and seen.

3. The Baptist pointed to Jesus as the source of spiritual life. He baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. Here the Baptist steps on to ground on which his assertions can be tested. He declares that Jesus can communicate the Holy Ghost-the fundamental article of the Christian Creed, which carries with it all else. No one knew better than the Baptist where human help failed; no one knew better than he what could be effected by rites and rules, by strength of will and asceticism and human endeavour; and no one knew better at what point all these become useless. More and more they seemed to him but a cleansing with water, a washing of the outside. More and more did he understand that, not from without, but from within, true cleansing must proceed, and that all else, save a new creation by the Spirit of God, was inefficacious. Only Spirit can act upon spirit; and for true renewal we need the action upon us of the Divine Spirit. Without this no new and eternal kingdom of God can be founded.

4. The Baptist pointed to Jesus as the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world. That by this title he meant only to designate Jesus as a person full of gentleness and innocence is out of the question. The second clause forbids this. He is the Lamb that takes away sin. And there is only one way in which a lamb can take away sin, and that is, by sacrifice. The expression no doubt suggests the picture in the fifty-third of Isaiah of the servant of Jehovah meekly enduring wrong. But unless the Baptist had been previously speaking of this chapter, the thoughts of his disciples would not at once turn to it, because in that passage it is not a lamb of sacrifice that is spoken of, but a lamb meekly enduring. In the Baptists words sacrifice is the primary idea, and it is needless to discuss whether he was thinking of the paschal lamb or the lamb of morning and evening sacrifice, because he merely used the lamb as the representative of sacrifice generally. Here, he says, is the reality to which all sacrifice has pointed, the Lamb of God.

5. The Baptist proclaims Jesus as the Son of God. That he should do so need not greatly surprise us, as we read in the other Gospels that Jesus had been thus designated by a voice from heaven at His baptism. Very early in His ministry, not only His disciples, but also the demoniacs ascribe to Him the same dignity. In one sense or other He was designated Son of God. No doubt we must bear in mind that this was in a rigidly monotheistic community, and in a community in which the same title had been freely applied to Israel and to Israels king to designate a certain alliance and close relation subsisting between the human and the Divine, but of course not suggesting metaphysical unity. But considering the high functions which clustered round the Messianic dignity, it is not unlikely that the Messiahs forerunner may have supposed that a fuller meaning than had yet been recognised might be latent in this title. Certainly we are safe in affirming that by applying this title to our Lord, the Baptist intended to indicate His unique personality, and to declare that He was the Messiah, Gods Viceroy on earth.

Whether we can add to this testimony the thoughts contained in the closing paragraph of the third chapter may be doubted. The thought of the passage moves within the circle of ideas familiar to the Baptist; and that the style is the style of the Evangelist does not prevent us from receiving the ideas as the Baptists. But there are expressions which it is difficult to suppose that the Baptist could have used. The preceding conversation was occasioned by the growing popularity of Jesus; was this, then, an occasion on which it could be said, No one receives His testimony? Is this not more appropriate to the Evangelist than to the Baptist? It would seem, then, that in this paragraph the Evangelist is expanding the Baptists testimony, in order to indicate its application to the eternal relations subsisting between Jesus and men generally.

The contents of the paragraph are a most emphatic testimony to the pre-existence and heavenly origin of Christ. In contrast to persons of earthly origin, He is from heaven. He cometh from above, as if His entrance into this world were a conscious transition, a voluntary coming from another world. His origin determines also His moral relationships and His teaching. He is above all, in dignity, in authority, in spirit; and He speaks what He has seen and heard. But in the thirty-fourth verse a new idea is presented. There it is said that He speaks the words of God, not directly, because He is from above, and speaks what He has seen and heard, but because God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto Him. What are we to understand by this double Divine inhabitation of the humanity of Jesus? And what are we to understand by the Spirit being given without measure to the Incarnate Word?

In the Old Testament two ideas present themselves regarding the Spirit which illustrate this statement. The one is that which conveys the impression that only a limited amount of spiritual influence was communicated to prophetic men, and that from them it could be conveyed to others. In Num_11:17 the Lord is represented as saying to Moses, I will take of the Spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and in 2Ki_2:9 Elisha is represented as praying that the eldest borns portion, the two-thirds of Elijahs spirit, might be bequeathed to him. The idea is a true and instructive one. The Spirit does, in point of fact, pass from man to man. It is as if in one receptive person the Divine Spirit found entrance through which He might pass to others. But another idea is also frequent in the Old Testament. The Spirit is spoken of rather as conferring a gift here and a power there than as dwelling wholly and permanently in men. One prophet had a dream, another a vision, a third legislated, a fourth wrote a psalm, a fifth founded an institution, a sixth in the power of the Spirit smote the Philistines, or, like Samson, tore a lion in pieces.

In Christ all powers are combined-power over nature, power to teach, power to reveal, power to legislate. And as in the Old Testament the Spirit passed from man to man, so in the New Testament Christ first Himself receives and then communicates to all the whole Spirit. Hence the law noticed at a subsequent stage of this Gospel that the Spirit was not yet given; because Jesus was not yet glorified (Joh_7:39). We cannot see to the bottom of the law, but the fact is apparent, that until Christ received into every part of His own humanity the fulness of the Divine Spirit, that Spirit could not fill with His fulness any man.

But why was the Spirit needed in a personality of which the Word, who had been with God and known God, was the basis? Because the humanity of Christ was a true humanity. Being human, He must be indebted to the Spirit for all impartation to His human nature of what is Divine. The knowledge of God which the Word possesses by experience must be humanly apprehended before it can be communicated to men; and this human apprehension can only be arrived at in the case of Christ by the enlightenment of the Spirit. It was useless for Christ to declare what could not be apprehended by human faculty, and His own human faculty was the measure and test of intelligibility. By the Spirit He was enlightened to speak of things Divine; and this Spirit, interposed, as it were, between the Word and the human nature of Jesus, was as little cumbrous in its operation or perceptible in consciousness as our breath interposed between the thinking mind and the words we speak to declare our mind.

To return to the direct testimony of the Baptist, we must (1) acknowledge its value. It is the testimony of a contemporary, of whom we know from other sources that he was generally reckoned a prophet-a man of unblemished and inviolable integrity, of rugged independence, of the keenest spiritual discernment. There was no man of larger size or more heroic mould in his day. In any generation he would have been conspicuous by his spiritual stature, his fearless unworldliness, his superiority to the common weaknesses of men; and yet this man himself looks up to Jesus as standing on quite a different platform from his own, as a Being of another order. He can find no expressions strong enough to mark the difference: I am not worthy to loose His shoe latchet; He that is of the earth (that is, himself) is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: He that cometh from heaven is above all. He would not have used such expressions of Isaiah, of Elijah, of Moses. He knew his own dignity, and would not have set so marked a difference between himself and any other prophet. But his own very greatness was precisely what revealed to him the absolute superiority of Christ. These crowds that gathered round him-what could he do for them more than refer them to Christ? Could he propose to himself to found among them a kingdom of God? Could he ask them to acknowledge him and trust in him for spiritual life? Could he promise them His Spirit? Could he even link to himself all kinds of men, of all nationalities? Could he be the light of men, giving to all a satisfying knowledge of God and of their relation to Him? No; he was not that light, he could but bear witness of that light. And this he did, by pointing men to Jesus, not as a brother prophet, not as another great man, but as the Son of God, as One who had come down from heaven.

It is, I say, impossible that we can make nothing of such a testimony. Here was one who knew, if any man ever did, spotless holiness when he saw it; who knew what human strength and courage could accomplish; who was himself certainly among the six greatest men the world has seen; and this man, standing thus on the highest altitudes human nature can reach, looks up to Christ, and does not only admit His superiority, but shrinks, as from something blasphemous, from all comparison with Him. What is the flaw in his testimony, or why are we not accepting Christ as our light, as able to take away our sins, as willing to baptize us with the Holy Ghost?

But (2) even such testimony as Johns is not sufficient of itself to carry conviction to the reluctant. None knew better than Johns contemporaries that he was a true man, not liable to make mistakes in a matter of this kind. And his testimony to Christ did stagger them, and often held them in check, and no doubt threw a kind of undefined awe over the person of Christ; but, after all, not many believed on account of Johns testimony, and those who did were not influenced solely by his testimony, but by his work as well. They had become concerned about sin, sensitive to defilement and failure, and were thus prepared to appreciate the offers of Christ. The two voices chimed, Johns voice saying, Behold, the Lamb of God! the voice of their own conscience crying for the taking away of sin. It is so still. The sense of sin, the feeling of spiritual weakness and need, the craving for God, direct the eye, and enable us to see in Christ what we do not otherwise see. We are not likely to know Christ until we know ourselves. What is the mans judgment regarding Christ worth who is not conscious of his own littleness and humbled by his own guilt? Let a man first go to school with the Baptist, let him catch something of his unworldliness and earnestness, let him become alive to his own shortcomings by at last beginning to strive after the highest things in life, and by seeking to live, not for pleasure, but for God, and his views of Christ and his relation to Him will become satisfactory and true.

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

1:6-9 God sent a man, John the Baptist, to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Joh 1:6. Ἐγένετο) not ἦν. The Evangelist does not say, was of John, but was made [fiebat: εἶναι is to be, γίνεσθαι, to begin to be]. The question is asked, how far the opening introduction to this book extends. The answer is. There is no introduction: the treatise itself [ipsa tractatio, the handling of the subject itself] begins with the beginning of the book. For in Joh 1:6 the Evangelist already describes the office of John, in bearing witness of the Light: and in the first five verses, he records what before had always been the nature and principle of the Light. Therefore up to this point a summary has been given of those things, which evidently preceded John; nor can these by any means be referred to the action of Jesus immediately succeeding John, as Artemonius, p. 412, refers it; and now there is unfolded by the Evangelist a more copious description of recent [new] events. Both [the things preceding John, and the things then from that point occurring] are most orderly in their arrangement.—ἄνθρωπος, a man) God deals with men through agents similar to themselves, namely, men; in order that they may the more readily take [‘capiant,’ take in, understand] and accept [His offers of love].—ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ Θεοῦ, sent from God) The definition of a prophet. Comp. Mat 11:9-10 [A prophet? Yea—and more than a prophet. For this is He, of whom it is written, Behold I send My messenger,” etc.] The Participle is here in immediate connection with the noun a man: and in mediate connection with the verb, was made [ἐγένετο began to be].—παρὰ Θεοῦ, from God, Joh 1:33.—Ἰωάννης, John) That is, an interpreter [exponent] of the grace of God. The greatness of John [is hereby implied], of whom mention is made immediately after the preceding statements [Joh 1:1-5]. Greater knowledge was brought into the world through John, than had been in all previous ages.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh_1:6. In the painful antithesis of Joh_1:5 which pervades the entire Gospel, was included not merely the pre-human relation of the Logos to mankind, but His relation thereto after His incarnation likewise (see on φαίνει). This latter is now more minutely unfolded as far as Joh_1:11, and indeed in such a way that John, to strengthen the antithesis, adduces first the testimony of the Baptist (Joh_1:6-8) to the Light, on the ground of which he then designates the Logos as the true Light (Joh_1:9); and finally, thus prefaced, makes the antithesis (Joh_1:10-11) follow with all the more tragic effect. The mention of Johns testimony here in the Prologue is not therefore a mere confirmation of the reality of the appearance of the Logos (Brückner), which the statements of Joh_1:9-10 did not require; still less is it a pressing forwards of the thought to the beginning of the Gospel history (De Wette), nor even the representation of the idea of the first intervention in the antithesis between light and darkness (Baur), nor an illustrious exception (Ewald) to the preceding ἡ σκοτία, κ.τ.λ.; but introducing a new paragraph, and therefore beginning without a particle, it forms a historical preparation, answering to what was actually the fact, for that non-recognition and rejection (Joh_1:10-11) which, in spite of that testimony of the Baptist, the light shining in the darkness had experienced. Joh_1:15 stands to Joh_1:7 in the relation of a particular definite statement to the general testimony of which it is a part.

ἐγένετο] not there was (ἦν, Joh_3:1), but denoting the appearing, the historical manifestation. See on Mar_1:4; Luk_1:5; Php_2:7. Hence not with Chrys.: ἐγένετο ἀπεσταλμένος ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀπεστάλη; which Hengstenberg repeats.

Observe in what follows the noble simplicity of the narrative: we need not look out for any antithetical reference (ἐγένετο

ἄνθρωπος

ἀπεστ. π. θεοῦ) to Joh_1:1 (B. Crusius, Luthardt, and older expositors). With ἀπεσταλμ. π. θεοῦ, comp. Joh_3:28; Mal_3:1-3. Description of the true prophet; comp. also Luk_3:2-3.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 1:6-13 . The historic manifestation of the Logos and its results .

Joh 1:6 . In this verse John passes to the historical; and like the other evangelists begins with the Baptist. So Theodore Mops: μετεληλυθὼς ἐπὶ τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν τοῦ υἱοῦ , τίνα ἄν εὗρεν ἀρχὴν ἑτέραν ἤ τὰ κατὰ τὸν Ἰωάννην ; ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπες , “not there was (chap. Joh 3:1 ), but denoting the appearing , the historical manifestation,” Meyer. Cf. Luk 1:5 . The testimony of John is introduced not only as a historical note but in order to bring out the aggravated blindness of those who rejected Christ. This man was ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ θεοῦ . Holtzmann says “an historical appearance is characterised as Godsent”. It might rather be said that an historical appearance sent to fulfil a definite Divine purpose is so characterised. There is no designation our Lord more frequently applies to Himself. In the prayer of chap. 17. some equivalent occurs six times. And in the epistle to the Hebrews He is called “the Apostle of our confession”. No distinguishing title is added to the common name “John”, Westcott says: “If the writer of the Gospel were himself the other John of the Gospel history, it is perfectly natural that he should think of the Baptist, apart from himself, as John only”. Watkins says: “The writer stood to him in the relation of disciple to teacher. To him he was the John.” Afterwards the disciple became the John.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

There is another more full manifestation of the Son of God, to the consideration whereof men are in good time stirred up, even by John’s voice, who is as it were the herald of Christ.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

The Evangelist here approaches his grand thesis, so paving his way for the full statement of it in Joh 1:14, that we may be able to bear the bright light of it, and take in its length and breadth and depth and height.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 6. Whose name was John.] This was John the Baptist; see his name and the nature of his office explained, Mr 1:4, and Mt 3:1-3.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

6. There was a man. The Evangelist now begins to discourse about the manner in which the Son of God was manifested in flesh; and that none may doubt that Christ is the eternal Son of God, he relates that Christ was announced by John the Baptist, as his herald. For not only did Christ exhibit himself to be seen by men, but he chose also to be made known by the testimony and doctrine of John; or rather, God the Father sent this witness before his Christ, that they might more willingly receive the salvation offered by him.

But it might at first sight appear ridiculous that Christ should receive testimony from another, as if he needed it; while, on the contrary, he declares that he does not seek testimony from man, (John 5:34.) The answer is easy and obvious, that this witness was appointed, not for the sake of Christ, but for our sake. If it be objected that the testimony of man is too weak to prove that Christ is the Son of God, it is likewise easy to reply, that the Baptist is not adduced as a private witness, but as one who, having received authority from God, sustained the character rather of an angel than of a man. Accordingly, he receives commendation not for his own virtues, but for this single circumstance, that he was the ambassador of God. Nor is this at variance with the fact, that the preaching of the gospel was committed to Christ, that he might be a witness to himself; for the design contemplated by the preaching of John was, that men might attend to the doctrine and miracles of Christ.

Sent by God. He does not say so for the purpose of confirming the baptism of John, but only mentions it in passing. This circumstance is not sufficient to produce certainty, since many run of their own accord, and boast that God has sent them; but the Evangelist, intending afterwards to speak more fully about this witness, reckoned it enough, for the present, to say in a single word, that John did not come but by the command of God. We shall afterwards see how he himself affirms that God is the Author of his ministry. We must now recollect — what I formerly noticed — that what is asserted about John is required in all the teachers of the Church, that they be called by God; so that the authority of teaching may not be founded on any other than on God alone.

Whose name was John. He states the name, not only for the purpose of pointing out the man, but because it was given to him in accordance with what he really was. There is no room to doubt that the Lord had reference to the office to which he appointed John, when he commanded by the angel that he should be so called, that by means of it all might acknowledge him to be the herald of divine grace. For though the name יהוחנן (Jehohannan) may be taken in a passive signification, and may thus be referred to the person, as denoting that John was acceptable to God; yet for my own part, I willingly extend it to the benefit which others ought to derive from him.

7. He came for a testimony. The end of his calling is briefly noticed; which was, that he might prepare a Church for Christ, as, by inviting all to Christ, he shows plainly enough that he did not come on his own account.

8. He was not that light. So far was John from needing commendation, that the Evangelist gives this warning, lest his excessive brightness might obscure the glory of Christ. For there were some who gazed so eagerly upon him that they neglected Christ; just as if a person, enraptured with beholding the dawning of the day, would not deign to turn his eyes towards the sun. In what sense the Evangelist employs the word light we shall immediately see. All the godly, indeed, are light in the Lord, (Ephesians 5:8,) because, in consequence of their being enlightened by his Spirit, they not only see for themselves, but likewise direct others by their example to the way of salvation. The apostles likewise are peculiarly called light, (Matthew 5:14,) because they go before, holding out the torch of the Gospel, to dispel the darkness of the world. But here the Evangelist speaks of him who is the only and eternal source of illumination, as he immediately shows more clearly.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(6) There was a man, or, There appeared a man. The word is the same as that which is used in Joh_1:3, “were made,” “was made,” and, as contrasted with the verb “was” in Joh_1:1-2; Joh_1:4, signifies the coming into being, as contrasted with original existence. In the same way “man” is emphatically opposed to “the Word,” who is the subject of the previous verses. “The Word was God:” the man was “sent from God.”

On the mission of John, see Notes on Matthew 3. The name was not uncommon, but it is striking that it is given here without the usual distinctive “Baptist.” The writer stood to him in the relation of disciple to teacher. To him he was the John. A greater teacher had not then appeared, but when He did appear, former teacher and disciple alike bear witness to Him. Great as was the forerunner, the least in the kingdom of heaven became greater than he was, and to after ages the disciple became the John, and his earlier master is given the title “Baptist,” which distinguishes the man and commemorates the work.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6–13. The Word revealed to Men and rejected by them

6. There was a man] Rather, There arose a man, in contrast to the ‘was’ in Joh_1:1. The word was from all eternity; John arose, came into existence, in time. Comp. Joh_10:19. Note once more the noble simplicity of language.

sent from God] i.e. a Prophet. Comp. ‘I will send my messenger,’ Mal_3:1; ‘I will send you Elijah the Prophet,’ Joh_4:5. From the Greek for ‘send’ (apostello) comes our word ‘Apostle.’

whose name was John] In the Fourth Gospel John is mentioned 20 times, and is never once distinguished as ‘the Baptist.’ The other three Evangelists carefully distinguish the Baptist from the son of Zebedee: to the writer of the Fourth Gospel there is only one John. This in itself is strong incidental evidence that he himself is the other John. See on Joh_11:16.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

There was a man sent from God,.... John the Baptist: he was not the Logos, or word; nor was he an angel, but a man; yet an extraordinary one, in his conception of a barren woman, and in being born when both parents were stricken in years; and whilst he was in the womb, he leaped for joy at the salutation of Mary; and as soon as born was filled with the Holy Ghost; and when he was grown up, and appeared in public, it was in an uncommon manner: his dress and his diet were both out of the common way; and his temper and spirit were that of Elias the prophet; and as for his work and office, it was very peculiar; he was the forerunner of Christ, and the first administrator of the new ordinance of baptism, and the greatest of all the prophets: this person had his mission from God, both to preach and baptize:

whose name was John; the name given him by the angel before his conception, and by his mother Elisabeth, after her neighbours and cousins had given him another; and which was confirmed by his father Zacharias, when deaf and dumb: it signifies grace, or gracious; and a gracious man he was; he was very acceptable to his parents; a man that had the grace of God in him, and great gifts of grace bestowed on him; he was a preacher of the doctrines of grace; and his ministry was very grateful to many.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

Ver. 6. There was a man sent from God] As he ran not, till sent, Jer 23:32. St Paul holds it not only for incredible, but for impossible, that men should preach that are not sent, Rom 10:15. So he declined not his ambassage, as did Jonah, απαιτουμενος την αποστολην; who was therefore met with by another messenger of God, and sent into the whale’s belly to make his sermon for Nineveh; and in his prayer before, to acknowledge out of sad experience that they that hunt "after lying vanities" (as he had done) "forsake their own mercies," Jon 2:8.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

A man sent from God - See Matt. 3. The evangelist proceeds now to show that John the Baptist was not the Messiah and to state the true nature of his office. Many had supposed that he was the Christ, but this opinion he corrects; yet he admits that he was “sent from God” - that he was divinely commissioned. Though he denied that he was “the Messiah,” yet he did not deny that he was sent from or by heaven on an important errand to human beings. Some have supposed that the sole design of this gospel was to show that John the Baptist was not the Messiah. Though there is no foundation for this opinion, yet there is no doubt that one object was to show this. The main design was to show that “Jesus was the Christ,” Joh 20:31. To do this, it was proper, in the beginning, to prove that “John” was not the Messiah; and this might have been at that time an important object. John made many disciples, Mat 3:5. Many persons supposed that he might be the Messiah, Luk 3:15; Joh 1:19. “Many of these disciples of John remained” at Ephesus, “the very place where John is supposed to have written this gospel, long after the ascension of Jesus,” Act 19:1-3. It is not improbable that there might have been many others who adhered to John, and perhaps many who supposed that he was the Messiah. On these accounts it was important for the evangelist to show that John “was not the Christ,” and to show, also, that he, who was extensively admitted to be a prophet, was an important “witness” to prove that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ. The evangelist in the first four verses stated that “the Word” was divine; he now proceeds to state the proof that he was a “man,” and was the Messiah. The first evidence adduced is the testimony of John the Baptist.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

There was a man sent from God; not the Christ, not an angel, but a man; yet one, than whom (as our Saviour saith) there had not risen a greater amongst those that were born of women. He did not come of his own head, but was sent; for it was he of whom it was written, Mal 3:1, Behold, I will send my messenger before thy face, & c., Luk 7:27, he was not sent of men, but from God, foretold by the angel, as to his existence, name, work, and success, Luk 1:13-17.

Whose name was John; his name was John, named by the angel, Luk 1:13, before he was born; by his father and mother, Luk 1:60,63, when he was born. John signifieth grace; and doubtless the Baptist obtained that name, because he was to be the first and a famous preacher of the grace of the gospel which came to the world through Jesus Christ.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

6-8. Thus far the Evangelist has traced the Word from his eternity into his creation of things, his creation and original enlightening of man’s nature, and his shedding new but rejected light into man’s darkness. He is soon (9-18) to trace the entrance of the Logos into our living world; but he first takes care (6-8) that we shall not be led astray in our thoughts by mistaking for the Logos one who was not the Logos. The disciples of John the Baptist, even to a late date, maintained that he was the superior of Jesus. Our Evangelist John, with his brother James, had both been disciples of the Baptist; and he is, therefore, the very man to correct the error. He does so now by this preliminary statement; in which he brings John into a comparison of overwhelming inferiority with the supreme eternal Light.

6. There was a man—Yes, a man; and that is a noble title; but what is it in comparison with the Logos?

Sent from God—And so sent he has a grand going forth; but what is it compared to the eternal goings forth of the Logos?

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 6-13. (4) The general manifestation of the revealing Logos.

Vers. 6-8. (a) The prophetic dispensation.

There was a man, sent from (para Yeou) God, whose name was John. Observe the contrast between the egeneto of John"s appearance and the hn of the Logos, between the "man" John sent from God and the (LOGOS SARX EGENETO) "Word became flesh" of ver. 14. At this point the evangelist touches on the temporal mission and effulgence of the true Light in the Incarnation; yet this paragraph deals with far more general characteristics and wider ranges of thought than the earthly ministry of Christ on which he is about to enlarge. First of all, he deals with the testimony of John in its widest sense; afterwards he enlarges upon it in its striking detail. Consequently, we think that "the man," "John," is, when first introduced, referred to in his representative character rather than his historical position. The teaching of the prophets and synoptists shows that "John" was rather the exponent of the old covenant than the harbinger of the new. He was the embodiment of the idea of prophet, priest, and ascetic of the patriarchal, Mosaic, and latest Hebraic revelation. He was "more than a prophet." No one greater than he had ever been born of woman, and his functions in these several particulars are strongly impressed upon that disciple who here loses his own individuality in the strength of his Master"s teaching. Through this very "man sent from God" the apostle had been prepared to see and personally receive the Logos incarnate. His personality gathered up for our author all that there was in the past of definite revelation, while Jesus filled up all the present and the future. First of all, he treats the mission of the Baptist as representative of all that wonderful past.

Vers. 6-8. The witness of the Baptist to the true Light.

We now come to the historic manifestation of the Word.

I THE PERSONALITY OF THE BAPTIST. "There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

1. He was the offspring of pious parents, and his birth was due to miraculous Divine interference.

2. He was a Nazarite in the ascetic aspect of his life.

3. He was the last prophet of the Old Testament dispensation the link between the prophets of the old and the apostles of the new dispensations.

4. He was the forerunner of the.Messiah, who was to come in the power of Elias, to preach the coming of the kingdom of heaven. He was, in truth, "a man sent from God." His forerunnership ended with the baptism of Jesus, who then appeared visibly on the scene of his ministry. But his testimony only ceased with his life.

5. It was by the Baptist that the author of this Gospel was introduced to Christ (ver. 35).

II THE PURPOSE OF HIS TESTIMONY. "The same came for witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.

1. The witness bearing was necessary, as the Word was to appear in the likeness of sinful flesh. " Man in his blindness could not well discern him without some testimony.

2. Witness bearing is a fundamental idea in Christianity. It implies faith, and a body of facts to be believed.

3. It marks a distinct place for human instrumentality, even in connection with the conversion of souls.

4. Its design is to lead to belief. "That all men through him might believe;" that is, through John"s witness.

(1) "Faith cometh by hearing." As through John"s testimony Andrew and John became disciples of Christ, so still through the preaching of ministers are men brought to the Saviour.

(2) The essence of the message is universal. It is no longer restricted in its blessings to Israel. (Isa_49:6)

(3) The scope of the message is not stated. But there can be but one Object of faith the Lamb of God, the Bridegroom, the Almighty Saviour.

III CORRECTION OF A GRAVE MISAPPREHENSION RESPECTING THE BAPTIST. "He was not the Light, but came that he might bear witness of the Light.

1. Some of the Jews probably imagined that John was the Christ. (Comp. vers. 19, 20 with Luk_3:15)

2. He was, by our Lord"s own witness, a burning and a shining light;" rather, a candle, for Christ is himself the true Fountain of all light the Light itself.

3. It was a sign of the remarkable humility as well as sincerity of the Baptist"s Character, that he himself once and again, not only disclaimed the Messiahship, but confessed his own complete inferiority to Christ. He had no inward struggle on effacing himself. "He must increase; I must decrease."

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

There was a man - The evangelist now proceeds to him who testified of the light, which he had spoken of in the five preceding verses.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

John the Baptist and the Logos:

v. 6. There was a man sent from God whose name was John.

v. 7. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through Him might believe.

v. 8. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

v. 9. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

There was, there came, there arose, there came into being, as the result of a special plan and purpose of God, a man, not differing from other men in any respect but in this material point: he was sent out by God. He was entrusted with a mission; he was sent out for a special, distinct purpose, as the forerunner of the Messiah. His name was John ("merciful is Jehovah"), and he had received his name by God’s order, Luk 1:13. This man came to fulfill, to carry out, his mission; he came for witness, for the purpose of witnessing. He was not to do a great work of his own, but to point to another. All his work, energy, and preaching were to be spent in testifying, in preaching as one sure of the truth of his declaration. His topic was simple, but comprehensive: he was to bear witness about, with regard to, concerning the Light. That one topic, that one subject, was to be the sum and substance of his witnessing. Everyone that witnesses in the sense of John must make the topic of John’s testimony his own, speak and preach of Jesus, the Savior. By nature no one comes to Christ; only through the Word, by means of the testimony of the true witnesses, is Christ made known to men. Through the Word, by faith, Christ is received. John did not testify concerning himself, for he himself was not the Light, he was not the Savior. But his work and office, the purpose of his life, the end and aim of his preaching was to give testimony concerning the Light, the wonderful, life-giving Light. All should believe. The gracious will of God has as its object all men; He wants all to be saved; all should believe on the Lord Jesus Christ for their soul’s salvation. So John was in no way seeking his own light, his own glory and benefit, but only that of the Savior. And this was a great privilege. For the true Light, that lighteth every man, was even then coming, was on His way; He was shortly to begin His ministry for the salvation of men. That fact characterizes the true Light, that brings out His essential goodness, that the enlightenment of the world is due to Him, that He shines with His rays of beauty and glory for every person is the Sun of grace and righteousness, His rays are intended for all without exception. Every person that is saved receives the light of salvation from Christ; for without Him there is no salvation.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Here the evangelist proceeds in declaring Christ to be really God, because he was that original, that essential light, which had no beginning, suffers no decay, but is so diffusive, and in some kind and in some measure or other, to enlighten every man that cometh into the world. Some of the Jews had a conceit, that John the Baptist was the promised Messiah, as appears by Luk 3:15 The people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John whether he were the Christ or not.

Here therefore, to undeceive the Jews, the evangelist adds, that John was not that light; John was a great light, a burning and a shining light, but not such a light as the Messias was to be.

John was a light instrumentally, Christ efficiently,

John was a light enlightened, Christ was a light enlightening;

John’s light was by derivation and particiapation, Christ’s was essential and original;

John’s light was the light of a candle in a private house, in and among the Jews only: but Christ’s light was as the light of the sun, spreading over the face of the whole earth.

This is the true light, that lighteth every man that cometh into the world; that is, he enlightens all mankind with the light of reason, and is the Author of all spiritual illumination in them that receive it. Christ is called a light in regard of his office, which was to manifest and declare that salvation to his church which lay hid before in the purpose of God; and he is called the true light, not so much in opposition to all false light, but as opposed to the types and shadows of the Mosaical dispensation.

Learn, 1. That every man and woman that comes into the world is enlightened by Christ in some kind and measure or other. All are enlightened with the light of reason and natural conscience: some with the light of grace and supernatural illumination.

Learn, 5. That Christ being the essential, original, and eternal Light, enlightening and enlivening the whole creation, is an evident and undeniable demonstration that he is truly and really God.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6–8. There was a man sent from God. The writer now speaks of a witness to the Light, John, a man sent from God. He was called to his work from his mother's womb.

The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light. John came, not so much as a reformer, as a witness. His work, as declared by Malachi, was to be a messenger to go before the Lord. In all his preaching he testified of Christ. He pointed his own disciples to Jesus.

He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness. An early heretical sect held that John the Baptist was the Messiah. The apostle is explicit, in order to correct this error.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

testify about the light

Here "light" is a metaphor for the revelation of God in Jesus. AT: "show how Jesus is like the true light of God" (See: Metaphor)

translationWords

God

John (the apostle)

testimony

light

believe

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

6–13. THE WORD REVEALED TO MEN AND REJECTED BY THEM

6. ἐγένετο ἄν. The contrast between ἐγένετο and ἦν is carefully maintained and should be preserved in translation: not ‘there was a man’ but ‘there arose a man;’ ἄνθρωπος, ‘a human being,’ in contrast to the Logos and also as an instance of that race which was illuminated by the Logos (Joh 1:4); comp. Joh 3:1. Note (as in Joh 1:1) the noble simplicity of language, and also the marked asyndeton between Joh 1:5-6. Greek is so rich in particles that asyndeton is generally remarkable.

ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ θεοῦ. A Prophet. Cf. ‘I will send my messenger,’ Mal 3:1; ‘I will send you Elijah the prophet,’ Joh 4:5. John’s mission proceeded, as it were, from the presence of God, the literal meaning of παρά with the genitive.

ὄνομα αὐτῷ Ἰωάννης. The clause is a kind of parenthesis, like Νικόδημος ὄνομα αὐτῷ, Joh 3:1. In the Fourth Gospel John is mentioned twenty times and is never once distinguished as ‘the Baptist.’ The other three Evangelists carefully distinguish ‘the Baptist’ from the son of Zebedee: to the writer of the Fourth Gospel there is only one John. This in itself is strong incidental evidence that he himself is the other John.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6-18.] The manifestation and working of the Divine Word, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, incarnate in our flesh.

6.] The Evangelist now passes to the historic manifestation of the Word. μετεληλυθὼς ἐπὶ τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν τοῦ υἱοῦ, τίνα ἂν εὗρεν ἀρχὴν ἑτέραν, ἢ τὰ κατὰ τὸν Ἰωάννην; ( in loc. p. 729, ed. Migne.) He enunciates briefly in these verses 6, 7, what he afterwards, vv. 19-36, narrates with historical detail.

ἐγένετο—not belonging to ἀπεσταλμένος, but to ἄνθρ.: the ordinary opening of an historical period, see Luk 1:5. No stress on ἐγένετο, as distinguished from ἦν, ver. 1 (Olshausen), see ch. 3:1. There was—a man sent, &c. In ἀπεστ. παρὰ θεοῦ we have possibly a reference to Mal 3:1.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6. ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπος κτλ. (“There arose a man,” etc.). There is no introductory particle connecting this with v. 5. It is a sentence quite distinct from the verse of the Logos Hymn which goes before.

ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ θεοῦ. The Baptist made this claim for himself (3:28); cf. Mal 3:1. Cf. 9:16, 33 for a similar use of παρὰ θεοῦ, and see on 6:45.

ὅνομα αὐτῷ Ἰωάνης. For the constr. cf. 3:1 and Rev 6:8, Rev 9:11. Burney urges that this is a Semitic constr.,1 and represents an Aramaic or Hebrew שמו; but it is also good Greek, e.g. Ἀριστοφῶν ὅνομα αὐτῷ (Demosth. contra Zenoth. 11).

The spelling Ἰωάνης is preferred to Ἰωάννης by most modern editors, being almost universally found in B “It belongs to the series of Hellenised names which treat the an of the Hebrew termination (Ioanan) as a variable inflection” (Blass, Gram. 11).2

Jn. is prone to distinguish carefully people who have the same name, e.g. Judas (6:71, 13:2, 14:22), Mary (11:2, 19:25), Joseph (19:38); in this being more scrupulous than the Synoptists. It is, perhaps, worthy of note, therefore, that Jn. never writes “John the Baptist,” but always “John,” as if there were no other John who could be confused with him. On this has been based an argument to prove that John the son of Zebedee is, in some sense, the author (if not the actual scribe) of the Fourth Gospel; for the one person to whom it would not occur to distinguish John the Baptist from John the son of Zebedee would be John the son of Zebedee himself. On the other hand, the Synoptists only occasionally give the full description “John the Baptist,” “John” being quite sufficient in most places where the name occurs. It would not be as necessary for an evangelist writing for Christian readers at the end of the first century to say explicitly “John the Baptist,” when introducing the John who bore witness to Jesus at the beginning of His ministry, as it was for Josephus when writing for Roman readers to distinguish him as “John who is called the Baptist” (Antt. xviii, V. 2).

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

[See also the "General Considerations on the Prologue" in the comments of Joh 1:18.]

Ver. 6. “There appeared a man sent from God; his name was John.”

The forerunner is not mentioned here as representing, either the whole of the Jewish economy, or prophetism in particular, as is thought by the interpreters who endeavor to find an historical plan in the Prologue. The apostle speaks of the forerunner only with respect to his personality and from the point of view of his relation to that of the Saviour.

The mention of the forerunner in this place with such particularity is, as Weiss observes, characteristic of the Apostle John, to whom the Baptist had served as a guide to conduct him to Christ.

The word ἐγένετο, became, appeared, points to an historical fact, and might thus form a contrast with the verbs ἠν, was, which in Joh 1:1 designated the eternal existence of the Word; but between them the two ἠν of Joh 1:4 have intervened. The word ἅνθρωπος, a man, might also be the antithesis to the divine subject who has alone been brought forward up to this point; yet there is nothing which indicates this with sufficient positiveness.

The analytic form ἐγένετο ἀπεσταλμένος sets forth the importance of the person of John in a better way than the simple ἀπεστάλη, which would have reference only to his mission. He was the first prophetic person raised up by God since a time long past. On the word sent, comp. Joh 3:28 : “Because I am sent before him,” as well as Mal 3:1, from which passage this expression is certainly drawn. The name John (God shows grace) marked the character of the era which was about to open. Yet it is not for this reason that the evangelist mentions the name here. He means simply to say: “This man, of whom I speak to you, is the one who is known by you all under the name of John.” It is remarkable that our evangelist uses simply the name John, without adding the epithet Baptist, which had early become inseparable from this name, as we see from the Synoptics, and even from the Jewish historian, Josephus. Does not Meyer reasonably conclude from this omission (Introd. p. 31), that the author of our Gospel must have known the forerunner otherwise than through the general tradition of the Church? If he had really known him before the public voice had given him this title, it was very natural that he should designate him simply by his name. Credner thought that, inasmuch as the title Baptist served in the Church to distinguish the forerunner from another person of the same name (John the apostle), the latter omitted the title in order that he might not attract attention to himself by the contrast; an ingenious observation, but, perhaps, less well- founded than the preceding. After having introduced this personage, the author describes his role:

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.