More on John 1 and ‘The Torah Dressed Itself in Flesh’:

With regard to Yochanan 1 (John’s prologue) James DG Dunn wrote: “Prior to v.14 we are in the same realm as pre-Christian talk of Wisdom and Logos, the same language and ideas that we find in the Wisdom tradition and in Philo, where, as we have seen, we are dealing with personifications rather than persons, personified actions of God rather than individual divine beings as such.

The point is obscured by the fact that we have to translate the masculine Logos as ‘he’ throughout the poem.

But if we translated logos as ‘God’s utterance’ instead, it would become clearer that the poem did not necessarily intend the Logos in vv.1-13 to be thought of as a personal being.

In other words, the revolutionary significance of v.14 may well be that it marks not only the transition in the thought of the poem from pre-existence to incarnation, but also the transition from impersonal personification to actual person.” –‘Christology in the Making’, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996) 

I like the general statement that Dunn makes here. However, Dunn states that “… we have to translate the masculine Logos as ‘he’…”, which may have been a rhetorical comment, as Dunn must surely know that we don’t ‘have to’.

In the same way that Wisdom (Hebrew: חָכְמָה) in Mishlei (Proverbs) 8 is a feminine noun and is personified, we still should appreciate that this ‘wisdom’ is not an actual person!

"The L-RD purchased me at the very beginning of His way before any of his activities at that point. From before time began, I was poured out, even before there was "earth"
... And I was BESIDE (or WITH) Him, a master artisan, And I was full of delights, daily playing before Him at every moment”
 –Mishlei ( Proverbs) 8:22-23, 30 as translated by Uriel ben Mordechai © http://chut-hamshulash.org

While we ‘have to’ acknowledge that ‘wisdom’ is grammatically a feminine noun, we don’t ‘have to’ then infer that this ‘entity’ is a person. In the same way there is no need to do so with the Greek ‘logos’ of Yochanan 1.

And some further evidence that we don’t ‘have to’ is shown in the fact that the first 8 translations of the New Testament into English (all before the KJV of 1611) do not. They all used ‘it’, not ‘he’ or ‘him’.

See for example the Geneva Bible of 1559:
“3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made.

4 In it was life, and that life was the light of men.”

With an appreciation of this reality and also with the acknowledgement that this 'wisdom' is also the ‘word of God’ or ‘Torah’, we can re-write this prologue in a more expanded and ’modern’ manner to reject the inappropriate interpretation that “Logos in vv.1-13 – is -  thought of as a personal being.”, and instead better grasp the truth being shared in this introduction to a Gospel written to share the belief that the eschatological Messiah had at last appeared (v 20:31: “ but these are written so that you may believe that Yeshua is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”).  

It is also important to appreciate that the author of John’s Gospel quotes from a number of Jewish sources, or at least uses phrases that are very similar to other Jewish sources that pre-date his work.

For example, the Jewish inter-testamental work, the Book of Jubilees 12:4 also appreciates that this ‘wisdom’ is Torah and has that God "has created everything by His word/Torah" (12:4).

As well as this, the wording of two sentences in the Dead Sea Scrolls also presents a similar conceptual framework: "By His (God's) knowledge everything came to be, and everything which is happening — He establishes it by his design and without Him [nothing] is done" (1QS XI: 11).

And  "By the wisdom of Thy knowledge Thou didst establish their destiny ere they came into being, and according [Thy will] everything came to be, and without Thee [nothing] is done" (1QH 1:19-20).

This last one is particularly echoed in Yochanan (John) 1:3.

So now consider that this Jewish man, the author of “John’s Gospel”, written most likely in the late 80’s to early 90’s of the first century CE, has possibly been a witness to the life and times of Yeshua, or at least has heard first-hand from many who were.

He at last sees the fulfilment of Deuteronomy 18, and this in turn then leads this Jewish follower of Yeshua to write these very Jewish words, where he has paraphrased other Jewish ‘commonplaces’ and made much use of Hebraism’s (see my article here for some more on the Hebraisms in this Gospel).

To better present the translation I argue for in my articles (see 'The Torah Dressed Itself in Flesh' and 'John 1:1c and Arianism' ), I thought I would have a go at a paraphrase:

1. In the beginning (before the Universe was created) was the plans and instructions, or ‘blueprints’ (Torah) of God, and it, (Torah) was there for the purpose of God, and as such it had God’s nature and character.

2. To repeat and reiterate, this Torah was there at the very beginning with God Himself.

3. Everything in the entire Universe was created through it, that is, through these plans and instructions of God, and so nothing in this Universe was created that did not come about as part of the plans and instructions of God.

4. Within these original plans was life, that is 'true freedom' which comes from obeying the instructions of God, and this 'life', this 'true freedom', allows mankind to live in the light and not the darkness.

…

14 And these plans and instructions, this Torah, was finally embodied most perfectly in a man, (so that the light of God's truth and love would fully shine upon all mankind, through the power and message of this man), a 'son' (descendant) of Abraham, and King David, a man who best displayed the totality of God’s grace and truth.”
- paraphrase of Yochanan 1:1-4, 14

To appreciate that Torah brings 'true freedom' please see my article, 'Freedom and the Law'

Also, part of the reason I believe that so many Christians believe that Yeshua ‘pre-existed’ in some form or other (or that they see the 'word' as some being of some sort, then somehow becoming a human being – which is essentially the same thing), is that this Hellenistic mindset so pervades Christendom and has done so for some 1700+ years.

Yet, when we consider the orthodox Jewish understanding of texts like Proverbs 8, we learn that they understand that both the Almighty is personified in a human sense (anthromorphisms) and that entities or characteristics (especially of God) like ‘wisdom’ and the ‘word of the Lord’ are personified as well. They understand that in their own Scriptures, these are just grammatical devices to help illustrate some theological truth.

So when orthodox Jews speak of Moses or the Messiah pre-existing, it is only in this sense.

In Pesikta Rabbati 152b is said that ‘from the beginning of the creation of the world the King Messiah was born, for he came up in the thought of God before the world was created.’ 

"For this is what the Lord of the world has decreed: He created the world on behalf of his people, but he did not make this purpose of creation known from the beginning of the world so that the nations might be found guilty... But He did design and devise me [Moses], who was prepared from the beginning of the world to be the mediator of the covenant" (Testament of Moses, 1:13, 14).

I have written at some length on this here.

Another factor to consider though, is that if John’s prologue really is taken from the pattern and truth of Genesis 1, then it is most likely a functional statement about the creation of the Messiah, rather than a materialistic one.

In ‘The Lost World of Genesis One’, Prof John H Walton gives a very compelling argument that the primary purpose of Genesis 1 is a functional narrative of the creation of the world as a ‘temple’ for the Almighty.

It is a fascinating and very powerful argument that takes the truth of the Framework view and adds to it the more important ‘functional’ understanding. 

I introduce his book here.

IF Genesis 1 is best understood as primarily a description of a functional creation of the Temple of God and man’s relationship to it and, IF the author of John’s Gospel understood this Ancient Near East perspective and tried to reflect it in his prologue, 

THEN John 1 is also a functional description of the ‘creation’ and installation of the Messiah.

Thus, the introduction of the ‘word’ or 'Torah' in John 1:1 is to show how this plan of God’s had a great and most significant function from the very beginning to eventually introduce a man, the end-times Messiah, who would most perfectly demonstrate through his life and words the truth of Torah and the reality that the ‘moral order’ was of more importance than the physical order. 

Prof Paul Johnson in his brilliant book, ‘A History of the Jews’ explains that the Book of Job declares that there are two orders in the Universe, the physical order and the moral order. 'As Job dimly recognizes the secret to wisdom and the foundation of the moral order is obedience to God'. 

“And he said to man: ‘Behold the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom, and to depart from evil is understanding’. – Job 28:28.

This was also argued by Ben Sira in Ecclesiasticus. So in Yochanan (John) 1, we read how functionally (NOT literally or physically) wisdom/Torah is embodied in Yeshua and we see a man who displays, in his life, his deeds and his words, what it means to be obedient to God.


December 2015

Appendix:Browns- Driver-Brigg's on "Wisdom': The divine wisdom is personified: she was begotten before all things to be the architect and counsellor of God in the creation (Proverbs 8:22-31); she builds a palace and spreads a feast for those who will receive her instruction Proverbs 9:1 (compare Proverbs 9:2-5); she teaches in public Proverbs 1:20; Proverbs 8:1,5,11,12 (see context); gives her pupils the divine spirit Proverbs 1:23; by her discipline simple become wise, rulers rule wisely, and those seeking her are richly rewardedProverbs 8:14 (compare Proverbs 8:1-21).