John 1:2Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

So that you may not set a beginning for the Only-begotten, the Evangelist adds, “He was in the beginning with God.” This means that He is as eternal as the Father Himself.

The Father was never without the Word. Rather, God the Word was always with God the Father, yet in His own hypostasis.

So that no one would consider the Son’s Godhead lesser, the Evangelist immediately adds proof of His true Godhead.

He ascribes eternity to Him: “He was,” he says, “in the beginning with God.” He also ascribes creative power: “All things came into being through Him, and without Him nothing came into being.”

He is not a work and not a creature, but the Word.

There are two kinds of word. One is inward, which we possess even when we do not speak, that is, the capacity for speech.

For even one who sleeps and does not speak still has the word implanted in him and has not lost the capacity.

Thus one word is inward. The other is spoken, which we utter with our lips, putting into action the capacity for speech, the capacity of the mental word that lies within.

Although there are two kinds of word, neither applies to the Son of God, for the Word of God is neither spoken nor inward.

Those words are natural and ours. But the Word of the Father, being above nature, is not subject to earthly sophistries.

Therefore the clever syllogism of the pagan Porphyry collapses by itself. In trying to overthrow the Gospel, he used this division.

If the Son of God is a word, then He is either a spoken word or an inward word. But He is neither the one nor the other. Therefore He is not the Word.

Thus the Evangelist resolved this syllogism beforehand by saying that inward and spoken words are said of us and of natural things. Nothing of this kind is said of things above nature.

Yet this too must be said: the pagan’s doubt would have had a basis if the name “Word” were fully worthy of God and were used of Him properly and essentially.

But no one has yet found any name fully worthy of God. This very name “Word” is not used of Him properly and essentially.

It only shows that the Son was born of the Father without passion, just as word comes from mind, and that He became the herald of the Father’s will.

Why then, unhappy man, do you cling to the name? Hearing of Father, Son, and Spirit, why do you fall into material relations?

Why do you imagine in your mind fleshly fathers and sons, and a wind of the air, perhaps south or north, or some other wind producing a storm?

But if you wish to know what kind of word the Word of God is, listen to what follows.

Having known Him, having marveled at Him, and having worshiped your Master, Who has been established in you through teaching, know that “this was in the beginning,” that is, always with God His Father.

Keep these few words, having marked them upon your memory like a seal. They will be an unshaken wall when slanderers rush upon you.

They are a saving enclosure for souls against attackers.

If someone comes to you and says, “He who did not exist was begotten; for if He existed, how was He begotten?” then flee this blasphemy against the glory of the Only-begotten as a demonic voice.

Return and take refuge in the Gospel words: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This was in the beginning with God.”

Say “was” four times, and you will repel their “He was not.”

Let these foundations of faith be immovable. Upon them, God granting, the rest also will be built.

It is impossible to speak with you about everything at once. Otherwise, by the length of our discourse we would make useless what has been laboriously gathered for you.

The mind, lacking the strength to embrace everything at once, will suffer what the stomach suffers when, through excess of food, it cannot digest what is given to it.

Therefore I desire that you delight in the taste and profit from what has been offered. I am ready to serve you also in the rest, in Christ Jesus our Lord, to Whom be glory and dominion unto ages of ages. Amen.

The radiance of the sun, which proceeds from it, does not come after it, and the sun never appears without radiance.

If this is so with sensible things, what can one say about what is above every word?

Having called the Word God, he also ascribes to Him a divine property, namely creation.

For “the gods who did not make heaven and earth shall perish” (Jer 10:11). He does this so that no one may think that the Word is inferior to the Father.

There is nothing else that aids the understanding of God apart from eternity, except that one must always encounter this truth: God always is.

That this was also signified by God through Moses can, according to ordinary understanding, be taken in no other way.

The Gospels also bear witness that this belongs to the Only-begotten God: that in the beginning was the Word, and that He was with God.

They testify that He was the true Light, that the Only-begotten God abides in the bosom of the Father, and that Jesus Christ, over all, is God.

Therefore He was and is, for from Him is the One Who is eternally the One Who Is.

To be from Him, that is, to be from the Father, is birth. To be always from Him Who always is, is eternal birth.

But this birth is not from Himself, but from the Eternal One. From the Eternal One nothing is born except what is eternal.

If what is born is not eternal, then the father who gives beginning by begetting is not eternal.

Therefore John the Theologian, to present this more clearly, adds: “He was the true Light, which enlightens every man coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him” (Jn 1:9-10).

From the beginning, he says, God was everywhere, enlightening and giving life to every man who comes into the world. He existed before the creation of the world. All things were with God before their manifestation in being. Then, when God created this sensible world, He did not withdraw from it in place, for He is everywhere present and fills all things. Yet nothing among all that exists in the world came near to Him by nature or by the glory of His Godhead.

God, though not distant from anything that exists, is manifestly in all things. Yet no one knows Him, as our Lord says: “No one knows the Father except the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal Him” (Mt 11:27).

Therefore God, who was in the world and was not known by it, “came,” he says, “to His own, and His own did not receive Him.” He calls the world and the people in the world His own because He is their Creator and Master. He also calls them His own because of the kinship He entered into with men through His Incarnation.

Reflect carefully on what we have said. Know that God the Word, who in the beginning was with God and the Father, who has life in Himself, who created all things, and who is the Light enlightening every man, is Himself the One who existed before the world. He created the world. He is in the world, yet is neither known by the world nor comprehended by it. He came into the world and became man, so that He might appear as God and be known as He is by those who receive Him as God with faith and keep His commandments.

Therefore the holy Evangelist says: “As many as received Him, to them He gave power to become children of God, to those who believe in His name; who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us; and we beheld His glory, glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (Jn 1:12-14).

Take it! Here is the mirror of which I spoke before: these very words. Look, I beg you, at the precision in the Evangelist’s words. How clearly he marks the signs by which the faithful are known, so that we may know both ourselves and our neighbors.

“As many,” he says, “as received Him,” that is, through faith, and confessed Him as God and not merely as man, “He gave power” through Baptism “to become children of God,” freeing them from the tyranny of the devil. Thus they should not only be faithful, but, if they wish to live according to His commandments, they should add holiness to faith through the practice of His commandments. As the Lord says elsewhere: “You shall be holy, for I am holy” (Lev 19:2). Again: “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Lk 6:36).

Then the Evangelist shows the manner in which such people become children of God, saying: “who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (Jn 1:13). Here he calls birth the spiritual change accomplished and seen through Baptism in the Holy Spirit. As the truthful Lord Himself says: “John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5).

Therefore those baptized in the Holy Spirit become like light in light, and they know Him who begot them because they see Him. Hear what the Evangelist says about this: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” Those born by the grace of the Holy Spirit need to be nourished also by the holy communion of the most pure Body and precious Blood of our Lord.

That these words speak of the most pure Mysteries, hear the Lord, who says: “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him” (Jn 6:56).

When we are born spiritually by the grace of the Holy Spirit and become children of God, then Christ, the incarnate Son and Word of God, enters and dwells in us as Light through communion of the most pure Body and precious Blood of the Lord. Then this also follows: “We beheld His glory, glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father.”

For when we are spiritually born from Him, when He dwells in us through the Mysteries, and when we consciously abide in Him, then, in the very hour this comes to pass in us, we suddenly behold the glory of His Godhead. It is “glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father,” that is, such glory as no other possesses, neither angel nor man.

Since the Father and His Only-begotten Son are one, it is clear that the glory of Both is also one. This glory is revealed and made known to all to whom the Son wills to reveal it, through the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father.

He was with God, not as a saint or an angel who receives might and authority from God by grace.

He was with God as the Son of God and as God by nature, possessing dominion and almightiness, just as His Father does.

The following statement confirms this thought: Verse 3. “All things came into being through Him, and without Him nothing came into being that came into being.”

The first four verses of the first chapter of John's Gospel may be called a preface or introduction to all four Evangelists. This is an entrance into the heavenly history of Jesus Christ.

Here the heavens seem to open, and the Word appears. He is presented as Creator. He comes "to His own," and to those who receive Him, He gives "power to become children of God" (Jn 1:11-12).

This is the summary of the whole life of Jesus Christ, the purpose of His appearing. Then the Evangelists relate in greatest detail how all this took place.

Here the eternal Word is only presented in all clarity. In the detailed description of the life of Jesus Christ, only the Son of Man will be visible, while the Word is as though hidden.

One may say that the heavens are as though hidden again. Darkness again spreads in Judea and Rome. Only something bright and divine shone through.

In Judea it shone through the law, and in Rome through certain kinds of knowledge.

Then follows the narrative of the Evangelist Luke (Lk 1:5). The Word described by John, like lightning, illumined everything, and then is hidden again and makes one go as though by touch.

In Saint Luke, the field of activity of this Word is presented, as it were. What are Zacharias and Elizabeth in comparison with Caesars and Roman nobles, that the Evangelist should concern himself with them?

Here what the Apostle said is as though fulfilled: "The base things of the world and the things despised God has chosen" (1 Cor 1:28).

Why did the first three Evangelists not give a description like John's? They stopped at earthly events, while John begins from heaven.

Of course, this is because, as the Apostle says, "the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each for the profit of all" (1 Cor 12:7). The Holy Spirit gives gifts "to each one as He wills" (1 Cor 12:11).

But does the Holy Spirit in distributing gifts conform to no laws? No. The difference in His gifts depends on the difference in the intellectual and moral powers of those who receive them.

In John we see deep love. This deep love produced an equally deep knowledge. In him the Person of Jesus Christ appears preeminently as divine.

Such a supplement made by John was greatly needed, as Saint Chrysostom notes. The first three Gospels would not have been sufficient.

Moreover, many heretics stopped precisely at what was human in the Person of Jesus Christ. In defense of their earthliness, they could refer to the three Evangelists, in whom, they claimed, only the earthly deeds of Jesus Christ are discussed.

Therefore John's theology was also supremely necessary. He became, as it were, a Christian metaphysician by necessity, yet not without harmony with his spirit and his lofty love.

It is impossible fully to explain and define these first verses of John's Gospel. Interpreters who dissected especially the first verse according to the rules of necrological interpretive art resemble those who divided the garments of Jesus Christ (Jn 19:23).

On the contrary, one should treat this verse as one treats the seamless tunic, woven from above. To strain to understand it means to understand nothing.

All the thoughts and words here are irreplaceable, as Saint Chrysostom beautifully observes.

"If something is insufficient," he says, "for representing the whole, do not be surprised. For the matter concerns God, concerning Whom nothing can be adequately said or thought."

And elsewhere he says, "No single word is sufficient to express the divine Word. If anyone asserts that he can say anything about God, he thereby plainly shows that he does not understand God."

"There is no name that could fully express God. Thus one cannot comprehend Him entirely."

But as what is He presented by John? And on this basis, as what may we represent Him? He is presented by him as God the Word.

It is clear that this Person is divine. Whether we say that God is the Word, or that the Word is God, taking the word as predicate or as subject, the thought is one and the same.

It is evident, however, that this Word is inseparably united with God (Jn 1:2). What kind of inseparability is this? Is the union only moral, or physical? It must be both.

One must not understand two Gods here, for nothing so terrified the Jews as polytheism. Therefore, if John had meant two gods here, he would certainly have had to make a qualification.

But distinction is also noticeable here. Otherwise, how would He be another, if He did not differ in any way from the first?

This distinction is expressed in the first verse of his Gospel: "And the Word was προς τον Θεον." By this word, προς, he shows that He has His own personhood.

Some will say that our knowledge of Greek does not yet guarantee such an interpretation. Yet Saints Chrysostom and Basil the Great, before all the people of Constantinople, who surely knew their native language excellently, said that here προς signifies personhood.

Chrysostom says: "When John says of the Word that He was in the beginning, lest anyone consider Him an unbegotten God from eternity, John says that He was 'from the beginning' 'with God.'"

"And lest anyone consider Him a word uttered aloud, John adds the Greek term προς, showing that He was not in God, but with God."

Then he says that this Word was God Himself: "And the Word was God." Yet this distinction in no way harms the dogma of monotheism.

In this verse the whole teaching on the Trinity is contained. Further, John says that "the Word was God," without the article, Θεος.

Idle critics found certain passages in Philo where, as they claim, he used the word Θεος without the article when speaking of a lower, created god.

But Saint Chrysostom says: "If John here meant a word, or a created god, what prevented him from saying, 'In the beginning God created the Word'?"

"And the Only-begotten Son of God Himself, in His humility, would not have failed to say that He was created, if He truly were so."

"He might sooner have kept silence about His majesty and Godhead than conceal that He had been created."

Here is, once and for all, the answer to objections against the divinity of Jesus Christ.

The beginning of John's Gospel seems similar to the beginning of Moses' book of Genesis, but there is also an extraordinary difference. John says, "In the beginning was the Word," not "was created."

Why did John call Jesus Christ "the Word"? This is a most important question in Christian history and dogmatics.

Is the name his own, or borrowed? It is most probable that it is borrowed.

It could have been borrowed either from Christian writers or from uninspired Jewish writers, such as Philo, who in places speaks of the Word, λογος, of God. It could also have been borrowed from pagan writers, such as Plato.

The Apostle Paul proves that something could be borrowed from Greek writers, for in his epistles he sometimes cites Greek verses (Acts 17:28).

In the New Testament the Word is mentioned very often. In the Old Testament it is rarer, as in Jesus son of Sirach (Sir 43:28). There the word is presented as a special action of Providence.

In the Wisdom of Solomon (Wis 18:15), personality is as it were ascribed to the word. It is presented in the likeness of an angel who strikes the Egyptians and guides the Israelites through the wilderness.

In the Wisdom of Solomon (Wis 7:21), "Wisdom" is described as a Person. She is presented as passing from generation to generation into the souls of the righteous (Wis 7:27).

By this the Incarnation of the Word is as though hinted at; compare Sir 1:9-10 and Bar 3:28-38.

Yet in the Old Testament, "Wisdom" is presented more than "word." Therefore the Evangelist John did not himself invent this word.

He borrowed it from the Old Testament biblical writers, for there is no need to borrow from others when one can borrow from one's own.

However, he also had in view the "word" used by Greek writers, who had an incorrect understanding of the word.

It is more than probable that, by his depiction of the Word, he wished to correct the errors of pagans and Jews who had written about the word.

But why did the writers of the Old Testament use "word"? And why did John find it fitting and, so to speak, unable to choose a better term for describing the second Person of the Holy Trinity?

The chief reason is that this name is truly the most fitting in this case. John saw no better one.

John himself treasures this name, and uses it only twice more in the most important and decisive cases (1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13).

Amid exalted and divine revelations, he did not forget his "Word" (Rev 19:13).

Of course, this expression does not fully correspond to the reality, nor can such a correspondence be found. At least it contains a small shade and faint likeness of the truth.

The second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, His relation to God the Father, and His independent subsistence cannot be expressed more fittingly in human language than by the word Λογος.

For us now Λογος mostly means an external word. For the Greeks it meant thought, mind itself, and the external word.

The holy fathers also present the reason why John called Jesus Christ the Word. Saint Chrysostom says that John called Him by this name so that no one would think the Son was begotten by the Father with passion.

He also did so because this Word proclaimed to us the will of the heavenly Father. Not only to us, but He constantly proclaims it to all, and everything descends from the Father only through Him.

One cannot fail to note here the God-befitting character of the expressions, as the holy fathers also observed. The subject is lofty. Men would have written very much about it, yet in much there would have been little.

John wrote little, but expressed everything. This little was given to him from above. Hence the firmness and decisiveness in his words. Not the slightest wavering is noticeable.

Thus it is fitting for one taught from above to speak. Saint Chrysostom says: "If someone suddenly carried a man standing on the seashore and seeing mountains and forests to the middle of the sea, he would see the same things from there in precisely the same way."

Thus "in the beginning was" means nothing other than eternal and infinite being.

“When you hear, ‘In the beginning was the Word,’ and acknowledge Him as eternal, do not think that the life of the Father precedes the life of the Son by some interval, that is, by many ages.

So that you may not set a beginning for the Only-begotten, the Evangelist adds, ‘He was in the beginning with God,’ that is, He is as eternal as the Father Himself” (Chrysostom).

In God, the Son is from the Father, but not after the Father.

The being of the Son with the Father is without beginning and therefore without end, and therefore eternal. He always was, is, and always will be. This is a mystery surpassing the human mind.

Arius reasoned falsely in this way, and the Arians after him even more so.

For them the Son was God, but not uncreated. For them He was the first created essence, from which everything afterward came forth and by which everything is governed.

Everything among creatures is produced through Him. But He Himself is not consubstantial with the Father and is not one with Him.

Rather, according to them, He was produced by God the Father out of nothing.

Against this Saint John, or more precisely the Holy Spirit Who guided him, set the final word: “This was in the beginning with God.”

Arius’s son received a beginning from God the Father, though before every other creature.

But the true Son of God, God the Word, was without beginning with the Father, in communion of the one divine nature with the Father.

In other words, He was and is beginninglessly consubstantial with the Father.

Therefore it is impious to reason that He received a beginning and is from nothing.

Then He would not be God, and whoever worshiped Him would worship not God, but a creature. Such a person would therefore not be a true worshiper of the true God.

Thus Saint John, in few words, gathered together all theology concerning the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity.

His whole concern, as you see, was to remove occasions for dividing the nature and for confusing the hypostases.

For this reason he chose word after word, with restraint from entangling verbosity and with sufficient fullness.

He did this so that all might understand that God must be confessed as tri-hypostatic, “neither confusing the hypostases nor dividing the essence.”

This is what our Lord and Savior is in the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity: the Only-begotten Son of God, beginningless, the hypostatic Word, consubstantial with the Father, and God.