You are currently viewing John 1:1 The Jewish Mind vs The Translators’ Bias (Part 1)

John 1:1 The Jewish Mind vs The Translators’ Bias (Part 1)

Invariably Trinitarians point to John 1:1-3 as the key passage in their defense of Jesus’ deity and by extension, the doctrine of the Trinity. This article begins a multi-part treatment of John’s prologue in which we will compare what his Jewish contemporaries would have understood it to mean versus how Trinitarian scholars translated it centuries later.   

Begin With the End in Mind

One of the habits Steven Covey wrote about in his popular book,  7 Habits of Highly Effective People, is that we should, “Begin with the end in mind.” In other words, knowing what you want to achieve will help you know where to begin.  In our quest to rightly interpret John chapter 1, we’ll need to begin with John’s end in mind.  What was the “end” or the conclusion John wanted his readers to reach about Jesus and his ministry?  What was the purpose for which he wrote his gospel?  This is important because the beginning of John’s gospel should be in keeping with the end; there should be a continuity of message.

The Jewish Mind

In his summary statement, John presents the purpose for which he wrote his account of Jesus’ life and ministry:

John 20:30-31 (NASB) Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. (emphasis added)

Note that John did not say that the purpose of his gospel was so that we might know that Jesus is God. He could have stated that plainly if that were the case, but he didn’t.  After all, the revelation that Jesus was God would have been of greater importance than that of his being Messiah.  Rather, John says the very reason he penned his account was so that we might know and believe that Jesus was the Christ, the one anointed by God to be king.  As we learned in Son of God: Proof of Jesus’ Deity?, the title Son of God was not a designation of divinity, but was a synonym for the Christ (Messiah) and King of Israel.[1] Yet somehow the gospel of John has come to be seen as the gospel that reveals the deity of Jesus.  Why the discrepancy between John’s statement of purpose and the one later ascribed to him?  We’ll see in a subsequent post in this series that the Church fathers, steeped in Platonic philosophy, infused their interpretation of Scripture with Greek thought, thus displacing the very Hebraic framework in which the gospel of John was written.  This first post, however, will examine John 1:1 as we explore how John’s first century readers would have understood the text. In order to do that, we must begin with John’s end in mind, otherwise we’ll end up forcing the text into a preconceived Platonic mold.

John’s Prologue

John 1:1-3 (NASB)  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2  He was in the beginning with God. 3  All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

Many point to this passage as proof that Jesus pre-existed as God in heaven.  However, it would seem that such a profound truth, indeed the very cornerstone of Christianity–that God came to earth clothed in humanity–would be stated plainly and repeatedly in Scripture.  Shockingly, however, the Gospel of John is the only book of the Bible that purportedly speaks of Jesus’ pre-existence as the pre-incarnated Word. The absence of such a crucial detail should cause us concern especially since the Athanasian Creed (ca 500 AD), which many denominations uphold, states emphatically that if you don’t believe Jesus pre-existed and later became God-incarnate, you can’t be saved.  How can man’s creed state emphatically that which Scripture does not?

Grammatical Considerations

There are three grammatical considerations to take into account when examining John 1:1.  In the process of our examination we’ll see evidence of the translators’ biases emerge.  The grammatical considerations we’ll cover are:

  1. The use of capitalization
  2. The use of personal pronouns
  3. The treatment of a descriptive noun

The Use of Capitalization

Note in the following verse that “word” has been capitalized by the translators.

John 1:1 (NASB)  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (emphasis added)

The Greek language at the time in which the New Testament manuscripts were written consisted of all capital letters, uniform in size so that one letter did not stand out from another.[2]  Moreover, as we shall see, there is nothing in the context that would indicate “word” to be a proper noun thereby requiring the translators to capitalize it.  This fact is evidenced by the numerous Bible versions that translate “word” with a lower case “w.”  Why then do the modern translations capitalize “word?”  It was done so as to give the reader the impression that the “word” is a proper noun, in particular, a pre-incarnate Jesus. 

What does “Word” mean?

“Word” in Greek is logos and it has a variety of meanings.  For example, logos can mean: word, speech, utterance, analogy, account, commandment, statement, matter, message, reason, plan, intelligence, discourse, saying and things. These and other meanings can each be categorized under one of two headings: logic/reason (what the Old Testament refers to as wisdom) or speech/word. 

Logos is often said to be a word embodying an idea or thoughts expressed in words.[3] A thought is whatever is in the heart or mind of a person, including one’s reason, plans and purposes, etc.  When God spoke Creation into being, His thoughts about Creation, His plans, ideas and purposes for the world were made manifest[4]. For example:

Genesis 1:3 (NASB)  Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. (emphasis added)

Psalm 33:6 and 9 (NASB)  By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their host…9  For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast.  (emphasis added)

 Hebrews 11:3 (NASB) By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible. (emphasis added)

The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon speaks to this when it says:

 A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus first used the term Logos around 600 B.C. to designate the divine reason or plan which coordinates a changing universe. This word was well suited to John’s purpose in John 1.[5]  (emphasis added)

Logos as a person?

The word logos occurs 331 times in the New Testament.  Its Hebrew equivalent, dabar (also davar), occurs 1,450 times in the Old Testament for a combined total of 1,781 times in Scripture.  Neither logos or dabar carry the definition of “a person” or “a being,” instead all definitions fall under either logic/reason or word/speech.  Translators, however, made an exception for John’s prologue when they deviated from all of the other approximately 1,800 occurrences by capitalizing the “w” in “word,” thus leading the reader to believe that the logos of God is a pre-existent person.  This is an example of the translators’ bias.

What John 1:1 says and what it does not say

Let’s apply what we’ve learned about logos to the text at hand.   

John 1:1  In the beginning was the logos (the logic, reason, wisdom, plan, purpose, ideas and thoughts expressed) of God.  It was this logic, wisdom, plan, etc. that was with God…

Any Jews hearing the words, “In the beginning…” would have immediately recalled the Genesis account where God spoke and His idea or plan for Creation was made manifest.  Like John, Peter employs this idea in his second epistle:

2 Peter 3:5 (NASB) For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word (logos) of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water  (emphasis added)

As important as it is to know what John 1:1 says, it’s also important to know what it does not say.  The text does not say, “In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was God.” Neither does it say “In the beginning was God the Son, and God the Son was with God, and God the Son was God” (which would be redundant). Further, it does not say, “In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God.”  In spite of this, we have been taught, with the help of biased translators, to read the text with these substitutions.  Something that Dr. Colin Brown, senior professor of systematic theology at Fuller Seminary, says is a “patent misreading” of the text:

It is a common but patent misreading of the opening of John’s Gospel to read it as if it said: In the beginning was the Son and the Son was with God and the Son was God. What has happened here is the substitution of Son for Word, and thereby the Son is made a member of the Godhead which existed from the beginning.[6]

John 1:1 isn’t the only time John referenced the Genesis account

John 1:1 isn’t the only time the apostle referenced the Genesis account in his writings.  We find the opening to his first epistle is a mirror image of his gospel’s prologue.  This parallel is important because by looking at his epistle we can gain insight into what John meant when he used “word” or logos in John 1.  As you read the following, notice how many times John uses “what” when referring to the “word” or logos.

 1 John 1:1-4 (NASB) What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word [logos] of Life—2  and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3  what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. 4  These things we write, so that our joy may be made complete. (emphasis added)

In 1 John 1:1 the apostle writes “in the beginning,” echoing the theme of Genesis 1 and his gospel’s prologue. Pay careful attention to the fact that the “word (logos) of life” is called a “what” five times and not a “who.”  John says, “what was from the beginning” not “Who was from the beginning.”  For John, the “word” (logos) is a “what” and not a pre-existent divine being.  Let’s apply this to the text.

 John 1:1 and 14 (NASB) In the beginning was the Word (of life), and the Word (of life) was with God, and the Word (of life) was God…(verse 14) And the Word (of life) became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Just as God spoke His word (His thoughts, plan, ideas, purposes, wisdom, etc.) and it brought forth life at Creation, in like manner, God spoke His redemptive plan (logos) into being. God’s word was made manifest.  His plan came to life in the person of Jesus Christ.  Another way to say it would be, “In the beginning was the plan of God, and the plan of God was with God, and the plan of God was God (everything that God was the plan was).”  Our ideas, words, etc., are an expression of who we are and what we think as the author of Proverbs illustrates:

Proverbs 23:7a  (NASB) For as he thinks within himself, so he is.

In addition to John, Paul provides us another example of God’s word being manifested or made known  in the person of Jesus:

Titus 1:1-4 (NASB) Paul, a bond-servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness, 2  in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago, 3  but at the proper time manifested, even His word [logos], in the proclamation with which I was entrusted according to the commandment of God our Savior, 4  To Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior. (emphasis added)[7]

Notice that Paul differentiates between God, who is the Father, and Jesus, who is the Christ (the anointed one).  What was it that God promised long ago?  Eternal life or the hope of eternal life.  According to the text, what was manifested?  God’s word, that is the word of eternal life.  Paul and others proclaimed this word of life.  The promise was made, then the promise was manifested at the proper time in the person of Jesus Christ.

Once more, the apostle John writes of the idea that God’s word was manifested or made known in Jesus when he says:

Revelation 19:13  He [Jesus] is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. (emphasis added)

It doesn’t say “His name is God” or His name is “God the Word,” rather, His name is “the Word of God.” This is appropriate since Jesus is the embodiment of God’s wisdom and plan for mankind. 

James Dunn, Trinitarian theologian and author who specializes in New Testament Christology, agrees:

 “Initially at least, Christ was not thought of as a divine being who had pre-existed with [YEHOVAH] God but as the climactic embodiment of God’s power and purpose — his life, death and resurrection understood in terms of God Himself reaching out to men. Christ was identified not with some heavenly redeemer figure but with God’s creative wisdomGod’s redemptive purposeGod’s revelatory word expressed in a final way that made the Christ-event the normative definition of divine wisdom and revelation — God’s clearest self-expression, God’s last word.[8] (emphasis added)

In other words, the early Church did not see Jesus as having pre-existed in heaven as God-the-Word, rather, Jesus was seen as the embodiment of God’s wisdom, power and purpose. 

Summary of Textual Consideration #1

“Word” or logos in John 1:1 does not refer to a pre-existent person, rather it speaks of the wisdom, ideas, thoughts, plans and purposes that were in the mind of God and were expressed or manifested in Jesus.  There are Biblical texts that support this understanding.  Indeed, scholars will attest to the fact that this is how John, who was Jewish, would have meant it and how his Jewish audience would have understood it.  Unfortunately, modern day translators have obscured the meaning from us by capitalizing the “w” in “word” causing us to believe that the “Word” of God was a pre-existing version of Jesus.


Next: Part 2:  John 1:1 The Jewish Mind vs The Translators’ Bias


[1] John 1:41, 49 

[2] “An Introduction to the Biblical Greek Alphabet,” Zondervan Academic Blog, January 1st, 2018. accessed 4-18-19, https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/biblical-greek-alphabet/

[3] The New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible gives the definition of logos as, “a word (as embodying an idea), a statement, a speech.”

[4] Psalm 148:5; 2 Peter 3:5

[5] “Logos,” The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon, Bible Study Tools, accessed 4-19-19 https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/logos.html

[6] Colin Brown, “Trinity and Incarnation: In Search of Contemporary Orthodoxy,” Ex Auditu (7), 1991, p. 88-89

[7] In this text both God the Father and Jesus Messiah are rightly called “savior” because God saved us through His Messiah. See John 3:17.  Also God saved Israel through King David in 2 Sam 3:18. Examples of how God saves through the agency of men: Judges 3:31; 6;11; 10:1; 2 Sam 19:9; 2 Kings 14:27. 

[8] James D.G. Dunn, Christology in the Making, (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman’s, 1989), p. 262.

This Post Has 23 Comments

  1. Beverly Nicholson

    Very well researched and explained. I liked your tie-in with Proverbs 23:7a.

    1. admin

      Thanks so much for your encouraging feedback!

  2. JP

    i am also a unitarian and i was reading your post and while i agree with most of what is said, i believe there are some pointed issues for trinitarians that are not discussed. like the problem of proving that Yeshua is the word, this is usually a trinitarian interpretation where the word in John 1:3 is translated as him which is wrong as the word autou can mean he she or it for “he” it would “auto”, but autou should be translated as “it”. also the reference to rev 19:13 in my opinion is not referring to Yeshua, the problem here is that Yeshua is not once ever said to be coming on a horse as the person in rev19 is, also Yeshua is never referred to as the king of kings lord of lords, this reserved for Yehovah (1 tim 6:15) this is what i have written maybe you could compare notes with it http://seedofthekingdom.x10host.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/johns-prologue-the-kingdom.pdf

    1. admin

      Thanks for taking the time to read the post and comment. I briefly read through the paper you linked. It looks interesting. I appreciate the detailed notes and your commitment to research and study the topic. Perhaps I’ll be able to find some time to review it more thoroughly in the future. In the meantime, I’d like to note that, contrary to your point that the title “king of kings and lord of lords” is reserved for Yehovah, Revelation 17:14 identifies the Lamb (Jesus; Rev 5) as the Lord of lords and King of kings. Furthermore, we see in Scripture that the phrase is not reserved for deity. Nebuchadnezzar is called “king of kings” in Daniel 2:37 and Ezk 26:7, as is King Artaxerxes in Ezra 7:12.

      Semitic languages often use the genitive case to describe something they thought was the “best” or the “greatest, ” or what we might call superlatives. For example, Nebuchadnezzar called God the “god of gods” before he understood who God was because Daniel’s god could interpret dreams (Dan 2:47). In addition, Noah said that Canaan would be the “servant of servants” (Gen 9:25). Jesus is the ultimate king and lord having been exalted by God, and thus the title is fitting.

      Again, thanks for stopping by the site and sharing your thoughts.
      Blessings,
      OGW

      1. JP

        hi i know that Yeshua is referred to in rev17 the lord of lords king of kings if you did not notice the distinction is that it is the opposite of king of king lord of lord which is reserved for Yehovah only, king of kings is used for humans but this is as you say only a superlative, but none are called by the title king of kings lord of lords. In these it should be noted the they are ascending titles as a king is of a lower order compared to a lord in heaven, for Yeshua you will note his title starts with lord which is a lower order compared to a king on earth, one heavenly title for Yehovah and one earthly for Yeshua.

        1. admin

          Hi JP,
          Thanks for sharing your insight! A couple of thoughts. God is referred to as simply the Lord of Lords in Psalm 136:3 without reference to also being a king. Also, in Rev. 19:16 it says that on Jesus’ “robe and on his thigh he has a name written: ‘King of Kings and Lord of Lords.” This does not fit the pattern you suggest. Whether it refers to a title he bears or is representative of the authority (robe/sash) he has been given by God, who is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, is uncertain. Regardless, Scripture says the authority Jesus has was given to him by God.

          Thanks for stopping by the website! God bless!
          OGW

  3. Rob Bjerk

    “verses” in paragraph 1 should be “versus” (not meaning to be picky (sometimes it’s even the spell checker that does these things) — just noticed it before I got started reading

    1. admin

      Thanks, Rob, for the “heads up!” I’ve made the correction.
      Blessings!

    1. admin

      Thanks, Chuck, for taking the time to read the article and for your encouraging comment!
      Blessings!

  4. arnel chavez burgos

    john 1:3 ans john1:10..

    What is the right interpretation?

    is it new creation or genesis creation?

    1. admin

      Hi Arnel,
      Thanks for your question. I understand John 1 to be a reference to the Genesis account, where the word of God (logos, a non-person) was the instrument through which creation was made. (I would encourage you to read, if you haven’t already, the other two installments in this series on John 1.) God spoke His plan and purpose for the world into being, which included the coming Messiah (1 Peter 1:20). That the world was made “through” him or “dia” in the Greek could also mean “on account of” him or “with” him in mind. It may also be helpful to read the article on Colossians 1:15-18 Is Jesus the Creator? and Hebrews 1:1-2 Through Whom He Made the World: An Examination of Hebrews. Hope this helps.
      God bless!

  5. Ben H.

    “John 20:30-31 (NASB) Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. (emphasis added)”

    If Jesus is not God, then how can believing in him give us “life in his name”

    1. admin

      Hello Ben,

      Great question. God determined that salvation or eternal life would come through faith in His Messiah, that is, Jesus. Here is an article that I think you will find helpful. It lists several Scripture passages that address your question. Jesus Became the Source of Eternal Life.

      Blessings,
      OGW

  6. Gus

    Thank you for this website. Some say John1 is about the new creation and the new beginning…. I’m not sure bout that.

    What about in Revelation where it says Jesus’ name is the Word of God?

    Rev19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. 12 His eyes are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on Him which no one knows except Himself. 13 He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

    1. Gus

      Nevermind… I see you address this…

      1. admin

        Ok, good. Glad you found it.
        Blessings,
        OGW

  7. Lori

    So how is “word” in John 1:14 translated then? When it says the Word was made flesh & dwelt among us.

    It makes so much sense to put “plan” or most of the other words for logos in place of Word/ the Son, but it doesn’t fit as well in 1:14. Can you please help me understand this verse?
    Thank you.

    1. admin

      Hi Lori!
      Thanks for reading and commenting. I think if you’ll read the other two articles in the “John 1” series it will answer your questions. Here is Part 2 and Part 3.
      Blessings,
      OGW

  8. Lori

    Are there any Bibles that are translated w/out trinitarian bias? Any translated since those in the 1500s or whenever, by Calvinists, Protestants, & Catholics? That also give us such understandings as that connection btwn In th beginning in John & Genesis?

    1. admin

      You may be interested in these two non-Trinitarian translations. The first is the Revised English Version, which you can find for free online, or the NT is available to purchase online. The other translation is The One God the Father, One Man Messiah, which you can purchase online. (These are affiliate links.)
      Blessings,
      OGW

  9. Suzi Bea

    In the beginning, Jesus proclaimed the Word of God to Israel, and the Word he proclaimed was God, that is, he expressed the Father to us in the words he spoke and the works he did. Everything which came to be since the baptism of John, came to be through the Word proclaimed by Jesus. In the Word he proclaimed was Life and that Life was the Light of men. God the Father is that Light and beginning with the Gospel of John, that True Light, the Father, was coming into the world. He who had seen the flesh named Jesus had seen the Father in terms of the things that flesh did. The Father who tabernacled in that flesh was the One who did the works, as Jesus testified. The Word was God, that is, the Word which Jesus proclaimed was to explain/express the Father to the world. In the beginning was the proclaimed Word which made the Father known to us so that we might have eternal life.
    John’s entire point is that human flesh manifested the Father in terms of all the things Jesus did during his ministry. This occurred because Jesus perfectly embodied God’s will, and in this way, this human being was an expression of the Father Himself. The Father’s Truth, the Father’s Life, the Father’s Light, the Father’s Love, could be seen and touched because that flesh was all those things in terms of the things Jesus did. “The Word was God” is not a statement about who is who but a way to state that the Word proclaimed by Jesus was the expression of the Father since the Father’s will was manifested through Jesus. And so people saw God’s Truth with their eyes; they touched God the Father’s love with their hands, and evil men put the Father’s love on a cross and killed it rejecting the Father’s because they loved of the world and the world loves its own.
    John 1:3 refers to everything that came to be beginning with the baptism of John and through the Word as proclaimed by Jesus in his ministry. Jesus’ ministry was the beginning of the new creation of God and his disciples are the firstfruits of the new creation, those who shine as the stars in the heavens.

    1. admin

      Thanks, Suzi, for sharing your thoughts. Jesus is definitely the agent of the Father. Jesus said, “…He who has seen Me has seen the Father…” (John 14:9)

Leave a Reply