John 1:12-13 Equivalents
“But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to be the
children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of
blood nor of the will of the flesh nor the will of man, but of God”
(1:12-13). Most did not receive Him, some did. This is primarily talking about Israel and the
Jewish remnant (cf. Deut. 32:18). There is a rejection/acceptance contrast.
Acceptance is a decision of faith. Kostenberger remarks that could be “the climactic statement of the entire
prologue.”[1]
It clearly sets these over and against those who rejected—there are some
who did respond by faith. One needs to observe that in these verses there are
two important equivalents:
Receive/Believe.
To “receive Him” is parallel to “believe
in His name,” they are equivalents. The word receive has the idea of being welcomed into a intimate
relationship.[2] To me
this puts to rest the idea that I have heard expressed among some
dispensationalist, which say we do not have to receive Christ to be saved. I
disagree. Paul contradicts this in Colossians 2:6 were he maintains that
believers “have received the Christ Jesus
our Lord.” A phrase used by Paul as a description of the transmission and
reception of the gospel of grace. The Greek word lambano
(receive) has the root meaning of to
take or to take in hand, thus to receive. Interestingly, the same word is used
of Joseph in taking Mary as his wife (Matt. 1:24). Laney points out that such
an action implies trust and commitment.[3]
The equivalent is to “believe in His name.”[4]
This phrase explains what it is, or the means to receive him.[5] In
the ancient world one’s name is bound up with the character of the person. It
reveals who the person was. The word “believe” is a present participle which
could denote continual belief.[6]
Receiving Him entails believing or having faith in Him. There are three
elements to believing/faith: knowledge, approval, and trust. Faith does not
only believe facts; it is personal trust in Christ.
Children of God/Born of God
The second parallel equivalent is
found in the phrases: “He gave the right
to become children of God” (1:12), and “who
were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man,
but of God” (1:13). The equitant is found in the words “give the right” and “born” sense
both speak of the action that makes those who receive him, the children of God.
Both are action verbs.
The first phrase has three key
words or concepts:[7]
First are the words “He gave.” The verb gave (didomi)
means to give, bestow, or present. It is a bridge word that connects both to
the word receive and the word right. Because they receive the Son He (God) gave
them a right. Borchert captures the overall tone when he says, “To be a child of God comes by way of God’s
gift through human receiving.”[8]
Second are the words “the right.”
The word right (exousia) is used 102 times in the
New Testament, and has the basic meaning of power, ability, authority, or
prerogative. Beasley-Murray says the word can mean “give permission.”[9] The word in this context is less on ability,
and more on the authority of a change of status.[10]
They have the authority to be called the sons of God. This refers to a new
status or authorization to become the child of God. It speaks of the granting
to the status of children.
Third, is the phrase “to become children of God.” This is
their new status; they are no longer the children of Satan, but of God. John
never refers to believers as “sons” of God. To him that title belongs only to
one—the Lord Jesus Christ. By these titles, John is careful to distinguish
believers from the unique Son of God.
This right or authorization is
equivalent to birth—“who were born,”
(1:13) which explains the method used to give the new status. It was birth that
gave them the right. The children of God are those who are born with God. The
birth motif is common in John’s writings (cf. 3:3, 5-6; 1 John 2:29; 3:9; 4:7;
5:1, 4, 18). Here John emphasizes what the new birth is not by using three
negative phrases—not of blood, will of the
flesh, will of man. These phrases may well note three attempts by men to
gain spiritual life—our heritage, achievement, and determination.[11]
This likely is an allusion to Jewish pride in their ancestry and race. None of
these can cause us to be born of God. The phrases are given to accentuate that
the new birth is spiritual and not physical. MacLeod correctly observes:
In these three negations John was
emphasizing the inability of humans to bring about spiritual birth. Many people
resent this fact because it seems to detract from human effort. But that is
exactly the point. The biblical doctrine of the new birth takes all the glory
away from individuals and gives it completely to God.[12]
One phrase is positive—“but of God.” The word but indicates contrast. In contrast to
the physical birth, the new birth is the work of God. He is the source and the
means of the action. It is noteworthy that the preposition of is the Greek word ek,
meaning out from. It marks the immediate source. It could be translated “born
by or from God.”
[1] Kostenberger, BECNT: JOHN, 38.
[2] MacLeod, “The Reaction of the World to the
Word,” 404. Morris, NICNT: JOHN, 86.
[3] Laney, MGC: JOHN, 42.
[4] It should be pointed out that the word
“even” in verse 12 was added by translators and is not in the Greek text.
[4] Wallace, BEYOND THE BASICS, 621.
[5] Godet, JOHN, 265.
[6] Wallace, BEYOND THE BASICS, 621.
[7] Morris, NICNT: JOHN, 98
[8] Gerald L. Borchert, NAC: JOHN 1-11, [Nashville TN
[9] Beasley-Murray, WBC: JOHN, 13.
[10] Morris, NICNT: JOHN, 98. Kostenberger, BECNT:
JOHN, 39.
[11] Borchert, JOHN 1-11, 118.
[12] MacLeod, “The Reaction of the World to the
Word: John 1:10-13,” 412.
No comments:
Post a Comment