John Calvin Commentary John 1

In the beginning was the Speech. In this introduction, he asserts the eternal Divinity of Christ, to inform us that He is the eternal God, who was manifested in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). The design is to show that it was necessary for the restoration of humankind to be accomplished by the Son of God, since by His power all things were created, since He alone breathes life and energy into all creatures so that they remain in their state, and since in humanity itself He has given a remarkable display both of His power and of His grace, and even after the fall of humanity has not ceased to show generosity and kindness toward their descendants.

And this doctrine is highly necessary to know; for since, apart from God, we should not seek life and salvation at all, how could our faith rest on Christ if we did not know with certainty what is taught here? By these words, therefore, the Evangelist assures us that we do not withdraw from the only and eternal God when we believe in Christ, and likewise that life is now restored to the dead through the kindness of Him who was the source and cause of life when human nature was still uncorrupted.

As to the Evangelist calling the Son of God the Speech, the simple reason appears to me to be, first, because He is the eternal Wisdom and Will of God; and, secondly, because He is the living image of His purpose. For, as Speech is said to be among humans the image of the mind, so it is not inappropriate to apply this to God and to say that He reveals Himself to us by His Speech. The other meanings of the Greek word λόγος (Logos) do not apply so well. It means, no doubt, definition, and reasoning, and calculation; but I am unwilling to carry the abstruseness of philosophy beyond the measure of my faith. And we perceive that the Spirit of God is so far from approving of such subtleties that, in His simple way of speaking to us, by His very silence He cries aloud with what sobriety we should handle such lofty mysteries.

Now as God, in creating the world, revealed Himself by that Speech, so He formerly had Him concealed within Himself, so that there is a twofold relation: the former to God, and the latter to humans. Servetus, a haughty scoundrel from the Spanish nation, invents the statement that this eternal Speech began to exist at that time when He was displayed in the creation of the world, as if He did not exist before His power was made known by external operation. The Evangelist teaches very differently in this passage, for he does not ascribe to the Speech a beginning of time, but says that He was from the beginning, and thus rises beyond all ages. I am fully aware how this dog barks against us, and what cavils were formerly raised by the Arians, namely, that

in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,
(Genesis 1:1)

which, nevertheless, are not eternal, because the word beginning refers to order instead of denoting eternity. But the Evangelist counters this calumny when he says,

And the Speech was with God. If the Speech began to exist at some time, they must find some succession of time in God; and undoubtedly by this clause John intended to distinguish Him from all created things. For many questions might arise: Where was this Speech? How did He exert His power?

What was His nature? How might He be known? The Evangelist, therefore, declares that we must not confine our views to the world and to created things, for He was always united to God before the world existed. Now when people date the beginning from the origin of heaven and earth, do they not reduce Christ to the common order of the world, from which He is excluded in express terms by this passage?

By this action, they offer an egregious insult not only to the Son of God, but to His eternal Father, whom they deprive of His wisdom. If we are not free to conceive of God without His wisdom, it must be acknowledged that we should not seek the origin of the Speech anywhere else than in the Eternal Wisdom of God.

Servetus objects that the Speech cannot be acknowledged to have existed any earlier than when Moses introduces God as speaking. As if He did not subsist in God because He was not publicly made known: that is, as if He did not exist within until He began to appear without. But every pretext for outrageously absurd fancies of this kind is cut off by the Evangelist, when he affirms without reservation that the Speech was with God; for he expressly withdraws us from every moment of time.

Those who infer from the imperfect tense of the verb used here that it denotes continued existence have little strength of argument to support them. Was, they say, is a word better suited to express the idea of uninterrupted succession than if John had said, Has been.

But on such weighty matters, we should employ more solid arguments; and, indeed, the argument I have brought forward should be considered sufficient by us: namely, that the Evangelist sends us to the eternal secrets of God, so that we may learn there that the Speech was, so to speak, hidden, before He revealed Himself in the external structure of the world.

Justly, therefore, does Augustine remark that this beginning, which is now mentioned, has no beginning; for though, in the order of nature, the Father came before His Wisdom, yet those who conceive of any point of time when He preceded His Wisdom deprive Him of His glory. And this is the eternal generation, which, during a period of infinite extent before the foundation of the world, lay hidden in God, so to speak—which, for a long succession of years, was obscurely foreshadowed to the Fathers under the Law, and at length was more fully manifested in the flesh.

I wonder what induced the Latins to render ὁ λόγος as Verbum (the Word), for that would rather have been the translation of τὸ ῥη̑μα. But granting that they had some plausible reason, it still cannot be denied that Sermo (the Speech) would have been far more appropriate. Hence it is evident what barbarous tyranny was exercised by the theologians of the Sorbonne, who teased and stormed at Erasmus in such a manner because he had changed a single word for the better.

And the Speech was with God. We have already said that the Son of God is thus placed above the world and above all creatures, and is declared to have existed before all ages. But at the same time, this mode of expression attributes to Him a distinct personality from the Father; for it would have been absurd for the Evangelist to say that the Speech was always with God if He did not have some kind of subsistence peculiar to Himself in God.

This passage serves, therefore, to refute the error of Sabellius, for it shows that the Son is distinct from the Father. I have already remarked that we should be sober in thinking and modest in speaking about such high mysteries. And yet the ancient writers of the Church were excusable when, finding that they could not in any other way maintain sound and pure doctrine against the perplexed and ambiguous phraseology of the heretics, they were compelled to invent some words, which after all had no other meaning than what is taught in the Scriptures. They said that there are three Hypostases, or Subsistences, or Persons, in the one and simple essence of God. The word ὑπόστασις (Hypostasis) occurs in this sense in Hebrews 1:3, to which corresponds the Latin word Substantia (substance), as it is used by Hilary. The Persons (τὰ πρόσωπα) were called by them distinct properties in God, which present themselves to the view of our minds; as Gregory Nazianzen says, “I cannot think of the One (God) without having the Three (Persons) shining around me.”

And the Speech was God. So that there may be no remaining doubt as to Christ’s divine essence, the Evangelist distinctly asserts that He is God. Now since there is but one God, it follows that Christ is of the same essence as the Father, and yet that, in some respect, He is distinct from the Father. But of the second clause we have already spoken. As to the unity of the divine essence, Arius showed prodigious wickedness when, to avoid being compelled to acknowledge the eternal Divinity of Christ, he prattled about some imaginary Deity; but for our part, when we are informed that the Speech was God, what right do we have any longer to call into question His eternal essence?

He was in the beginning. In order to impress more deeply on our minds what had already been said, the Evangelist condenses the two preceding clauses into a brief summary: that the Speech always was, and that he was with God; so that it may be understood that the beginning was before all time.

All things were made by him. Having affirmed that the Speech is God, and having asserted his eternal essence, he now proves his Divinity from his works. And this is the practical knowledge to which we should be primarily accustomed, for the mere name of God attributed to Christ will affect us little if our faith does not feel it to be such by experience.

In reference to the Son of God, he makes an assertion which strictly and properly applies to his person. Sometimes, indeed, Paul simply declares that all things are by God (Romans 11:36), but whenever the Son is compared with the Father, he is usually distinguished by this mark. Accordingly, the ordinary mode of expression is here employed: that the Father made all things by the Son, and that all things are by God through the Son.

Now the design of the Evangelist is, as I have already said, to show that no sooner was the world created than the Speech of God came forth into external operation; for having formerly been incomprehensible in his essence, he then became publicly known by the effect of his power.

There are some, indeed, even among philosophers, who make God to be the Master-builder of the world in such a manner as to ascribe to him intelligence in framing this work. So far they are in the right, for they agree with Scripture; but as they immediately fly off into frivolous speculations, there is no reason why we should eagerly desire to have their testimonies. On the contrary, we should be satisfied with this inspired declaration, well knowing that it conveys far more than our mind is able to comprehend.

And without him was not anything made that was made. Though there is a variety of readings in this passage, yet, for my part, I have no hesitation in taking it continuously thus: not anything was made that was made. In this, almost all the Greek manuscripts, or at least those of them which are most approved, are found to agree; besides, the sense requires it.

Those who separate the words, which was made, from the preceding clause, so as to connect them with the following one, bring out a forced sense: what was made was in him life—that is, lived, or was sustained in life. But they will never show that this mode of expression is, in any instance, applied to creatures.

Augustine, who is excessively addicted to the philosophy of Plato, is carried along, according to custom, to the doctrine of ideas: that before God made the world, he had the form of the whole building conceived in his mind. And so, the life of those things which did not yet exist was in Christ, because the creation of the world was appointed in him. But how widely different this is from the intention of the Evangelist we shall immediately see.

I now return to the former clause. This is not a faulty redundancy (περιττολογία) as it appears to be, for as Satan endeavors by every possible method to take anything from Christ, the Evangelist intended to declare expressly that of those things which have been made there is no exception whatever.

In him was life. Until now he has taught us, that by the Speech of God all things were created. He now attributes to him, in the same manner, the preservation of those things which had been created, as if he had said, that in the creation of the world there was not merely displayed a sudden exercise of his power, which soon passed away, but that it is manifested in the steady and regular order of nature, as he is said to uphold all things by the word or will of his power (Hebrews 1:3).

This life may be extended either to inanimate creatures (which live after their own manner, though they are devoid of feeling) or may be explained in reference to living creatures alone. It is of little consequence which you choose; for the simple meaning is, that the Speech of God was not only the source of life to all the creatures, so that those which were not began to be, but that his life-giving power causes them to remain in their condition.

For if his continued inspiration did not give vigor to the world, everything that lives would immediately decay or be reduced to nothing. In a word, what Paul ascribes to God, that in him we are, and move, and live (Acts 17:28), John declares to be accomplished by the gracious agency of the Speech; so that it is God who gives us life, but it is by the eternal Speech.

The life was the light of men. The other interpretations, which do not accord with the meaning of the Evangelist, I intentionally pass by. He speaks here, in my opinion, of that part of life in which men excel other animals; and informs us that the life which was bestowed on men was not of an ordinary description, but was united to the light of understanding.

He separates man from the rank of other creatures; because we perceive the power of God more readily by feeling it in us than by beholding it at a distance. Thus Paul charges us not to seek God at a distance, because he makes himself to be felt within us (Acts 17:27).

After having presented a general exhibition of the kindness of Christ, in order to induce men to take a nearer view of it, he points out what has been bestowed peculiarly on themselves; namely, that they were not created like the beasts, but having been endowed with reason, they had obtained a higher rank.

As it is not in vain that God imparts his light to their minds, it follows that the purpose for which they were created was, that they might acknowledge Him who is the Author of so excellent a blessing. And since this light, of which the Speech was the source, has been conveyed from him to us, it ought to serve as a mirror, in which we may clearly behold the divine power of the Speech.

And the light shineth in darkness. It might be objected that the passages of Scripture in which men are called blind are so numerous, and the blindness for which they are condemned is all too well known. For in all their reasoning faculties, they miserably fail. How does it happen that there are so many labyrinths of errors in the world, if not because men, by their own guidance, are led only to vanity and lies?

But if no light appears in men, that testimony of the divinity of Christ, which the Evangelist recently mentioned, is destroyed. For that is the third step, as I have said: that in the life of men there is something more excellent than motion and breathing.

The Evangelist anticipates this question and, first of all, lays down this caution: that the light which was originally bestowed on men must not be estimated by their present condition, because in this corrupted and degenerate nature, light has been turned into darkness.

And yet he affirms that the light of understanding is not wholly extinguished, for, amidst the thick darkness of the human mind, some remaining sparks of the brightness still shine.

My readers now understand that this sentence contains two clauses. For he says that men are now widely distant from that perfectly holy nature with which they were originally endowed, because their understanding, which ought to have shed light in every direction, has been plunged in darkness and is wretchedly blinded. Thus, the glory of Christ may be said to be darkened amidst this corruption of nature.

But, on the other hand, the Evangelist maintains that in the midst of the darkness, there are still some remains of light, which show in some degree the divine power of Christ. The Evangelist admits, therefore, that the mind of man is blinded, so that it may justly be pronounced to be covered with darkness.

For he might have used a milder term and might have said that the light is dark or cloudy; but he chose to state more distinctly how wretched our condition has become since the fall of the first man. The statement that the light shineth in darkness is not at all intended for the commendation of depraved nature but rather for taking away every excuse for ignorance.

And the darkness did not comprehend it. Although by that small measure of light which still remains in us, the Son of God has always invited men to Himself, yet the Evangelist says that this was attended by no advantage, because seeing, they did not see (Matthew 13:13). For since man lost the favor of God, his mind is so completely overwhelmed by the bondage of ignorance that any portion of light which remains in it is quenched and useless.

This is proven daily by experience. For all who are not regenerated by the Spirit of God possess some reason, and this is an undeniable proof that man was made not only to breathe but also to have understanding. But by that guidance of their reason, they do not come to God and do not even approach Him, so that all their understanding is nothing but mere vanity.

Hence it follows that there is no hope for the salvation of men unless God grants new aid; for though the Son of God sheds His light upon them, they are so dull that they do not comprehend from where that light proceeds but are carried away by foolish and wicked imaginations to absolute madness.

The light which still dwells in corrupt nature consists chiefly of two parts:

1. All men naturally possess some seed of religion.
2. The distinction between good and evil is engraved on their consciences.

But what are the fruits that ultimately spring from it, except that religion degenerates into a thousand monsters of superstition, and conscience perverts every decision, so as to confound vice with virtue?

In short, natural reason never will direct men to Christ. And as to their being endowed with prudence for regulating their lives or born to cultivate the liberal arts and sciences, all this passes away without yielding any advantage.

It ought to be understood that the Evangelist speaks of natural gifts only and does not yet say anything about the grace of regeneration. For there are two distinct powers which belong to the Son of God: the first, which is manifested in the structure of the world and the order of nature; and the second, by which He renews and restores fallen nature.

As He is the eternal Speech of God, by Him the world was made. By His power, all things continue to possess the life which they once received. Man, especially, was endowed with an extraordinary gift of understanding. And though by his revolt he lost the light of understanding, he still sees and understands, so that what he naturally possesses from the grace of the Son of God is not entirely destroyed.

But since by his stupidity and perverseness, he darkens the light which still dwells in him, it remains that a new office must be undertaken by the Son of God—the office of Mediator—to renew, by the Spirit of regeneration, man who had been ruined.

Therefore, those persons who refer this light, which the Evangelist mentions, to the gospel and the doctrine of salvation, reason absurdly and inconclusively.