The Word Made Flesh from a Biblical Unitarian Perspective

The Word Made Flesh: From a Biblical Unitarian Perspective

The first chapter of the Gospel of John is seen by many to really be a prologue to his Gospel. John begins the prologue with this famous verse: "In the beginning was the word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

From this passage of Scripture, many assumed that John sought to convey the idea that Jesus is the word referred to here, meaning Jesus pre-existed his birth. And in fact, many believe that he eternally pre-existed as God. However, we believe that Jesus was and is a human being, and he began his existence in the womb of his mother Mary. And yet, we also believe that Jesus is the word referenced here in the first chapter of John. How is that possible? Well, obviously, we interpret this passage differently than most. And you might not agree with every point of my interpretation of this passage, but I hope you'll see that it is at least a reasonable alternative to the mainstream interpretation.

Now, to be able to understand what John meant when he referenced the word in this chapter, let's take a quick look at how other Jewish people of his day understood the word. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, the Jewish people of the first century understood the word to refer to, quote, "the creative or directive word or speech of God manifesting his power in the world of matter or mind." When God wanted to interact with his creation, he did so through his speech. And of course, a famous example is God speaking the world into existence in the creation narrative in Genesis.

Over time, the Jewish people wanted to find a way to speak of God's work and creation, but also maintain that God is above us. So they began to personify the word, speaking as if the word was a personal entity, somehow distinct from God, yet a part of him. Let me show you what I mean. I think most of us have heard of the Message Bible and the Living Bible. And and these are paraphrases of the Bible. A paraphrased translation of the Bible does not translate the Bible word for word, but rather thought for thought. In the first century, the Jewish people had several paraphrases of the Hebrew Bible in the common language of Aramaic, and each was called a Targum, which simply means translation or interpretation.

Now, in these paraphrases, the Jewish people spoke of the Word of God as being an agent of God, doing his work. However, this was not meant to be taken literally. Again, it was a poetic way of referring to God's activity in creation. Here are a couple of examples: In Genesis chapter 1, verse 27, it says, "God created man in his own image." But the Targum Jonathan paraphrased this verse this way: "It says, 'And the Word of the Lord created man in his likeness.'" In Genesis 3, verse 8, it says of Adam and Eve that they heard "the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day." But the Targum Jonathan paraphrased this verse this way: "They heard the voice of the Word of the Lord God walking in the garden in the repose of the day."

So, did the Jewish people think of the word as a literal, separate person from God? No. The word, again, was a poetic way of referring to God's manifestation and activity in creation. So let's keep this in mind as we look at John chapter 1.

The Word in the Prologue of John

Again, the first verse is: "In the beginning was the word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Let's look at that first line: "In the beginning was the word." Now, John was clearly echoing the first line from the book of Genesis when he said "in the beginning." In fact, the Hebrew name for the book of Genesis is Bereshit, which we translate as "in the beginning." Therefore, with just this first line, John intended for us to be thinking of the creation narrative in the first chapter of Genesis. John said that the word was there in the beginning, but we have to ask, what is the word?

Let's let Scripture interpret Scripture, because John himself said in his first epistle, starting in 1st John chapter 1: "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 of life—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—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 the Messiah."

So, in just these three verses here in First John, John gives us some major clues on how we are to understand the prologue to his Gospel. I mean, in verse 1, it says the word is the word of life. In verse 2, the word of life was with the Father, just as the Word was with God in John chapter 1, verse 1. The word of life here was manifested to us, just as John said in John 1:14, that "the word became flesh." So, when John's first epistle, the word is not a literal person, but refers to God's plan for eternal life before creation. God looked ahead, and he saw the need for salvation, and he planned accordingly. God knew that if human beings sinned, he would need to put into motion a plan of salvation, which included sending his Son Jesus to die for our sins.

In Jewish thought, things can pre-exist in God's plan, and this is something the Apostles expressed. Take a look at these examples of things that didn't literally pre-exist but existed in God's plan. First of all, Peter said that the Messiah was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you. First Peter 1, verse 20. So God had Jesus in mind since the very beginning, but the Messiah didn't actually appear in history until 2,000 years ago. And John stated, depending on how it's translated, that the Messiah was slain from the foundation of the world. It says this in Revelation chapter 13, verse 8, at least according to the New King James Version: "All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Now, we all know that Jesus died at a specific point in time, 2,000 years ago, but according to this verse, he was slain from the very beginning. And and this refers to the fact, in my opinion, that Jesus's death was always in God's plan.

Also, Paul said, speaking of believers, "For those whom he foreknew, he also predestined to become conformed to the image of his Son, so that he would be the firstborn among many brethren. And these whom he predestined, he also called, and these whom he called, he also justified, and these whom he justified, he also glorified." That's from Romans chapter 8, verses 29 to 30. Now, I'm sure most of you watching this don't believe that we existed, that we human beings existed before our birth. But according to Paul, God already knew us, predestined us to become conformed to the image of his Son, he called us, he justified us, and get this, he glorified us. In the Bible, to be glorified means to be given resurrection and immortality, and these are that have not yet happened for believers. So Paul must have meant that God had us in his plan of salvation. So it was not foreign to the Apostles to understand that that God planned out what he would do if mankind fell into sin.

For John, this plan is God's Word. And think about this: remember, by saying "in the beginning," John wants us to be thinking of the book of Genesis, which is a part of the five books of Moses, the Torah. That the Torah comprises God's first revelation of the Word. Before the Word became flesh in Jesus, the Word became letters on a scroll. Through the Scripture, God revealed himself and his wise plan for creation, his plan for salvation, his plan for eternal life.

The next line in verse one is: "And the Word was with God." So this wise plan was with God from the very beginning, and it was fully expressive of God. Now, to say something is "with God" is a very Hebraic way of saying that something was within the scope of God's plan, something was within the scope of his plan, something with that was within the scope of his decrees and will for the future. Take a look at this: In the book of Job, it says of God that "with him are wisdom and might; and it also says, 'To him belong counsel and understanding. With him are strength and sound wisdom; the misled and the misleader belong to him.'" Not only that, in the Proverbs, wisdom is personified and has even said to have been there with God when he created the universe. It says this in Proverbs 8: "When he established the heavens, I [wisdom] was there."

So, much in the same way, I would argue John is poetically personifying the Word and saying that the Word was there in the beginning with God. This is like in Isaiah. In Isaiah, God's Word was said to come out of God's mouth and accomplish what He desires and to achieve the purpose for which He sent it. It says this in Isaiah 55: "As the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there without watering the earth and making it bare and sprout and furnishing seed to the sower and bread to the eater, so will my word be which goes forth from my mouth; it will not turn return to me empty, without accomplishing what I desire, without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it." So these are all very beautiful and poetic ways of referring to God's plans and the execution of his plans.

The next line is: "And the Word was God." To say that the Word was God is to say that it was fully expressive of God. The Word accurately represents God. Now, just as the words we speak or the plans we make express our thoughts and represent who we are, so too does God's Word express who He is and represents Him perfectly. We should keep in mind, however, that a person's speech is not literally the person. But rather represents the person. Certainly, a person's word is not a separate person.

It goes on to say in John chapter 1 and verse 2: "He was in the beginning with God." So remember that John is not referring to a literal person. If that's the case, why then did he use the word "he"? Well, first of all, a more literal translation of this verse is this: "The Word was in the beginning with God." But even if you leave it as "he," which is how it is translated in most of the popular translations, it would just simply mean that John was personifying God's wise plan. The Word, remember, wisdom was personified in Proverbs 8. So it's possible that John was personifying the Word, especially since in verse 4 and onwards, John certainly seems to be conflating the Word with the man Jesus. And of course, in verse 14, the Word is said to have become flesh, that is, a real human person.

In verse 3, John chapter 1, it says: "All things came into being through him, and apart from him nothing came into being that has come into being." The pronouns "he" and "him" can just as easily have been translated as "it." Or to make it easier to understand, how about this: "All things came into being through the Word, and apart from the Word, nothing came into being that has come into being." And we know from Scripture that everything came into being through God's Word. It says this in Psalm 33, verse 6: "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their hosts." So even if John intended us to understand the pronouns as "he" and "him," it would simply be a poetic personification. No one in ancient Israel took this personification of the Word that was found in the Targum, or of wisdom in the book of Proverbs, they didn't take these things literally as if these were actual persons with God. Instead, as I mentioned earlier, personifying God's attributes is a way of expressing the transcendent God.

Additionally, since John obviously had Jesus in mind, we can also understand that God had Jesus in mind in his plan when he created all things. This, this means that we can paraphrase this verse this way: "With Jesus in mind, all things came into being, and apart from God's plan, which had Jesus as the focus, nothing came into being that has come into being."

For the sake of time, we're not going to cover every verse in the prologue, but let's skip down to verse 14, where it says: "And the Word became flesh." To encapsulate the personification that John had been using in the previous verses, he plainly stated that the Word spoken of in verse one became a human being. Now, the word "incarnation" is not in the Bible, but the idea is here, poetically. Remember, the Word is not a person, but refers to God's utterances, his decree, his wise plan, wisdom. So if that's what the Word is, in what sense did the Word become flesh? The Word became flesh in so much as Jesus was directly created by God and lived a sinless life. Therefore, he bore the image of God his Father. Jesus embodied everything that is the Word. However, it would not be correct to say that Jesus is literally the Word. Let me explain what I mean. Think of a blueprint for a house. You can have a blueprint for a house, and then once the house is built, the house then embodies in reality everything that the blueprint was. But it would not be right to think that the house was actually the blueprint. The Word is God's blueprint for creation, especially with regard to salvation, and Jesus is the actual person who embodies and accomplishes that plan.

It goes on to say in John 1:14: "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us." Now, since the Word is fully expressive of God, you can say, in a metaphoric way, that God became flesh in the man Jesus. In fact, the phrase "dwelt among us" brings to mind the concept of God's divine presence dwelling in and among Israel in the holy place, whether in the tent of meeting, the tabernacle, or the temple. Similarly, God was manifest in Jesus. In fact, God said that "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself." 2nd Corinthians 5:19.

Now, let's read the full verse of John 1:14: "And the Word 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." So, Jesus, the Word made flesh, is the only begotten from the Father. The word translated here as "only begotten" means "single of its kind," "only." And it's used of only sons or only daughters. It's a word used of a child in relation to their parents, a word used to describe one who is a unique or only descendant of someone. So Jesus is God's only and unique Son. It's the same word used in John 3:16. So we have to say that it's not that Jesus is just a man or a mere man, but he is a unique man. He is the direct creation of God in the womb of Mary. Jesus was not just any human being; he is the best human being that has ever lived. Jesus is everything God originally intended human beings to be. And because of that, Jesus truly lives out the idea that human beings are made in God's image.

Along those lines, let's read verse 18: "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, he has explained him." Now, I think from this verse, we get an interesting peek into the theology of the Apostles. What John said here, that "no one has seen God at any time." So think about that. If the Apostles truly believed that Jesus was God, and they obviously saw him, how could they say that no one has seen God? But the point John is making here is that Jesus is the one who shows us what God is like.

Now, the manuscript evidence attests to both the phrase "only begotten God" and also "only begotten Son." You might see from different translations that that one translation will have it one way, and another translation will have it the other way. Now, the word translated here as "only begotten" is the same word we just looked at in verse 14. This word, again, refers to a unique or only descendant of someone. So if this verse should read "only begotten God," then I would say that that John is simply saying, not that Jesus is God, but rather that Jesus is a human being who is uniquely generated from God and uniquely represents God. However, in the Greek, the phrase translated here as "only begotten God" doesn't appear anywhere else in the New Testament. And considering the one referenced here is in the bosom of the Father, it would make more sense that the verse should read "only begotten Son," a phrase that's found elsewhere in John, most notably in John 3:16.

But regardless, the point that John is trying to make is that Jesus, who is the one who makes the Word a reality in terms of being a human being, he is the one who explains God. The God that whom no one can see. "If you've seen Jesus, you've seen the Father," as it says in John 14:9. And that's because Jesus fully represents God in terms of being a human being, just as the Word is fully expressive of God.

So, what can we take away from this? Well, for one thing, when you're forming your view of God, you should be looking to Jesus by studying Jesus. And that is his words and his actions. We can have a better understanding of God. But theologically, in terms of our understanding of Jesus and his relationship to God, in my opinion, John chapter 1 does not teach that Jesus literally pre-existed his birth. Rather, we can say that the Word is a reference to God's great and wise plan of salvation, and that Jesus manifests that plan in reality. Indeed, Jesus is the Word made flesh.