0

John 1:15 (NASB95)

John testified about Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’“

Most translations choose to interpret the ἔμπροσθέν in “ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν” as regarding status rather than order of events.

Within the first chapter, John’s usage of the verb γίνομαι is used exclusively in the sense of either coming into being (vv. 3, 6, 10, 17, 28), or becoming as in a transformation (12, 14).

Therefore, “ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν” in 1:15 & 30 could mean one of two things:

  1. “He has come into being before me”, in this sense, ἔμπροσθέν is indicating the time when the Word “γέγονεν”, or came into existence. So if the Word came into being ἔμπροσθέν John, the γέγονεν would imply that there was a point of origin for the Word and a time when he did not exist. This matches the use of γίνομαι by John up until this point, regarding the origination of creations and attributes.
  2. “He has become before me [in rank]”, in this sense, ἔμπροσθέν is regarding a position of the Word in relation to John, and the γέγονεν is indicating that the positional status came to be at some point.

Is the translational choice of the latter merely due to doctrinal preference of the translators, or are there other factors that point to ἔμπροσθέν being translated in a positional sense? Are there examples of the phrase “ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν” having an established idiomatic meaning in Greek at the time?

A parallel phrase in favor of the former translation would be Isaiah 43:10

Before Me there was no God formed

ἔμπροσθέν μου οὐκ ἐγένετο ἄλλος θεὸς

It is not likely that this passage is referring rank, because it goes on to say

And there will be none after Me.

Which would indicate this is regarding the time in which the other gods were made, not rank.

Is there a closer parallel to the language used in John 1:15 & 30 that would indicate this is about status rather than a prior coming into being?

Note: This question does not ask anything regarding the “ὁ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος” or the “ὅτι πρῶτός μου ἦν” as the linked question does. That question is about whether or not the passage implies preexistence. This question is regarding whether the “ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν” should be translated as “has a higher rank than I” or “came into existence before me”. The doctrinal implications of this question are quite different.

Improve this question
18
  • 2
    Thanks Nigel. But you are referencing two of the three things listed: ‘coming’ ἐρχόμενος, and ‘existing’ ἦν. But between that coming and existing, it mentions a ‘coming into being’ γέγονεν. The question is, is this ‘coming into being’ regarding the ‘before’ as in a higher rank which was obtained at some point, or regarding Jesus as in he came into existence prior to John, meaning there was a time when Jesus was not in existence. γίνομαι tends to indicate something coming into existence which was once not in existence.
    – Any_mouse
    Jan 31, 2022 at 21:43
  • 2
    This differs from the other questions you and Dottard posted, because those both relate to pre-existence, and therefore focus on the ‘ἦν’. I’m saying that the ‘γέγονεν’ can either be translated as Jesus was created/generated before John, or that Jesus’ elevated status came into existence.
    – Any_mouse
    Jan 31, 2022 at 21:48
  • 2
    And then I provided a similar phrase in Isaiah to showcase this point. The question is, between the two translations I provided, what reasonings are there for choosing the latter other than doctrinal?
    – Any_mouse
    Jan 31, 2022 at 22:00
  • 1
    @Any_mouse, I disagree that your question has nothing to do with 'whether or not “πρῶτός μου ἦν” is indicating pre-existence as the linked question asks.' If Dottard is correct and Jesus's chronological preexistence is in view then an affirmative response to your inquiry is even more probable. It becomes even more likely that γέγονεν implies Jesus was created. That said your question is clearly substantially different from the linked question, though it may build off of it, and should be reopened.
    – Austin
    Feb 1, 2022 at 2:09
  • 1
    @Dottard, would you consider reopening the question since the link question doesn't actually address whether or not it can be implied that Jesus was created - the central issue to this question? Otherwise, the closing would have the effect of not allowing the question of Jesus's creation, with regard to John 1:15, to be asked at all.
    – Austin
    Feb 1, 2022 at 2:13

0

Reset to default