John Chapter 1, Verse 13
From BibleWiki
13: οι ουκ εξ αιματων ουδε εκ θεληματος σαρκος ουδε εκ θεληματος ανδρος αλλ εκ θεου εγεννηθησαν
13: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh,
nor of the will of man, but of God.
13: Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of
the will of man, but of God.
For hoi .. egennethesan the O.L. version in b gives qui natus est, the verse being thus a reference to the Virgin Birth of Christ. Irenaeus (adv. Haer. III. xvii. I and XX. 2), and possibly Justin (Tryph. 61 ; cf. Apol. i. 32, 63 and ii. 6), bear witness to the existence of this (Western) reading. Tertullian (de carne Christi, 19) adopts it formally, adducing arguments against the common text "who were born," which he says is an invention of the Valentinians. In recent years the reference of the verse to Christ, and the reading qui natus est, have been approved by Resch (Aussercanonische Paralleltexte, iv. 57) and by Blass (Philology of the Gospels, p. 234). But the MS. evidence is overwhelming for egennethesan, which moreover, as we shall see, is accordance with the characteristic teaching of John.
The children of God arc "begotten" by Him by spiritual generation, as commuted with the ordinary process of physical generation.
Contents |
ουκ εξ αιματων κτλ
It was a current doctrine in Greek physiology that the human embryo is made from the seed of the father, and the blood of the mother. Thus Wis 7:2, "In the womb of a mother was I moulded into flesh in the time of ten months, being compacted in blood (pageis en haimati) of the seed of man and pleasure that came with sleep." Cf. 4 Macc 13:20 and Philo (de opif. mundi 45).
The plural haimaton is unexpected, but Brückner quoted the parallel allon trapheis aph' haimaton (Eurip. Ion, 693). Augustine (Serm. cxxi. 4) explains haimaton, "mixtis sanguinibus, masculi et feminae, commixtione carnis masculi et feminae," which may be right; but more probably the plural is used to indicate drops of blood.
ουδε εκ θεληματος σαÏκος
"nor yet of the will of the flesh," i.e. of sexual desire. thelema is used once or twice in the LXX in the sense of delectatio, e.g. Isa 62:4 and Eccl 12:1. Hippolytus (Ref. vi. 9) has the phrase ex haimaton kai epithumias sarkikes, kathaper kai hoi loipoi, gegennemenos which is apparently a reminiscence of this verse, of which at any rate it gives the meaning, identifying thelema with epithumia (cf. 1Jn 2:16).
The passage is also recalled by Justin (Tryph. 63), hos tou haimatos autou ouk ex anthropeiou stermatos gegennemenou all' ek thelematos theou.
ουδε εκ θεληματος ανδÏος
"nor yet of the will of a man," i.e. a male, for so aner is always used in John, as distinct from anthropos.
The threefold negation emphasises the point that the "begetting" of the children of God has nothing to do with the normal begetting of children.
αλλ εκ θεου εγεννηθησαν
(God being the immediate cause of the new spiritual life which begins in the believer). The metaphor of God as "begetting" children is strange to a modern ear, but it is frequent in Jn. Cf. also 1 Pet 1:3, ho ... anagennesas hemas eis elpida zosan, and see J. B. Mayor on Jam 1:18.
The verb gennan in the active voice generally means "to beget," and is used of the father, e.g. Abraam egennese ton Isaak (Mt 1:2). Sometimes this is followed by ek and the mother's name, e.g. egennesa ex autes Tobian (Tob 1:9).
gennan is also, but rarely, used of the "bearing " of children by a woman, e.g. mia meter egennesen hemas didumous (Acta Philippi, 115).
In John the verb (with one exception, 1Jn 5:1) is only found in the passive gennasthai. Sometimes this means "to be born," e.g. Jn 9:2f Jn 16:21 Jn 18:37; cf. Marias, ex hes egennethe Iesous (Mt 1:18).
But usually in Jn. gennasthai means "to be begotten," and the phrase "to be begotten by God" is thoroughly Johannine. Jn. does not shrink from drawing out the metaphor, e.g. 1Jn 3:9)f. God's sterma is in the man, who is thus teknon theou. An even closer parallel to vv. 12, 13, is 1Jn 5:1ff), where it is again said that those who believe in Christ are "begotten of God." Cf. also 1Jn 2:29 1Jn 4:7 1Jn 5:18. This mystical language goes back to Psalm 27, where Yahweh says of the king of His favour, ego semeron gegenneka se. Indeed, to say that believers are "begotten of God" is only to stretch a little farther the metaphor involved in the words, "Our Father which art in heaven." See on v. 12.
The rendering of egennethesan here by nati sunt in the Latin versions cannot be taken to exclude the translation "were begotten"; for in the several passages in 1 Jn. where we have the phrase gegennemenos ek tou theou (1Jn 2:29 1Jn 3:9 1Jn 4:7 1Jn 5:1 1Jn 5:18), and where it must bear the meaning "begotten by God" (see especially 1Jn 3:9), the Latin versions similarly have natus.
Which were born. This doubtless refers to the new birth, or to the great change in the sinner's mind called regeneration or conversion. It means that they did not become the children of God in virtue of their natural birth, or because they were the children of Jews, or because they were descended from pious parents. The term "to be born" is often used to denote this change. Comp. Jn 3:3ff
1Jn 2:29. It illustrates clearly and beautifully this great change. The natural birth introduces us to life. The new birth is the beginning of spiritual life. Before, the sinner is dead in sins (Eph 2:1); now he begins truly to live. And as the natural birth is the beginning of life, so to be born of God is to be introduced to real life, to light, to happiness, and to the favour of God. The term expresses at once the greatness and the nature of the change.
Not of blood. The Greek word is plural; not of bloods -- that is, not of man. Comp. Mt 27:4.
The Jews prided themselves on being the descendants of Abraham, Mt 3:9. They supposed that it was proof of the favour of God to be descended from such an illustrious ancestry. In this passage this notion is corrected. It is not because men are descended from an illustrious or pious parentage that they are entitled to the favour of God; or perhaps the meaning may be, not because there is a union of illustrious lines of ancestry or bloods in them. The law of Christ's kingdom is different from what the Jews supposed. Comp. 1 Pet 1:23.
It was necessary to be born of God by regeneration. Possibly, however, it may mean that they did not become children of God by the bloody rite of circumcision, as many of the Jews supposed they did. This is agreeable to the declaration of Paul in Rom 2:28f. Nor of the will of the flesh. Not by natural generation. Nor of the will of man. This may refer, perhaps, to the will of man in adopting a child, as the former phrases do to the natural birth; and the design of using these three phrases may have been to say that they became the children of God neither in virtue of their descent from illustrious parents like Abraham, nor by their natural birth, nor by being adopted by a pious man. None of the ways by which we become entitled to the privileges of children among men can give us a title to be called the sons of God. It is not by human power or agency that men become children of the Most High.
But of God. That is, God produces the change, and confers the privilege of being called his children. The heart is changed by his power. No unaided effort of man, no works of ours, can produce this change. At the same time, it is true that no man is renewed who does not himself desire and will to be a believer; for the effect of the change is on his will (Ps 1103) , and no one is changed who does not strive to enter in at the strait gate, Phil 2:12.
