John 1: 10-13 (Proof Text #5)
"He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons (Greek 'children') of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1: 10-13 KJV)
"Received" in "received him not" and "received him" are Aorist tense (indicative active). "Believe" is a present tense, active participle. "Were born" is Aorist (indicative passive).
The argument is often made that since "believe" is a present participle, active voice, and "were born" is Aorist passive, the birth must precede the believing. But, that is simply not the case. For one thing, though the word "believe" is present yet "received" is Aorist. The only difference in both words receive and born is that one is active and one passive voice. The tense and aspect are the same. They are both Aorist. Therefore, the argument is null and void that says the "receiving" and the being "born" do not occur together.
I realize that "believing," in contrast to "received," is different in tense, the former being Present and the latter Aorist. So, why is "received" Aorist and "believing" Present (participle)? Especially considering that believing and receiving are the same thing?
Those who are presently believing (linearly) are they who have previously received Christ and been born of God. That is true. But, the initial receiving was a believing, and the life of faith begins with the first act of faith and that is to receive Christ. That is what I see the apostle as saying.
Calvin wrote the following in commentary on the verses in John 1: 12, 13:
"On the contrary, the Evangelist repeats the same thing in a variety of words, in order to explain it more fully, and impress it more deeply on the minds of men. Though he refers directly to the Jews, who gloried in the flesh, yet from this passage a general doctrine may be obtained: that our being reckoned the sons of God does not belong to our nature, and does not proceed from us, but because God begat us WILLINGLY, (James 1:18,) that is, from undeserved love. Hence it follows, first, that faith does not proceed from ourselves, but is the fruit of spiritual regeneration; for the Evangelist affirms that no man can believe, unless he be begotten of God; and therefore faith is a heavenly gift. It follows, secondly, that faith is not bare or cold knowledge, since no man can believe who has not been renewed by the Spirit of God.
It may be thought that the Evangelist reverses the natural order by making regeneration to precede faith, whereas, on the contrary, it is an effect of faith, and therefore ought to be placed later. I reply, that both statements perfectly agree; because by faith we receive the incorruptible seed, (1 Peter 1:23,) by which we are born again to a new and divine life. And yet faith itself is a work of the Holy Spirit, who dwells in none but the children of God. So then, in various respects, faith is a part of our regeneration, and an entrance into the kingdom of God, that he may reckon us among his children. The illumination of our minds by the Holy Spirit belongs to our renewal, and thus faith flows from regeneration as from its source; but since it is by the same faith that we receive Christ, who sanctifies us by his Spirit, on that account it is said to be the beginning of our adoption.
Another solution, still more plain and easy, may be offered; for when the Lord breathes faith into us, he regenerates us by some method that is hidden and unknown to us; but after we have received faith, we perceive, by a lively feeling of conscience, not only the grace of adoption, but also newness of life and the other gifts of the Holy Spirit. For since faith, as we have said, receives Christ, it puts us in possession, so to speak, of all his blessings. Thus so far as respects our sense, it is only after having believed — that we begin to be the sons of God. But if the inheritance of eternal life is the fruit of adoption, we see how the Evangelist ascribes the whole of our salvation to the grace of Christ alone; and, indeed, how closely soever men examine themselves, they will find nothing that is worthy of the children of God, except what Christ has bestowed on them." (Calvin, Commentary, John 1:13)
All the discussion about verb tenses aside, there can be little debate on the order of these words - "to them who received him gave he the power to become the children of God." Receiving Christ is the prerequisite for becoming the children of God. Also, the Greek word for "children" denotes one that is so by being begotten. Thus, receive Christ to become, via birth, a child of God. To attempt to make the tense of "were born" to undermine what is clearly taught in the above words is to make the text to contradict itself. This thought is the same as we see in many other passages such as Galatians 3: 26 where Paul said:
"For you are all sons ('children' KJV) of God through faith in Christ Jesus." (NKJV)
Here we see that faith precedes being born of God, or made a child of God, and unlike the born again before faith view, which relies on logical deductions for proof of their view, our view that faith precedes being born is expressly stated in scripture.
In summation we simply say that "were born" (Aorist) is connected with "received him" (Aorist) and so the text says "as many as received him were born of God." If you have not received Christ by faith, then you are not born again, not a child or son of God.
No comments:
Post a Comment