19. The proof in all these cases is somewhat doubtful. Never- theless the idea is strengthened by the fact that in Rabbinical writings the Messiah is often spoken of as " the Word." In the third of Genesis, the Chaldee paraphrase says that Adam and Eve " heard the Word of the Lord walking in the garden."
Arrowsmith, in his admirable work on this chapter, suggests a probable reason why John did not say, "In the beginning was the Son of God," but " the Word."—" John would not at first ahenate the hearts of his readers. He knew that neither Jews nor Gentiles would endure the term, the Son of God. They could not endure to hear of a sonship in the Deity and Godhead : but with this term ' Word,' applied to the Godhead, they were well acquainted." — Poole observes that no term was so abhorred by the Jews as the term " Son of God." — Ferus remarks, that by calHng our Lord "the Word," St. John excludes all idea of a material, carnal relationship between the Father and the Son. Tliis is also shown by Suicer to be the view of Chrysostom, Theodoret, Basil, Gregory, Nyssen, and Theophylact.
Whatever difl5culty we may feel about this expression, " the Word," in our times, there does not seem to have been the same difficulty felt about it, either by Jews or Gentiles, when St. John wrote his Gospel. To say, as some have done, that he borrowed the expression from the philosophers of his time, is dishonouring to inspiration. But we may safely say that he used an expres- sion, of which the meaning was quite familiar to the first readers of his Gospel, as a name of the Second Person of the Trinity. With this we may be content. Those who wish more informa- tion, should consult VVitsius' Dissertation on the Word Logos, Suicer's Thesaurus, and Adam Clarke's Commentary.
[The word was with God.] This sentence means, that from all eternity there was a most intimate and ineffable union between the first and second Persons in the blessed Trinity, — between Christ the Word, and God the Father. And yet, though thus inefiably united, the Word and the Father were from all e-ternity two distinct Persons. " It was He," says Pearson, to whom the Father said, " Let us make man in our image." (Gen. i. 26.)
The truth contained in this sentence, is one of the deepest and most mysterious in the whole range of Christian theology. The nature of this union between the Father and the Son, we have no mental capacity to explain. Augustine draws illustra- tions from the sun and its rays, and from fire and the light of fire, which, though two distinct things, are yet inseparably united, so that where the one is the other is. But all illustra- tio.is on such subjects halt and fail. Hiire, at any rate, it is better to believe than to attempt to explain. Our Lord saya in the Father and the Father in me." "J