“and” stresses the transition of the Logos from his pre-existent state to human history. Whereas 1:1 shows the transcendence of the Word, 1:14 describes how he became immanent—the supernatural natural, and the invisible visible.7 It would have been easier for understanding the incarnation if John had simply written, “The Word was born as a man” (cf. Phil 2:7b). Why should John use two catching words, “became” and “flesh”?
Some in the early church might have believed that by becoming a man Christ put off his divine glory in heaven (cf. Phil 2:7a). As observed above, there were heretics in the late first century who questioned either Christ’s divinity or his humanity. The word “became” (egeneto) implies that by taking human form the pre-existent Word did not cease to be God, just as Jesus continued to be Jesus of Nazareth even after he became a prophet (Luke 24:19; cf. 3 John 8).8 It does not support a “naїve Docetism”9 that minimizes the reality of Jesus’ humanity. In the earthly life of Jesus, his oneness with the Father continued. Otherwise it would be impossible to see the Father’s glory on earth.
The word “flesh” goes beyond mere humanness and points to the frailty and vulnerability of human beings (Isa 40:6; John 6:63).10 This means that Jesus, by assuming human flesh, experienced the weakness and helplessness of human beings, enabling him to be compassionate toward helpless sinners (cf. Rom 8:3; 2 Cor 8:9; Heb 2:17–18). John’s word “flesh” thus displays not merely a polemic purpose, but it also gives the good news that the one God, who is inaccessible (1 Tim 6:16), came to live with the fallen humanity.
This thought is carried forward by the statement “and he dwelt among us” (literally “and he tabernacled in the midst of us”). The Logos becoming flesh and his dwelling among human beings go together, as the conjunction “and” shows. The Greek word eskēnōsen (“he tabernacled/dwelt”) echoes the dwelling of God among his people in the tabernacle (Exod 25:8–9; 29:45–46; Zech 2:10–11). Besides the wilderness motif, one can also see a Wisdom motif11: The Creator chose the people of Israel as the tent where Wisdom can dwell and minister before him (Sir 24:8, 10). What was applied to Wisdom is now applicable to the Logos, though with a conceptual difference. The eschatological motif in 1:14b becomes obvious in its allusion to the Lord’s dwelling in the midst of the people of Israel on the day when many nations will join themselves to be his people (Zech 2:10–11; cf. Rev 7:15; 21:3).12 In this eschatological framework, the phrase “among us” does not indicate only the people of Israel, but broadly all human beings. Thus, in the coming of the Logos in human flesh, the end-time has dawned.
However, the personal pronoun “we” in “we beheld his glory” (1:14c) points exclusively to those who, by faith, could see and experience God’s glory in the Logos incarnate. It need not be confined only to eyewitnesses or to the Johannine community. For unbelievers, however, the glory of God revealed in flesh remains hidden.13 “Seeing God’s glory” can be connected with the tabernacle and the temple, where one can see God’s presence or his glory (Exod 24:15–17; 25:8; 40:35; 1 Kgs 8:10, 11, 13). The temple is also the place where God put his name to dwell (1 Kgs 8:29; 9:3; 2 Chr 6:20). For John the name of God that dwelt in the tabernacle/temple and God’s glory that was seen by the Israelites are the same, and now they are revealed in Jesus, the incarnate Logos (cf. 17:11–12 with 17:22, 26).
Moses saw God’s glory in terms of his steadfast love and faithfulness (Exod 33:18–19; 34:6–7), which are equivalent to the twin words “grace and truth” (1:14). Jesus was bearing God’s glory even in Jesus’ pre-existent state (17:5, 24). It marks the oneness between them, on one hand, and the oneness between the believers, on the other (17:22). In this context, “glory” can mean the eternal relationship of love that exists between the Father and the Son (17:24b).14 In the light of Lazarus’ resurrection (11:4, 40), God’s glory may also indicate God’s saving power15 or God’s love expressed in his generosity to restore life.16 The glory seen in the Son was God’s splendor, manifested in his love and faithfulness to his covenant to give divine life. The idea of seeing God’s glory in flesh could be a polemic against the then-prevalent interest in mystical visions to see God in heaven in his kingly glory and in human form.17
The sharing of glory by the Father and the Son, a mark of oneness between them, is confirmed by the Greek word monogenēs (“only Son”), used four times in John (1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; cf. Wis 7:22 LXX). The word means “only one of its kind,” but when used in relation to the Father it means the “only Son.”18 After introducing the Logos as God and narrating that the glory revealed is that of the only Son from the Father, John would not have hesitated to call the “only Son” as the “only God” (cf. 1:18 in some manuscripts). In sharing with God oneness in life, glory, name, status, and function, there is no one who is equal to the status of Jesus as God’s Son and therefore Jesus is the only Son of God. From 1:14 onwards the pre-existent Logos is spoken in John in terms of the “Son of God.”
God’s steadfast love and faithfulness to his covenant, which constitute his glory, are termed as “his fullness” in 1:16.19 All those who believe through the witness of the Johannine community received “grace upon grace.” Literally, the phrase “grace upon grace” can be translated as “grace in the place of grace.” It does not mean that in place of the Mosaic Law the grace through Jesus was given, for John never opposes the Law in his Gospel. The Law that marks the old covenant was also a gift of God given to his people out of his grace. This means that the OT manifestation of God’s gracious love and favor has become accessible to all who believe in Christ, replacing the impossible observance of the OT Law by a personal and unique manifestation through his Son.20 Thus, “grace upon grace” implies God’s continuous supply of the same grace, expressed through the Law, from one degree to another by the gracious indwelling of Jesus.21 All human efforts to keep the Law in order to experience God are thereby made redundant.
The steadfast love and faithfulness of God, given in the OT Law in a shadowy way, have attained reality in the coming of the Logos-in-flesh, “Jesus Christ” (1:17). The phrase “given through Moses” implies the role of mediator played by Moses in giving the Law (cf. Gal 3:19b). The major aspect of God’s covenant with his people is God’s giving of the Law (Deut 5:1–21), which is the “Book of the Covenant” that was sealed by the offering of the “blood of the covenant” (Exod 24:7–8). The reference to the Law given through Moses (1:17), then, has an implicit reference to the covenant community. However, John looks beyond this old covenant community to a new covenant community that will be established in Jesus Christ, through whom came to humankind God’s “grace and truth.” These dual words allude to God’s mercy and initiative to forgive the sins of his people, who disobeyed his covenant, and to God’s faithfulness to put the Law within their hearts as the mark of making a new covenant (Exod 34:6–7; Jer 31:31–34; Ezek 36:22–32). By being in the “bosom of the Father,” Jesus alone knows God in the most intimate way and therefore he alone can reveal God to the world in his mercy and faithfulness (John 1:18; cf. 10:14–15; 14:10–11).
The whole Gospel, according to the prologue, evolves around one theme: the revelation of the one God in his glory and
