Why Christmas Matters

I want to invite you to take out your Bibles and turn with me to John chapter 1 and hold your place at verse 1. It is fortuitous in the providence of God that we find ourselves at this text this morning as we look forward to this Wednesday again celebrating the traditional day of or observing the traditional day of the celebration of the incarnation.

And every year this time is marked by the familiar. We often spend time with the same people, retelling the same stories, singing the same songs, eating the same food, watching the same movies, and doing the same activities as we have every other year.

Radio stations begin around Thanksgiving time playing 24 hours of Christmas music and any time you want you can turn on a certain radio station and be bombarded with not necessarily great Christmas music but at least something to do with the season.

Certain television stations will play the same Christmas movie for 24 hours straight and you can turn it on at any point and see the Red Rider BB gun story or those movies which are very common and very familiar and they are a part of the tradition of the season.

And I think that part of the reason why we are so given to the familiar is because it is in the familiar that we often find comfort. We find comfort in consistency. We find comfort in tradition. And there's really nothing wrong with that.

There's something ingrained in us where we are comforted by things that we know and when something happens that we are not familiar with or something that is inconsistent it strikes us. It's odd to us.

We don't seem to enjoy it as much when things are not as consistent and I was thinking this week just about how things have changed as I've gotten older and sometimes you long for those familiar times, those traditions of the past.

Well the reason why I'm talking this morning about the subject of tradition and consistency is because in keeping with the idea of consistency I want to say that this morning's message will probably contain very little that will be new to you.

In fact, if you are a person who has been a part of this church for any length of time, year, two years, three years, these will all be things you have probably heard me say or one of our other elders or teachers in this church say before.

Because we're going to be talking this morning about the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ and about the incarnation of God. And these are subjects, again, which we have talked about on many occasions.

I've written a book on the Trinity, our academy classes teach on the doctrine and theology of God on many occasions have talked about the Trinity. I just finished a course on the early church, eight weeks, where we looked at the first four centuries of the church and how the church was debating and developing the doctrines which related to the divinity of Christ.

And I've given sermons on this very passage several times in the past. In fact, I've walked through every word of our passage today in previous sermons. So again, we are today engaging in the familiar.

But what we mustn't do is we mustn't allow the familiar to cause us to lose our sense of awe and wonder of what it is we're studying. Like the communion table, which we choose to participate in every Lord's Day, it is possible that that can become common and it is possible that it can lose its sense of.

Awe.

But only if we allow it to do so. Only if we allow familiarity to produce a sense of lackadaisicalness or familiarity to cause us to lose our sense of wonder will that happen. So my encouragement to you this morning is as we engage in these sublime truths which we have heard over and over and over again, let us be moved in our hearts and in our minds toward a fresh awe, a fresh understanding, a, as it were, hearing for the first time.

Because what we are going to read in today's text is nothing less than astounding. No matter how many times we read it, no matter how many times we study it, no matter how often we look at this text, it goes far beyond what the mind can comprehend.

It dives into the wondrous mystery of the incarnation and the nature of our triune God. It leaves us, if we allow it, a sense of weightiness to which no other subject can even come close. And I'm not saying all this to build up something that just needs to be built up.

This text by itself is already built up. I'm just reminding us, let us not allow the familiar to become the mundane, but let us enter in again to our study of this text with the awe and reverence due to this text.

And with that being said, let's stand and read. And we're going to read verses 1 to 3, and then we are going to jump down to verse 14. And so John begins the gospel that he wrote with these words. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. And now we find our place at verse 14. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

And we have seen his glory, glorious of the only begotten Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. Father in heaven, hallowed be thy name, as we come to you, we come to you in and through and for the sake of the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Father, as I seek to give an understanding of this passage, as I seek to proclaim the wondrous mysteries of the incarnation of the Son of God, I pray right now, Lord, in this hour, that you would keep me from error.

For, O Lord, I am a fallible man. I am capable of false teaching. And for the sake of your name, for the sake of my conscience, for the sake of your people, Lord, protect me from false teaching. I pray that you would open up the eyes, ears, and hearts of everyone listening to this sermon.

To the believer, Lord, I pray that this would be a review of something that is already known, but a freshness of awe regarding what is known. But, Lord, for the one who does not know these truths and has maybe struggled with these truths, I pray, Lord, that today we would pinpoint the areas that need to be focused upon and that we would find this truth to be an everlasting and sublime reality.

And for the unbelievers, Lord, whether they be young or old, whether they be man or woman, child, Lord, I pray that they would see who the Lord Jesus Christ is and that they would come to love him, that they would come to trust him, that they would repent of their sin of unbelief and that they would trust in Christ today.

We pray this in Jesus' name.

Amen.

Last week, we began our new study. As in our pulpit ministry, it is common and is our common practice to preach through books of the Bible. Having just finished the book of 2 Corinthians, we are now making our way into the gospel of John.

And so, as is my tradition, as is my custom, last week, the first week that we look at a new book, we give an overview of the book and a context regarding the author, the purpose, and the theological insights that are contained in the book.

So, if you were not here last week and you have not yet listened to the message, it would be a good thing for you to go back and listen to that so that you are caught up to speed on what this book is about, who wrote it, and the purpose for which it was written.

And as we noted last week, the book of John, the gospel of John, can be divided, subdivided into two main parts. The first part, chapters 1 through 12, give us the ministry, the public ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ.

It is subdivided into seven specific miracles that John outlines throughout that first half of the book, and it culminates in the triumphal entry there in chapter 12. Then, beginning at chapter 13 and moving to chapter 17, John gives us the private exhortation of Christ to his apostles in the upper room, what we call the upper room discourse.

And then it culminates in this final moments of Jesus Christ being taken by force, led to the cross, nailed to the cross, where he gives up the ghost and provides an atonement for sin. Then he is buried, and three days later, rises from the grave.

And so, John's gospel, in many ways, mirrors the other gospels, and yet, in other ways, is completely different than the other gospels. It mirrors the gospels in that there is no substantial change to the story of Christ.

There is no inconsistency, or there is no contradiction between John's account and the other accounts, but yet, there is a much different focus in John's account. The other three gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, we call the synoptic gospels because their stories are very similar to one another.

Synoptic means to view together, and so we look at those gospels, and we see a lot of the same stories told the same way and in essentially the same order. But when we get to John's gospel, we see different stories.

About 90 of John's gospel is unique to John, and so many of the stories that we become accustomed to in the other gospels are not found in John. We read of John the Baptist, but not of Jesus' baptism.

We read of Jesus' miracles, but we read not of his parables. We read of the upper room, but not of the institution of the table. All of these things are interesting when we follow John's gospel because we know John is focused upon the divinity of Christ, but there is no mention of the transfiguration.

So it's interesting to find in John's gospel things that we become accustomed to in the other gospels and yet missing in this gospel. Not missing in the sense that they're somehow lost to time, but John chooses to focus on other areas of Christ's being, nature, and life.

And the main focus is given to us in what's known as John's prologue. John's gospel has a prologue and an epilogue, meaning a part that comes before to set the stage, an overture for the book, and then it concludes with an epilogue, which is to draw everything to a conclusion and to tell us the purpose.

And the purpose, of course, we read last week was that you may believe that Jesus is the Son of Christ, the Son of God, and by believing, you may have life in his name. And so over the next few weeks, it's going to be my job to unpack this tremendous epilogue, these first 18 verses of John's gospel, and to show that it is, in fact, the on-ramp or the overture to the entire letter.

And what's amazing about this prologue, these first 18 verses, is that they are intended in many ways to provide us a view of the relationship between Jesus and all other things. In fact, if you were to simply outline the first 18 verses, you'll find it's one after the next, after the next, after the next of relationships.

His relationship to time, he was in the beginning. His relationship to divinity, he was with God and he was God. His relationship to creation, all things were made through him and nothing that was made was not made by him.

His relationship to man, he is coming to the world and the world does not know him. His relationship to John, John is his forerunner who comes before him. His relationship to Israel, he came unto his own and his own did not receive him.

His relationship to the flesh, the word became flesh. His relationship to Moses, the law came through Moses and grace and truth came through Jesus. And his relationship to his purpose, he has come to give an exegesis of the father.

He has come to make him known. This is the prologue of John. It's about how this person who John identifies as the word relates to all of the other things both in heaven and on earth. This outline, this prologue is all about this word.

And so we begin, before we dive into the weeks ahead, we begin with what can only be described as the prologue of the prologue. The on-ramp to the on-ramp and that is verse 1. And we will unpack these tremendous truths and limit ourselves as much as we can only to these first three verses in verse 14.

And I will admit I'm not going to completely exegete verse 14 today, but only simply show how verse 14 brings together verses 1 to 3 into a culmination of what happens in time versus what happens outside of time.

And this is one of those times where, as it were, I truly wish I were teaching a class. Because when I preach and there is a distinction. Preaching is teaching and oftentimes teaching involves preaching.

If you've ever watched Mike teach Sunday school, it dives into preaching. So it's there, but there is some distinction. And you know me, I am most happy when I'm in front of a board as I can then pull out the marker and draw connections and things.

I won't be doing that this morning. And for some reason I've lost my connection even to my iPad, so I won't even be able to put up my screens. But you can do that for me, can't you, if I ask you for a screen?

Thank you. Well, I'll tell you when. Actually, that one's fine.

You did good.

We'll do that.

Because we're going to walk through John 1 .1. The lion's share of our time today is going to be spent in John 1 .1. John 1 .1 is made up of three parts. And therefore, when studying or teaching through this first verse of John's gospel, it is often described as the three clauses.

And if you outline it, it's Clause 1, Clause 2, Clause 3, or John 1 .1 .A, John 1 .1 .B, and John 1 .1 .C. And the outline is as follows. In the beginning was the Word. That's John 1 .1 .A. That's the first clause.

And Clause B, And the Word was with God. That's Clause B. And then the final clause, 1 .1 .C, And the Word was God. And every single word of this passage deserves careful consideration. In fact, of all the verses of the Bible, save possibly John 3 .16, this is one of those passages where literally when we study it, you can stop at every single word and talk about its significance.

Every preposition, every noun, every verb, all of these things culminate in this sublime and powerful awesome truth. And so that is my intention today is to look at every word of John 1 .1 and to hopefully show why John has constructed it the way that he has, what truths he is intending to convey, and how important these truths are to the Christian faith.

The first word that I want us to consider in this study is not the first word in the sentence because it is sometimes important before you begin looking at the sentence one word at a time to look at the word that is in the place of prominence in this passage.

And the word that is in the place of prominence in this passage is the word word. The word word, and that just sounds funny. So this, I'm going to use logos just because it'll help me when I'm saying the word logos.

This is the Greek word for our word, and we use it all the time in English. It makes its way into English in words like logic. That comes from logos. It makes its way into all of the words that we use for studying things.

When we talk about biology, that's the study, logos, of life, bios. Anthropology, that's the study of man, anthropos. And we can go through all of our ologies. Geology, study of the earth or the ground, right?

All of those things are with a root and then a suffix, and the suffix is taken from this word logos. But when we get to this word, and we see it's used three times here. In the beginning was the word, that's the first time.

And the word was with God, that's the second time. And the word was God, that's the third time. In these three clauses, they each center and focus upon the word giving us a different aspect of this word, this logos.

We have to step back and ask ourselves, why is it that John chooses to use logos in the opening passage of his text rather than simply using Jesus? Because, I don't know if any of you are going to disagree, but the logos is Jesus.

Because in verse 14, it says, the word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. That's obviously referring to the Lord Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, the only begotten Son of God.

That's the word.

We know who he is by the definition, and we know that it's referring to he, because verse 2 specifically says, he was in the beginning. So it goes from the somewhat nebulous word to the personal he, immediately in verse 2.

So why would John use logos, and he does, why would John use logos to refer to Jesus in this gospel and even in his epistles? Why would he use logos? Well, if you know anything about commentaries, you'll know that commentary writers love to speculate.

And there's probably not a subject that has been more speculated upon than the reason why John chooses logos to define Jesus. I think it's fair to say that much ink has been spilled, and probably even more than is necessary, over why John chooses logos for Jesus.

I want to give you two thoughts for the use of logos for Christ. And I want you to consider these from the two audiences which would have received John's letter. John writes to an audience of both Hebrew and Hellenistic populations.

And the Hebrew population would have certainly understood the word of God in the context of the Old Testament scriptures. What do we understand about the word of God from the Old Testament scriptures?

The word of God is associated with God's action in the world. It's associated with his creation. It's associated with his revelation. It's associated with his redemption. It's associated with his wisdom.

Psalm 33 .6 says, By the word of the Lord the heavens were made. Go back in your mind with me to Genesis. What does Genesis say God did to create the world? Did he mold with his hands? No, he spoke with his word.

We call that the divine fiat. And fiat is not a car.

Well, it was.

But the word fiat means the proclamation or decree.

The word.

The spoken word. God says, let there be and there was. And so Lagos in the mind of the Hebrew who has the Hebrew scriptures, who has read the Hebrew scriptures, would hear the term word. And as it applies to God would understand this is the revelation and the creative power and the exposure of God's self.

He is the word. His word is him. He speaks and it is. It's related to his redemption. Psalm 107, verse 20. He sent his word and healed them and delivered them from their destructions. It's related to his revelation.

What are the prophets often proceed their prophecies with? Thus sayeth the word, the Lord, the word of the Lord to these people, the word of the Lord to that people. So within the Hebrew culture, there's an understanding of this idea of the word of God.

And what John is doing is he's personalizing this word. He's identifying this word as person. And as I mentioned, there is also the Hellenistic culture. Hellenistic simply meaning the Greek culture. And within the Greek culture, there was somewhat of a different understanding of the logos.

The logos in Greek culture was associated with the rational principle that gives order and structure to the universe. Again, this comes back to the way we use the word logos in the word logic. When we say something is logical, what do we mean?

It's rational.

When we say something is logical, we're saying it fits the mold of purpose and right. If we say something's illogical, we're saying it's not right, it doesn't make sense, it's contradictory. 600 years before Jesus, a man by the name of Heraclitus identified the logos in Greek philosophy as that which underlied rational order and it was a force that gave the universe its structure.

It was the rational principle that ordered all things. So when the Hellenistic mind, the Greek mind, hears the word logos, it looks at the world around it and it says, yes, we know the logos. The logos is the reason why all things are orderly.

It's the reason why all things are rational. In fact, I would point this out to you. One of the greatest arguments for God's existence is that we live in a universe of order and not chaos. We live in a universe that has rules.

We call them laws and these laws are immutable. Today, water will freeze at the same temperature that it will freeze at tomorrow. It will boil at the same temperature that it boils at tomorrow. Certain things are consistent throughout the universe and they're consistent for the purpose of giving us a universe that can be not only lived in and enjoyed, but also understood and predicted.

God's word in Romans chapter 1 says it is that very order that tells us that God exists. It says that the man who can look at the world and can see the world with its order and structure and all of its consistency and say there is no God has suppressed the truth in unrighteousness.

Isn't that what it says?

Doesn't it say that when we look at the world, we can know God exists because of the things that have been made. Because there is logic and order in the universe. And the Greeks saw this law, this order, this logic as a force.

But John says it's not a force. It's not some nebulous idea. It's not like the Star Wars fiction which says all things are run from the force. Where there's a positive force, the good light of the force and the negative, the dark of the force.

It's not as if that's the way the universe runs. And by the way, that's based on Eastern mysticism. Because they believe in a positive and a negative type of force that governs the universe. They call it chi.

They say there's the positive chi and the negative chi. And the goal is not for the positive to outweigh the negative, but to balance the two. To find a balance between the positive and the negative. And this is why when you go to the person who puts the needles in your flesh.

And they're sticking those needles in your flesh. They're saying what they're doing is they're trying to balance out this cosmic energy which exists inside of you. Beloved, John is speaking of the logos to his hearers.

And he's saying the logos is not a force. The logos, the logical, rational, structural thing that brings all things together is not a thing. He is a person. That which gives order to the universe is not a nebulous force.

He is a personal God. And so as John uses this word logos. He is appealing both to those who know the word of the God who exists. And those who simply know of this word that is supposed to bring the rational out of the chaotic.

And he's saying all of this is in this person who we call the word. But what do we know about this person? What do we know about this word? Three things in this passage that we know. One, we know that he is preexistent.

We see that in the first part of this verse. The first clause. In the beginning was the word. Now as I said, every single word of this verse has meaning that is important. The preposition in, which in Greek is easy because it's the same.

In.

It's spelled different. Epsilon nu instead of in. But it's still said the same, means the same. And what's interesting is the original Greek does not say in the beginning. But rather it simply says in RK.

RK is the word for beginning. But there's no definite article attached to the word beginning. We include the definite article in the English because it makes sense for us. It would sound very odd if we simply said in beginning.

If we simply said in beginning, that would be an odd way for us to translate this word. And yet in the Greek, that's essentially what it says. And by doing that, by going immediately to RK from the preposition in.

In RK from the preposition to the point of the focus of the preposition, which is RK. He's saying in beginning and you say what beginning? What beginning is in view? Well, beloved, there are a lot of beginnings.

We could say the beginning of your life. That was a beginning. We could say the beginning of this church service. That was a beginning. We could say the beginning of the year coming next week. We're going to celebrate the beginning of a new year.

Throughout the Bible, we see the word beginning all through. This is the beginning of this. This is the beginning of that. This is the beginning of the other. But when the word in RK is used in this way, without a qualifier, without the article, but rather simply in beginning, it is identifying the beginning that needs no explanation.

It is identifying the beginning of all things. Where do we find that phrase? Genesis 1 .1. And what's interesting about that, and I hope you don't think this is, I hope you're with me on this. I hope you don't find this boring.

This to me is some of the most exciting parts of the Bible. It's somewhat scholastic, but it's still important to us because it drives our understanding of who this is. It says in the beginning, in the Greek, in RK, in the Hebrew, Bereshith.

But here's the interesting. Bereshith is translated into Greek by the Septuagint. Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. Translated 200 years before Jesus. How does the translators of the Septuagint translate Bereshith?

In RK. So the way that the whole Bible begins, in RK, in the beginning, God created. John takes that same prepositional phrase, in RK, in the beginning, what's the word? He uses the phrase was.

Remember how I said every word?

Every single word of this verse is important. Because when we get to the word was, we find ourselves with a use of a verb that is very important. Because the word was is what we call a be verb. If you don't remember this from school, a be verb is a verb that is intended to describe being.

I are, I was, I is.

Those are all be, I be. I be, I was, I were, I is.

All of these are, it's all forms of that idea of being. In the Greek, the word is amy. Jesus will use a phrase throughout the gospel. He'll say I am. That's present tense use of the verb. I am the way.

I am the truth. I am the life. But this form, in the imperfect tense, describes continuing action in the past. Reinforcing the idea that the word did not come into being in the beginning. But rather that the word already was in the beginning.

That's the key. It isn't saying in the beginning the word was made. In fact, there is a word for that. The word genomai means to become. And that's the word when it says the word became flesh.

Genomai.

Because that was an action that took place in time. The word has not always been flesh. But the word became flesh and dwelt among us. But in the beginning, the word did not become. In the beginning, the word already was.

This is speaking of his preexistence and eternality. In the beginning, the word already was. You understand there are those who argue that Jesus Christ, the word of God, was the first creation of God.

In fact, next week, I'm going to reinforce this message by teaching a lesson. It's a historical lesson. So I hope you come back. But I'm going to give a history lesson on what the major false teachings of Christ were in the first four centuries of the church.

From Docetism to Arianism to Modalism all the way down to the Monophysite heresy. All of those things were different ways that Christ's nature has been misunderstood and corrected by the church. Those are important.

And one of the errors, which is still held to in groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses, is that Jesus Christ has not always existed. The word has not always existed. But that he came into being in the beginning.

That God creates Jesus and then he uses Jesus to create everything else. If you read the Jehovah Witness translation of the Bible, the New World Translation, they say that. They say he created all other things.

Because he himself was created. They'll say he was created by the Father and then he was used by the Father to create all other things. John 1 .1 does not support that assertion. John 1 .1, on the other hand, supports that in the beginning, the word already was.

Y 'all, I'm not even through the first clause.

I just looked at the clock.

I like this verse. Maybe I just have to finish tonight. I had planned on doing verses 4 and 5 tonight. Maybe not. John 1 .1, in the beginning, the word already was. In the beginning was the word. The second clause of John 1 .1.

And the word was with God. And the word was with God. That phrase becomes for us something that must be considered beyond our comprehension. But yet something that we are to believe because the Bible says it.

Because what that second clause of John 1 .1 does, and the word was with God, what the second clause does is it distinguishes the word, the logos, from the theos, God. It distinguishes the word from God.

And yet in the third clause, it's going to say, and the word was God. Contradiction. And some could even consider it a contradiction if John didn't put them in the very same verse. Because one would seem to be opposed to the other.

How can someone be with someone and yet still be that one? I am convinced that the reason why false religions and cults exist regarding the nature of Jesus is because they try to fit their understanding of the nature of Christ into a mold which to them fits their understanding.

And this is beyond our understanding. This is, as we must hold, a sublime truth that is mysterious and yet still true. That is not to say we can't understand what it's saying. But it is to say that we cannot fully comprehend all that it is saying because to take all of the truth of who God is and put it into our feeble minds would be like taking the entire Atlantic Ocean and putting it inside of a Lowe's bucket.

It just doesn't fit. Now that does not mean that we should not search out the truths that God has provided for us. That doesn't mean we should abandon all things to the box of mystery and just say we have no idea.

No, we can know what it is saying and what it's not saying but we cannot fully embrace everything in our mind because our minds become overwhelmed by the solemnity of the truth. So when it says the Word was with God, it is denoting the relationship between the Word and the divine.

The Word and God. And it is expressing an idea of both presence and fellowship. So for a moment, I want you to consider this. When I say someone is with someone else, that doesn't always denote fellowship.

For instance, if I go to an office building and I step on an elevator, it can be rightly said that if there's another person in that elevator, I am with that person in the elevator. But if I am not in fellowship with that person, if I don't even know who that person is, though I am with them presence, I am not with them in fellowship.

And so when this word with is used, it is used along with a definite article which leads to the word theos or theon in this sense. It says he is pros ton theon, which means that he is with in the idea not only of presence but also relationship with God.

Very similarly, when we read in the Bible, we read about men like Enoch. What did Enoch do? He walked with God. It expresses relationship. So what it's saying about the word, it's saying in the first clause, it is saying this word is preexistent, but it is also telling us that this word is in relationship with God.

Now it's important at this point to define who this God is. When John uses the word theos or the theon is simply another construction of the same word. When John uses theos, he's speaking of the God of Israel.

He is speaking of the one true and living God. There are no other gods. There are not micro gods and many gods. We do not believe in a polytheistic God. We believe in one God. And the logos is in relationship with this one God.

The logos is in fellowship with this one God. He is face to face with this one God. Pros ton theon, toward God or face to face with God. This speaks of the distinction of the word and God, but not separation, just distinction.

Now why would I stress that? Because in a moment it's going to say the word was God. This is why I believe and I am convinced in my heart that understanding the doctrine of the Trinity is absolutely essential to understanding what John is referring to.

Because only through the doctrine of the Trinity do we arrive at the conclusion that God is one in his essence, but three in his person. And these three persons co-equal, co-eternal and distinct are able to share the being of God absolutely perfectly and be in fellowship with one another distinct from one another and yet not divided from one another.

This is what the Trinity teaches. There is one God. There are three persons who are called God. These three persons are co-equal, co-eternal, distinct. The word is with God because he's distinct. The third clause, the word was God.

Boy, how I wish I had a board. Because if there's ever been a verse that has been manhandled, misused and mistreated, it's the last phrase of John 1 .1, John 1 .1c. One of the ways that it is mishandled and misused is by those who say the word was a God.

Let me tell you what you can do with that. You can call it what it is, baloney. The word was a God. F .F. Bruce, great commentator of scripture, said there's nothing proven by writing a God other than your lack of understanding of Greek grammar.

Actually, what he said was they prove nothing by adding the indefinite article other than their ignorance of Greek grammar. And as I said, as I love to talk about grammar and talk about how words work together, this final phrase, kaitheos en halagos, is an interesting phrase all by itself.

It's a word that has two words in what are called the subject form or what's called the nominative case. Nominative in Greek is subject. In English, when we talk about the subject and the predicate, we usually define subject and predicate by word order.

If I say the boy threw the ball, what's the subject?