John 1:9 "enlightens every man"

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Benefactor, Aug 5, 2009.

  1. Benefactor

    Benefactor
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    0
    9. There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.

    Let break this verse down according to the Greek:

    h - eta and rough breathing
    w - omega

    Verse nine: hn to phws to alhthinon ho phwtizei panta anthrwton erxomenon eis ton kosmon.

    hn = it was
    to = the
    phws = light
    to = the
    alhthinon = true
    ho = which or who but in this case it is better translated which

    phwtizei = enlightens
    panta = every
    anthrwpon = man
    erxomenon = coming
    eis - into
    ton = the
    kosmon = world


    Those in the blue are in the nominative case and agree with each other

    Those in the red are in the accusative case and agree with each other

    The subject of this verse is in Blue and the predicate is in red.

    Every complete sentence contains two parts: a subject and a predicate. The subject is what (or whom) the sentence is about, while the predicate tells something about the subject. In this verse the blue is the subject and the red is the predicate and they agree according to the grammar as I have given it. Some translations do not honor the Greek or the English.

    Youn's Translation: 9. He was the true Light, which doth enlighten every man, coming to the world;

    DBR Translation: 9. The true light was that which, coming into the world, lightens every man.

    About half of the translation in the market translates it correctly.

    For anyone that is KJV only the wording I gave is in accordance with your tradition. In face there are not listed differences in textual traditions. You can check this out for yourself at the following website. When you look up a verse in this web site you will notice that in some cases where there is a comparison a Greek word will be in bold black and in the next listing of the same verse a different word in bold black too. This is where a difference occurs in manuscript tradition. In this particular case this verse does not have any differences in the different textual traditions so that climates any need to pit one translation against the other with respect to its tradition.

    What I have given you is rock solid from the Greek and the translations I give honor it almost word for word in English. Here is a word for word exactly as it is from Greek to English

    it was - the - light - the - ture - which - enlightens - every - man - coming - into - the - world.

    h t t p : / / w w w . greeknewtestament . com / index2 . h t m

    This verse without a doubt tells us that the Light of Jesus enlightens every man coming into the world. We are not talking about natural revelation but a supernatural enlightenment.

    Let me make this clear to all who read. This verse does not teach universalism or universal salvation. What it does say is that every man coming into the world is enlightened by Christ himself, the true light.


    This verse is not just a declaration of universal atonement which is a fact in Scripture. There too, universal atonement is a conditional offer for all mankind to believe and be saved not a statement promoting universalism where all are saved. Atonement is conditional whereby the person must believe for it to be effective, but it is universally available.

    The Sovereignty of God is
    The Love of God is
    The Salvation of God is

    Universal salvation is a lie
    Universal damnation is a lie
    Select election is a lie
    Free choice is God's plan not man’s and is the truth.
     
    #1 Benefactor, Aug 5, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 5, 2009
  2. Lux et veritas

    Lux et veritas
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe, just maybe by reading a couple of commentaries (e.g. Matthew Henry a good start), you would understand what John 1:9 means. It sure is evident that you don't at the moment.
     
  3. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Matthew Henry does a poor job on this, becuase he states that Jesus does in fact enlighten all men via reason (giving it to all men) 'AS WELL AS stating - (
    Then flips-flops around and states the exact opposite of what he gives prior:
    Kinda odd that God is enlightening those whom Christ has enlightened, huh?

    And then like a fish flops back again trying to reconcile the two by stating following and still he can not force the passage to conform to his theological position:
    The passage can speak to a physical light (reasoning) but it is specifically refering to a spiritual enlightenment and that, to all mankind. And like Mr. Henry aludes to, like the sun which enlightens every man that will open his eyes, and receive its light.
     
    #3 Allan, Aug 5, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 5, 2009
  4. Benefactor

    Benefactor
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    0
    What does Matthew Henry say?

    Here I found it (checking the rules on quotes be right back
     
    #4 Benefactor, Aug 5, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 5, 2009
  5. JDale

    JDale
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    0
    This passage does teach a "spiritual enlightenment," though it does not specify the extent to which each human is "enlightened." It is certain that this "enlightenment" is NOT referring to universal salvation, which shoots down Calvinism's insistence of this being "effectual calling." Instead, this is a reference to "prevenient grace," which is the calling of ALL men to God, enabling them to respond to the "light," but in no way forcing such response.
     
  6. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello Ben,

    Before I make a reply, and this reply may not come till tomorrow, I want to post this one short note telling you ben that this is more like the post we would like to see from you. Your other threads started out like a jurk that was going to teach the world a few things. This OP is much better.

    Thanks...:applause::applause::applause:
     
  7. Darrenss1

    Darrenss1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is a case where you will have to do the footwork to show why you think Ben doesn't know what he is talking about. As Allen pointed out, even Matthew Henry stumbled over his explanation of John 1:9. It would be interesting to read your reply to Ben's OP given that Ben has raised a very solid point.

    Darren
     
  8. Darrenss1

    Darrenss1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    0
    Seems to me to also challenge Total Depravity, in that since Jesus and the gospel is preached, that it comes up all mankind. That carries the benefit of being enabled to believe the gospel (Christ) or reject the gospel (Christ) by mankind's will in response to the gospel because of THAT light they have been given.

    Darren
     
  9. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    ok I'll go ahead and say it. :)

    John 1: 9 is talking about the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and not the coming of the light into the lives of all men.

    The word "coming" is ambiguous. Origen in the 2nd century even noticed this.

    On one hand the word coming could refer to the phrase "every man". This is how the KJV translators saw it. Phillips sees it this way too...

    ""that was the true light that shines upon every man as he comes into the world."

    This is a key verse for Quakers which believed in natural revelation. I think its even called "the Quakers' text"

    There are a bunch of things wrong with this view which I'll not get into right now. But there is another way to read it which is true to the greek. Coming refers not to "every man" but to the light. Its the incarnation of Christ. This is seen in the New English, the NIV and the Revised as seen below.

    The true light,...... that enlightens every man was,,,,,,,,,,,, coming into the world.
     
    #9 Jarthur001, Aug 5, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 5, 2009
  10. Darrenss1

    Darrenss1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    0
    John 1:7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
    1:8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
    1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

    Darren
     
  11. Benefactor

    Benefactor
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    0
    I noticed that in the different translations, however, the fact that the first part of the statement is true to the Greek (and there are not variations) in that it uses the nominative case, the subject of the statement and that the latter is the predicate and uses the accusative. While it is suggested that the word coming "erxomenon" I think it was said ambiguous is hard to swallow. I think the language is solid.

    Someone previously ask me about Matthew Henry and here is a quote form a website that as far as I can tell is not copyrighted


    h t t p : / / w w w . apostolic - churches . net / bible / mhc / MHC43001 . HTM August 5, 2009

    Henry goes on to explain away what is said. What purpose is such a statement for lost man already have creation and natural blessings, this light is already there as testified by what Paul states:

    Romans 1: 19. Because what is known of God is manifest among them, for God has manifested it to them, 20. -- for from the world's creation the invisible things of him are perceived, being apprehended by the mind through the things that are made, both his eternal power and divinity, -- so as to render them inexcusable. 21. Because, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but fell into folly in their thoughts, and their heart without understanding was darkened: 22. professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23. and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of an image of corruptible man and of birds and quadrupeds and reptiles. 24. Wherefore God gave them up also in the lusts of their hearts to uncleanness, to dishonour their bodies between themselves: 25. who changed the truth of God into falsehood, and honoured and served the creature more than him who had created it, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

    MH's commentary tries to press Paul's statement here in R1:19 to be the meaning of J1:9. They are two different revelations. Natural revelation has clearly been present form the creation, see green above.
     
    #11 Benefactor, Aug 5, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 5, 2009
  12. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello Ben,

    1st let me say I don't have a problem with what MH said. I think it was Allan that didn't like it. Maybe he can tell us why.

    2nd..believe it or not, we are going to be close in agreement on this passage. John is well known for his double entendres and this very well could be the case here. Henry seems to think so. I think that maybe is what Allan over looked, but maybe not.

    3rd..This is where we will disagree if anywhere. I will go with MH view as he adds...."John Baptist was a light, but he enlightened only Jerusalem and Judea, and the region round about Jordan, like a candle that enlightens one room; but Christ is the true light, for he is a light to enlighten the Gentiles. His everlasting gospel is to be preached to every nation and language, Rev. xiv. 6."....which I feel is the meaning of "every man"

    MH is public domain.


    I don't see him forcing it, but rather bringing out the double entendres. I'll admit he does not make a clear break between the two.
     
    #12 Jarthur001, Aug 5, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 5, 2009
  13. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    Was this atonement available to the untold millions of people of have lived and died without ever hearing the gospel of Jesus Christ?

    If the atonement is only available to those who believe.... how can it be universally available when there have been so many that have never had a chance to hear the gospel?

    peace to you:praying:
     
  14. Benefactor

    Benefactor
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Darren let me build on this:

    The word coming is a present participle verb and is used in the Restrictive Use. The noun it qualifies is "the world" and it is narrow and restrictive in its qualifying of that world, simply meaning that it cannot mean other than what it says. There are no allowances in its grammatical use, everything is in the right place and agrees in number (singular), case (accusative) and gender (masculine). There isn't any wiggle room for a variance in interpretation, if we simply let it speak for itself.

    Another such use is found in John 6:50 according to DM page 225. The English reading he cites is “This is the bread which cometh down form heaven”

    Cometh is the participle. The position of the participle in this statement follow the words it modifies in the Greek text, but the number, case and gender identify this for us and that is why it is stated in the way we would normally read it. If you were to read it literally it would read, “the bread the one out of the heaven coming down” Here coming is used as it is in j1:9 in the restrictive sense. Restrictive meaning there is no occasion to misunderstand what is being said and meant, no variance of meaning or shades of interpretation, it means what it says.
     
    #14 Benefactor, Aug 5, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 5, 2009
  15. Me4Him

    Me4Him
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joh 1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

    Isa 9:2 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.

    Joh 12:46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.

    Joh 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

    Ac 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

    Joh 12:35 Then Jesus said unto them, Yet a little while is the light with you. Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you: for he that walketh in darkness knoweth not whither he goeth.

    36 While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light.

    Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.


    20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

    21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light,

    Ge 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat,

    1Jo 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

    Lu 11:34 The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light;..... but...when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.

    Lu 11:35 Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness.

    Mt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
     
  16. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is my concern as well. In other threads over time, some have taken the position that the Bible speaks of Jesus being the light to every man, so someway, somehow, every person in the world knows about Jesus. They cannot explain how that was done, so it is a matter of faith for them.

    Such knowledge goes beyond Paul's assertion that all creation is a witness to the existence of God (in Romans 1). So there are some questions that still remain:

    If every one has heard about Jesus, how did they hear it? Was it simply a supernatural revelation, a vision, or what?

    If, in fact, every person without exception knows about Jesus, what is it that they know? Do they know about their own sinfulness and its consequences? Do they know about the cross? Do they know the gospel appeal to repentance and faith?

    And further, how does all this square with Paul's question in Romans 10, "how shall they hear without a preacher?"

    Still further, if a human being receives all the gospel he needs for salvation by supernatural revelation, shall we not call all our missionaries home? Shall we tell the street preachers it's not necessary?

    I wish it were provably true that every person without exception knows enough about Jesus for salvation; unfortunately, I don't see it.
     
  17. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is every text of Scripture about Calvinism vs non-Calvinism?
     
  18. Benefactor

    Benefactor
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    0
    The window we look through does color the view. The answer is yes for me and for you if you are honest. Once you have established your foundation everything else is flavored by it.
     
  19. Lux et veritas

    Lux et veritas
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ben outright lied in his previous thread in a statement of what Calvinists believe (regarding the teaching of the Canons of Dort). Until he is willing to acknowledge his error, to reply to him is unscriptural. He exhibits a contentious heart coupled with an unteachable spirit.

    And by the way, I recommended reading several commentaries, not just Matthew Henry. I don't think MH stumbled at all in his explanation.
     
  20. Lux et veritas

    Lux et veritas
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is for Ben or anyone else who thinks they are wiser than their forefathers who taught these truths and martyrs who died for them.
     

Share This Page

Loading...