(John 1:1-18)

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word,

and the Word was with God,

and the Word was God.

John 1:12 But to all who did receive him,

he gave them the right to become children of God:

to those who believe in his name,

John 1:13 who were born, not of blood,

nor of the will of the flesh,

nor of the will of man,

but of God.

"... to those who believe in his name" (v. 12). Significant is that "in" rendered in Greek as "eis", a particle of motion to a place. It expresses a movement oriented towards, imprinting on belief the dynamic proper to life, understood as a journey in Christ and for Christ. Believing in his name, therefore, means not only accepting, but orienting and conforming one's life to Christ. Only under these conditions can one obtain the "power," that is, the ability, to become children of God. Faith, therefore, enables one to acquire the capacity for divine sonship, because believing is walking towards Christ, growing in him. Only under these conditions does the believer "become" a child of God, that is, pass from a human condition to a divine one. A 'becoming' that is an evolutionary and transformative process, 'from ... to', which commits the believer's life, understood as a continuous becoming, significantly expressed in the particle 'eis'.

Verse 13 explains where the generation of God's sons comes from. Divine sonship does not depend on man: a) 'not of blood'; b) 'nor of the will of the flesh'; c) 'nor of the will of man'. Flesh, blood and man are three terms that are only apparently synonymous with each other; in reality, they indicate three types of people.

The first expression 'not of blood' in Greek is rendered in the plural ('ouk ex haimátōn', not of bloods). For Jews, blood is the seat of life; indeed, it is sometimes identified with life itself. This blood is always referred to in the singular. However, if blood flows from the body due to a wound or female menstruation, it is referred to in the plural, i.e. 'bloods'. These two aspects, wound and menstruation, refer respectively to circumcision, through which the child was incorporated into the people of Israel and thereby made heir to the divine promise, and to the generative capacity of women. Neither of these two types of blood is capable of giving divine sonship. While the blood that flows from the wound of circumcision is understandable, that of female menstruation is less clear, so let us pause for a moment to make it easier to understand. The use of the plural form of blood in this context, referring to the generation of divine sonship, recalls the generative capacity of women, which in the Jewish world was considered the sure element of Jewishness. A true Jew was someone born of a Jewish mother. Therefore, to say that the true sons of God do not come 'from the blood' was to say that it is not the Jewish people who generate them, neither through their women nor, even less so, through circumcision. This expression, 'ouk ex haimátōn', therefore, refers to the Jewish people and excludes their ability to generate true divine sonship. The true sons of God are not generated by Moses or by the Law. The denial of these two types of blood in terms of their generative capacity for the divine assigns this capacity to another blood and another flesh, those of Jesus.

The second expression, 'nor from the will of the flesh', closely recalls the state of conjugality between man and woman. That 'will', far from indicating a lustful desire, indicates the planning ability of man and woman, their capacity to determine their own future according to their own plans and designs. Divine sonship, therefore, does not even depend on the will of the spouses, understood in their innate generative capacity, which makes them fruitful and similar to God, the generator of life.

The third expression, 'nor from the will of man', captures man in his capacity for self-determination. The term used here to refer to man is not 'ánthrōpos', which means man in a generic sense and has its Latin equivalent in 'homo', but 'anēr', which contains within itself the meaning of man par excellence and has its Latin parallel in 'vir'. Therefore, even from this human excellence, made in the image and likeness of God, true divine sonship will not come forth. Thus, with the human realm in its three different facets excluded, only the divine realm remains, introduced by an adversative "but": "but they were begotten by God".

True divine sonship has its origin and roots exclusively in God. No human merit can boast divine generative capacity. Through faith and acceptance of the Word, the transition from fleshly nature to divine nature is effected in man. It is in this transition that lies the surprising novelty of the Christian in the face of the non-Christian. 

 Argentino Quintavalle, author of the books 

- Apocalypse – exegetical commentary 

- The Apostle Paul and the Judaizers – Law or Gospel?

Jesus Christ, true God and true Man in the Trinitarian mystery

The prophetic discourse of Jesus (Matthew 24-25)

All generations will call me blessed

 Catholics and Protestants in comparison – In defence of the faith

 The Church and Israel according to St Paul – Romans 9-11

(Available on Amazon)