The Doukhobors read this passage thus: "And without Him nothing was made"; then, putting a punctuation mark here, they read as if from a different beginning: "that which was made, in Him was life," and interpret this passage according to their own thought, saying that here the Evangelist speaks of the Spirit, that is, that the Holy Spirit was life. Thus say the Macedonians, trying to prove that the Holy Spirit was created, and to number Him among the creatures. And we are not so, but, putting a punctuation mark after the words "that was made," we read from a different beginning: "In Him was life." Having said of creation that all things came into being by the Word, the Evangelist goes on to say of providence, that the Word not only created, but also preserves the life of the created. For in Him was life.

I know of the following reading of this passage in one of the saints: "And without Him was not anything made that was made in Him." Then, putting a punctuation mark here, he began further: "there was life." I think that this reading does not contain an error, but contains the same correct idea. For this saint also correctly understood that without the Word nothing came into being that did not come into being in Him, since everything that came into being and was created was created by the Word Himself, and, consequently, without Him did not exist. Then he began again: "There was life, and life was the light of men." The Evangelist calls the Lord "life" both because He sustains the life of all things, and because He gives spiritual life to all rational beings, and "light," not so much sensual as intellectual, enlightening the soul itself. He did not say that He was the light of the Jews alone, but of all "men." For we are all men, inasmuch as we have received understanding and understanding from the Word Who created us, and therefore we are called enlightened by Him. For the reason given to us, by which we are called rational, is the light that guides us in what we should and should not do.

And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not enveloped it.

"Light," that is, the Word of God, shines "in darkness," that is, in death and error. For He, having submitted to death, so overcame it that He compelled it to vomit even those whom it had previously devoured. And in pagan error the preaching shines. "And darkness did not overtake Him." Neither death overcame Him, nor error. For this light, that is, the Word of God, is insurmountable. Some considered the flesh and earthly life to be "darkness." The Word shone even then, as it became in the flesh and was in this life, but darkness, that is, the opposite force, tempted and pursued the Light, but found Him invincible and invincible. The flesh is called darkness not because it is so by nature (let it not be!), but because of sin. For the flesh, as long as it is governed by the law of nature, has absolutely no evil, but when it moves beyond the limits of nature and serves sin, it becomes and is called darkness.

There was a man sent from God, his name was John.

Having told us about the pre-eternal existence of God the Word and intending to speak about the incarnation of the Word, the Evangelist inserts a speech about the Forerunner. And what else, if not about the birth of John the Baptist, can there be a word before the speech about the birth of the Lord in the flesh? The Evangelist says of the Forerunner that he was "sent" by God, that is, sent from God. For false prophets are not of God. When you hear that he was sent from God, then know that he did not say anything from himself or from people, but everything is from God. For this reason he is called an angel (Matt. 10:11; Mal. 3:1), and the advantage of an angel is not to say anything of his own. When you hear about an angel, do not think that John was an angel by nature, or that he came down from heaven; He is called an angel by deed and service. Since he preached and foretold the Lord, he was called an angel for this. For this reason, the Evangelist, in refutation of the assumption of many, who perhaps thought that John was an angel by nature, says: "There was a man," sent from God.

He came to bear witness, to bear witness to the Light, that all might believe through him.

This one, he says, was sent from God to bear witness to the light. Then, lest anyone should think that his testimony was truly necessary for the Only-begotten, as if in need of something, the Evangelist adds that John came to bear witness to the Son of God, not because He needed His testimony, but so that all would believe through Him. Did all also believe through him? No. How then does the Evangelist say: that all may believe? How? As much as depended on him, he testified in order to attract everyone, and if some did not believe, then he does not deserve blame. And then the sun rises to illuminate everyone, but if someone shuts himself up in a dark room and does not use its ray, then is the sun to blame for this? So it is here. John was sent that all might believe through him; if this does not happen, he is not to blame.

He was not the light, but was sent to bear witness to the Light.

Так как часто случается, что свидетель бывает выше того, о ком свидетельствует, то чтобы ты не подумал, что и Иоанн, свидетельствующий о Христе, был выше Его, евангелист в опровержение этого лукавого помысла говорит: «он не был свет». Но, может быть, кто-нибудь скажет: ужели мы не можем называть светом ни Иоанна, ни иного кого из святых? Светом мы можем назвать каждого из святых, но Светом, в данном значении, не можем назвать. Например, если кто тебе скажет: Иоанн есть ли свет? – согласись. Если же спросит так: ужели Иоанн есть оный Свет – скажи: нет. Ибо сам он не есть свет в собственном смысле, но свет по причастию, имеющий сияние от истинного света.

Был Свет истинный, который просвещает всякого человека, приходящего в мир.

Евангелист намерен говорить о домостроительстве Единородного во плоти, что Он пришел к Своим, что Он стал плотию. Итак, чтобы кто-нибудь не подумал, что Он не существовал прежде воплощения, для сего возводит мысль к бытию прежде всякого начала и говорит, что Свет истинный был и прежде воплощения. Этим он ниспровергает и ересь Фотина, и Павла Самосатского, утверждавших, что Единородный тогда получил бытие, когда родился от Девы, а прежде сего не существовал. И ты, арианин, не признающий Сына Божия истинным Богом, слушай, что говорит евангелист: «Свет истинный». И ты, манихей, говорящий, что мы созданы злым творцом, слушай, что Свет истинный просвещает всякого человека. Если злой творец есть тьма, то он не может никого просвещать. Посему мы создания истинного Света. И как, скажет иной, просвещает всякого человека, когда мы видим некоторых омраченными? Сколько зависит от Него Самого, Он просвещает всех. Ибо скажи, пожалуй, разве не все мы разумны? Разве не все по природе знаем добро и противное ему? Разве не имеем способности чрез размышление о тварях познавать Творца? Посему разум, данный нам и наставляющий нас природою, который и называется законом естественным, может быть назван светом, данным нам от Бога. Если же некоторые худо воспользовались разумом, те сами омрачили себя. Иные разрешают это возражение так: просвещает, говорят, «Господь всякого человека, приходящего в мир» (по-гречески – украшение, порядок), то есть в лучшее состояние, и старающегося украсить свою душу, а не оставлять ее беспорядочною и безобразною.

В мире был, и мир чрез Него начал быть, и мир Его не познал.

Был в мире как вездесущий Бог, а можно сказать, что был в мире и в отношении к промышлению и сохранению. Впрочем, говорит: что я говорю, что был в мире, когда не было бы и мира, если б Он не сотворил его? Со всех сторон доказывает, что Он – Творец, отстраняя в одно время и безумие Манеса, говорившего, что все произвел злой творец, и безумие Ария, называвшего Сына Божия тварью, а вместе и всякого человека, приводя к исповеданию Творца, научая не служить тварям, но поклоняться Создателю. Но «мир, – говорит, – Его не познал», то есть худые люди, занявшиеся мирскими делами. Ибо имя «мир» означает и эту вселенную, как и здесь сказано: «мир чрез Него начал быть»; означает и мудрствующих по мирскому, как здесь сказано: «мир Его не познал», то есть люди, приверженные к земле. Но все святые и пророки познали.