CLAIM: John writes, “[Believers] were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God” (Jn. 1:13 NASB). The NIV translates this as “nor of human decision.” Some Calvinists argue that this passage supports the idea that the human will has no role in coming to Christ. After all, this passage is set in contrast to being born “of God.” Is this the case?

RESPONSE: These three ways of not becoming a child of God are set against the backdrop of first-century Judaism. In this culture, religious Jewish people held that all three of these methods were ways to find salvation. Thus in many ways, these three methods describe the same approach to God: being physically born into the nation of Israel. In contrast to this, John writes that salvation comes through choosing to “receive” and “believe” in Jesus (v.12).

“Not of blood…” Colin Kruse writes, “In the ancient world procreation was understood to take place through the mixing of bloods (of the father and the mother). Here it is denied that natural procreation is the way people become children of God.”^[1] J. Ramsey Michaels writes, “The plural [“bloods”] points simply to the participation of two parents in the act of procreation.”^[2] D.A. Carson adds, “Heritage and race, even the Jewish race, are irrelevant to spiritual birth.”^[3] This becomes evident in John 8 especially.

“Nor of the will of the flesh…” In John, the term “flesh” (sarx) often refers to an entire human being (e.g. Jn. 3:6; 8:15; 17:2). Therefore, this expression “means to be born because of the desires of human parents as the NIV indicates.”^[4] D.A. Carson,^[5] Leon Morris,^[6] and George Beasley-Murray^[7] understand this to refer to “sexual desire.”

“Nor of the will of man…” This can also be translated as “a husband’s will” (NIV). Many commentators render this passage in this way.^[8] Morris leaves open the possibility that this refers to “any human volition whatsoever.”^[9] In John’s first-century world, the husband was thought to take the initiative and lead in procreation.^[10] John is writing against this notion: By contrast, the spiritual birth is not the decision of a parent, but rather, the decision of an individual person.

1. Ramsey Michaels summarizes, “The three negative expressions make a simple point: to be ‘born of God’ is not a physical or literal birth, but a metaphor for a transformed life.”^[11] Likewise, Leon Morris writes, “The piling up of these expressions is to be understood in the light of Jewish pride of race. The Jews held that because of the “Fathers,” that is their great ancestors, God would be favorable to them. John emphatically repudiates any such idea. Nothing human, however great or excellent, can bring about the birth of which he speaks.”^[12]

^[1] Kruse, C. G. (2003). John: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 4, p. 68). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

^[2] Michaels, J. R. (2010). The Gospel of John (p. 72). Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

^[3] Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John (p. 126). Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans.

^[4] Kruse, C. G. (2003). John: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 4, p. 68). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

^[5] Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John (p. 126). Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans.

^[6] Morris, L. (1995). The Gospel according to John (p. 89). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

^[7] Beasley-Murray, G. R. (2002). John (Vol. 36, p. 13). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.

^[8] Kruse, C. G. (2003). John: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 4, p. 68). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John (p. 126). Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans. Michaels, J. R. (2010). The Gospel of John (p. 72). Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

^[9] Morris, L. (1995). The Gospel according to John (p. 90). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

^[10] Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John (p. 126). Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans. Michaels, J. R. (2010). The Gospel of John (p. 72). Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Beasley-Murray, G. R. (2002). John (Vol. 36, p. 13). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.

^[11] Michaels, J. R. (2010). The Gospel of John (p. 73). Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

^[12] Morris, L. (1995). The Gospel according to John (p. 90). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.