The word ἀνθρώποs (anthropos) or MAN was never used in the original Codex written on papyrus which is not the the Greek Bible of today that also uses ἀνθρώποs. The correct word was Adam. There are other words that were changed when copies from the original were made but is not the subject matter here. To most Christian priests and ministers, this is just minutia, but for clear understanding the proper words must always be used. Using the term man infers that mankind is directly related to the Lord Jesus of the Virgin birth. Luke indicates that Adam was also the Son of God. Lk 3:38, which leads us to Jesus Christ's title as Son of Adam as in the flesh, NOT the Son of any man. In this context John 1:4 also loses all significance when we see the term "light of men" when it should be light of Adam. There is no light of men but there is the light of Adam. The light of Adam alludes to the light that was taken away from Adam after his trangression in the Garden, where afterwards, Adam bemoaned the fact that he could no longer see or hear the angels in heaven. You have to read the Masoretic texts and other Hebrew writtings to learn about the rest of that wonderful story. When Jesus the Christ was born our heavenly Father restored the light of Adam in Jesus Christ, this is why John speaks of this "light". The Lord God had made a covenant with Adam which eventually led to the birth of our Lord and Saviour. I said too much already, however, there is quite a bit more to this incredible Divine story that connects all the dots which leads to deeper understanding. If you wish further study, check out your Companion Bible and look up Appendix 14 -Synonymous Words Used for Man, where Christ is correctly called Son of Adam not Son of enosh (man) which is in accord with the original New Testament Codex.

The word ἀνθρώποs (anthropos) or MAN was never used in the original Codex written on papyrus which is not the the Greek Bible of today that also uses ἀνθρώποs. The correct word was Adam. There are other words that were changed when copies from the original were made but is not the subject matter here. To most Christian priests and ministers, this is just minutia, but for clear understanding the proper words must always be used. Using the term man infers that mankind is directly related to the Lord Jesus of the Virgin birth. Luke indicates that Adam was also the son of God. Lk 3:38, which leads us to Jesus Christ's title as Son of Adam as in the flesh, NOT the Son of any man. In this context John 1:4 also loses all significance when we see the term "light of men" when it should be light of Adam. There is no light of men but there is the light of Adam. The light of Adam alludes to the light that was taken away from Adam after his trangression in the Garden, where afterwards, Adam bemoaned the fact that he could no longer see or hear the angels in heaven. You have to read the Masoretic texts and other Hebrew writtings to learn about the rest of that wonderful story. When Jesus the Christ was born our heavenly Father restored the light of Adam in Jesus Christ, this is why John speaks of this "light". The Lord God had made a covenant with Adam which eventually led to the birth of our Lord and Saviour. I said too much already, however, there is quite a bit more to this incredible Divine story that connects all the dots which leads to deeper understanding. If you wish further study, check out your Companion Bible and look up Appendix 14 -Synonymous Words Used for Man, where Christ is correctly called Son of Adam not Son of enosh (man) which is in accord with the original New Testament Codex.