I decided to look more closely at John 1:1 -20 . You can read up to and including verse 7 and have no reference to the word having a gender. You can all debate this passage till the cows come home if you want. What im looking at is in tradition.
Verse 10 is the first t5ime a gender is mentioned, and an identity is given. Verse 14:
<dir><span style=”color: #008080; font-size: medium;”>Joh 1:14</span><span style=”font-size: medium;”> And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. </span>
seals the identity. Now, Trinitarians who believe Jesus is co eternal with the father, have a problem with this verse, or do they blindly over look it just agreeing with the tradition? I know trinity pastors who preach Jesus is the WORD of John 1;1. but heartedly believe the same identity is co eternal with the Father. There comes a grammatical error to.
Father, English dictionary
1Biological male parent of a child. 2.The term is also used for the man who has raised a child, who is not his biological offspring, such as an adopted child. As a parent, the father has a certain legal relationship with the child, which carries defined rights and obligations to the child.
If Jesus or spiritual equivalent was always coeternal then why does he call God ,Father? see dictionary definition.
The very first words of Johns gospel say “in the beginning”, he states the word became flesh. Now Jesus him self in resurrected state said he is the beginning and he was the beginning of Gods creation. So who telling half truths? It isn’t Jesus.
</dir>John 17:5. Jesus asks His Father to return to him the glory he had with his Father before he came to this world. He asked his Father. not tell an eual co eternal partner.
What gives an erroneous doctrine the power to let these verses go seemingly unnoticed
