- This topic has 25,957 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 6 hours, 14 minutes ago by
.
- Posts
@ Berean,
You may disagree with my assertion of whom is being spoken of, but looking at the verse prior “…He has names written and a name written which no one knows but he himself.” (WEB) Most translations do not have “has names written”; however, I find this interesting that it is inserted here. Who is known by many names? God or Jesus? What is written in most is the second half – a name only he knows. Are you saying Jesus has a name that only he knows and God his Father does not!?! Sounds like a rebellious child…keeping something from Daddy.
Moving onto the last part of verse 19:13, which seems to hang everyone up, “his name is called the Word of God”. The Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB) renders this phrase as HaDvar Hashem (the word of God – the “Ha” defines a definite article) and is rendered the same in most translations. Dvar Hashem occurs 87 times in the OJB and in most translations “of God” has been removed leaving just “word”. The same thing has been done in John 1:1, the OJB has Dvar Hashem (word of God) and every translation has removed “of God” and thus has changed the meaning of what is being conveyed by John and opening a door to alternative meanings. See passages below:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. (KJV)
1 Bereshis (In the Beginning) was the Dvar Hashem [Yeshayah 55:11; Bereshis 1:1], and the Dvar Hashem was agav (along with) Hashem [Mishle 8:30; 30:4], and the Dvar Hashem was nothing less, by nature, than Elohim! [Tehillim 56:11(10); Yochanan 17:5; Rev. 19:13] 2 Bereshis (In the Beginning) this Dvar Hashem was with Hashem [Mishle 8:30]. (OJB)
Reading the OJB does take work and requires an additional tool to translate certain words, but the Jewish perspective is enlightening. One of things I like are the references to additional passages for further clarity. For example, Mishle 8:30 is referenced twice as Dvar Hashem “was with” Hashem (God), this reference is Proverbs 8:30, the chapter on “wisdom”. Read all of Proverbs 8, keeping John 1:1 in mind as you do; are you seeing it yet, are things clearing up?
Hope this helps
To all……..Jesus said, (not me),…..“the words I am telling you are “NOT” MY words, but the words of him who sent me”.
So the idea of saying Jesus is the word of God, is a lie, by Jesus’ own mouth. GOD AND HIS WORD ARE ONE, JUST AS YOU AND YOUR WORDS ARE YOU. NO ONE CAN BE YOUR WORD, NOR CAN YOU BE ANYONE ELSE’S WORD EITHER.
THE PRINCIPLE OF BEING “IN” , SOMEONE.
Jesus said (not me)……..“I am “in” the Father and the Father is “in” me”.
Question? How is Jesus, “IN” the Father and the Father “IN” him?
We all know God the Father is a Spirit, according to Jesus right, So how can he be in Jesus and Jesus “in” him? , it works this way, as Jesus Grow in the words of God, who was telling him what to say and do, he was retaining the words of God “IN” HIM, and as he was retaining those words, the person or being, who said those words was existing “in” him, by those word remaining “IN” HIM. THE SAME HOLDS TRUE WITH US , IF WE RETAIN THE FATHER’S WORD, AND Jesus’ words, they remain “IN” BY THEIR “WORDS”.
Remember Jesus said (not me), “the words I am telling you are “Spirit”. Yes they were God the Father’s word and he is Spirit, So “HIS” words are also Spirit”
when we become one with God the Father and Jesus their words remain in us, that is what makes us , “ONE” WITH THEM.” , they exist “in” us by their word and we exist in them by our words also.
Peace and love to you all and yours……….gene
You
You may disagree with my statement referred to, but looking at the previous verse “…He has names written and a name written which no one knows but himself.” (WEB) Most translations don’t have “has written names”; however, I find it interesting that it is inserted here. Who is known by more than one name? God or Jesus? What is most written about is the second half – a name only he knows. Are you saying that Jesus has a name that only he knows and that God his Father does not know!?! Sounds like a rebellious kid… hiding something from dad.
Me
I believe that ONLY Jesus knows this name because he ALONE
EXPERIENCED in his earthly ministry what is written in Isaiah 63:2,3:
I trod the press ALONE; and among the people there was NONE WITH ME:.Jacob received the name of Israel, why?
Abram received the name Abraham, why?
Jesus will have a new name
when he comes back, why?
What do the names mean?
Why are they changed at some point?In the case of Jesus, this new name will be on the forehead of the victors
👇
KJB
Whoever overcomes, I will make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall not come out of it again: and 👉I will write on him the name of my God,👈 and 👉the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God: and 👉 I will write on him my new name.👈
These things will happen AFTER THE LAST JUDGMENT WHEN GOD MAKES ALL THINGS NEWYou
Moving on to the last part of verse 19:13, which seems to hook everyone up, “his name is called the Word of God”. The Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB) renders this phrase as HaDvar Hashem (the word of God – the “Ha” defines a definite article) and is rendered the same in most translations. Dvar Hashem appears 87 times in the OJB and in most translations “of God” has been dropped, leaving only “word”. The same was done in John 1:1, the OJB has Dvar Hashem (word of God) and each translation removed “from God” and thus changed the meaning of what is conveyed by John and opens a door to an alternative meanings. See passages below:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 So it was in the beginning with God. (KJV)
1 Bereshis (In the beginning) was the Dvar Hashem [Yeshayah 55:11; Bereshis 1:1], and the Dvar Hashem was agav (with) Hashem [Mishle 8:30; 30:4], and the Dvar Hashem was nothing less, by nature, than Elohim! [Tehillim 56:11(10); Yochanan 17:5; Apoc. 19:13] 2 Bereshis (In the beginning) this Dvar Hashem was with Hashem [Mishle 8:30]. (OJB)
Reading the OJB is labor intensive and requires an additional tool to translate certain words, but the Jewish perspective is illuminating. One of the things I like is the references to additional passages for clarity. For example, Mishle 8:30 is referenced twice as Dvar Hashem “was with” Hashem (God), this reference is Proverbs 8:30, the chapter on “wisdom”. Read all of Proverbs 8, keeping John 1:1 in mind as you do; do you still see it, are things clearing up?
I hope this helps you
Me
THE WORD OF GOD
OR THE WORD IS NOT A PROBLEMTHE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT “THE WORD WAS WITH GOD” AND WAS GOD AND WAS MADE FLESH.
Are you still applying Isaiah 63:3 to God?
Think carefully.
Yesterday or the day before yesterday I read a meditation on Isaiah which I found very beautiful. I deliver it to you.
I trod the wine press alone; and of the people there were none with me. Isaiah 63:3.
During his childhood, youth and manhood, Jesus walked alone. In his purity and faithfulness he trod the winepress alone, and there was no one with him among the people. He bore the terrible weight of the responsibility for the salvation of men. He knew that unless there was a decided change in the principles and purposes of the human race, all would be lost. It was the burden of his soul, and no one could appreciate the weight that rested on him.7 Jesus Christ, 92.
Throughout his life, his mother and his brothers did not understand his mission. Even his disciples did not understand this. He had dwelt in eternal light, as one with God, but his life on earth was to be spent in solitude. As one with us, He must bear the burden of our guilt and unhappiness. One who is without sin must feel the shame of sin. One who loves peace must live with conflict, truth must dwell with falsehood, purity with wickedness. Every sin, every discord, every filthy lust that transgression had brought, was a torture to His spirit.
Alone, he must tread the path; alone he must bear the burden. It is on Him who has abandoned his glory and accepted the weakness of humanity that the redemption must rest.
les as it should have been…. When Jesus was no longer with them, … they began to see how they might have shown Him attentions that would have brought gladness to His heart….
The same want is evident in our world today. But few appreciate all that Christ is to them. If they did, the great love of Mary [Matthew 26:6-13] would be expressed, the anointing would be freely bestowed…. Nothing would be thought too costly to give for Christ, no self-denial or self-sacrifice too great to be endured for His sake.9The Desire of Ages, 565.
From God’s Amazing Grace – Page 163
🙏
Gene
You
To all……..Jesus said, (not me),…..“the words I am telling you are “NOT” MY words, but the words of him who sent me”.
So the idea of saying Jesus is the word of God, is a lie, by Jesus’ own mouth. GOD AND HIS WORD ARE ONE, JUST AS YOU AND YOUR WORDS ARE YOU. NO ONE CAN BE YOUR WORD, NOR CAN YOU BE ANYONE ELSE’S WORD EITHER.
Me
WRONG
It is precisely because JESUS TRANSMITS THE WORDS OF GOD THE FATHER THAT HE IS CALLED 👉 THE WORD OF GOD 👈
I don’t see why you are offended by this.If we were to follow your reasoning, John 1:1 would MAKE NO SENSE. (to me)
IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD…
IT CAN ONLY BE ONE PERSON
AND THE WORD WAS WITH 👉THE GOD….👈
THIS IS ANOTHER PERSON, IT IS GOD THE FATHER
AND THE WORD WAS GOD
If this was a plan, a Prophecy, a design of God, I ABSOLUTELY DID NOT see WHY JOHN WOULD SPEAK THAT WAY.
A WORD THAT GOD SPEAKS IS NOT GOD BECAUSE ONLY THE PERSON OF GOD IS GOD.
And then John 17:5
is crystal clearAnd now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self 👉with the glory which I had 👉with thee👉 before the world was.
IN THE BEGINNING, THE SON OF GOD WAS WITH THE FATHER AND IT IS NOT PHILOSOPHY THAT WILL FORGET THIS HIGH FACT MENTIONED IN THE BIBLE (UNCORRUPTED)
BEREAN, I am not offended by the fact Jesus tell us God the Father’s words that abide “in” him, , that is exactly what I believe, but what offended both God the Father and me, is you going around telling people that Jesus , “IS”, the word of God, That is a LIE.
Jesus never was God the Father’s word, even though he “quoted” GOD THE FATHER’S WORDS TO US? Jesus is the mediator, telling us God the Father’s words. But you try to make him , himself God’s word, which makes you and other like you liars.
The truth is you and those who believe like are simply liars, nor do you people honestly believe what Jesus himself “CLEARLY” said either.
So no I am not offended about Jesus telling us God the Father’s words, but you lying and saying they are Jesus’ himselfs “own” words.
Peace and love to you and yours Berean………gene
Berean…….John 1:1, is not saying Jesus is the word of God, no scripture says that Jesus “IS” the word of God, he is no more the word of God then any of the Prophets of old are, they all spoke to us the Father’s words, exactly the same way. Through the Anointing Spirit that was abiding “in” them.
The book of Hebrews clearly shows us that. You simply are not abiding in the truth Berean, Repent !, while there is time.
Peace and love to you and yours. ……….gene
Gene
In THE BIBLE IT IS WRITTEN :
In Revelation 19
And he(Jésus,) was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called :
👉The Word of God. 👈
SO I SAY THAT JESUS IS ALSO
CALLED ” THE WORD OF GOD”
DO YOU BELEIVE THE BIBLE ?
We need to backup this bus, are you really saying Isa 63:2,3 is a reference to Jesus’ ministry!??!!?!? Read verse 1, who is being judge here? Edom is…again!! Who is Edom? Edom is Esau (Gen 36:8), the nation of Edom is from Esau, Esau is Jacob’s brother, the son of Isaac. If this reference of God’s vengeance on Edom is speaking of Christ’s ministry, then every judgment of God’s on Edom is too. We cannot pick and choose what we want scripture to mean or extrapolate pieces that fit best into our religion to make it work. The flaw with your assertion is Christ ministry wasn’t to “stomp” people like one does in a wine press (put it all into context). God is judging Edom in Isaiah, Ezekiel, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Malachi; and in the book of Revelation, God is judging mankind.
Are you insinuating ONLY Jesus knows his “new name” and is hidden from God? Wouldn’t this “new name” come from God? Just like it did for Abraham and Jacob? So how can the son know something the father does not? The opposite can be true, the father can know something the son does not. You cite Rev 3:12 as proof because Christ will write upon them “his new name.” Who does Christ receive this “name” from? This passage allusions back to Isa 62:2 and it is God who will give this new name.
You say “word of God” or “word” is a none issue and is acceptable, EXCEPT what does it really mean:
Luke 7:13 “making void the word of God by your tradition, which you have handed down. You do many things like this.”
Luke 4:4 “Jesus answered him, saying, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.’”
Luke 5:1 “Now while the multitude pressed on him and heard the word of God, he was standing by the lake of Gennesaret.”
Luke 8:11 “Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.”
Luke 8:21 “But he answered them, “My mother and my brothers are these who hear the word of God, and do it.”
Luke 11:28 “But he said, “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God, and keep it.”
John 10:35 “If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture can’t be broken)”
Acts 4:31 “When they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were gathered together. They were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spoke the word of God with boldness.”
Acts 6:7 “The word of God increased and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly. A great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.”
Acts 8:14 “Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them,”
Acts 11:1 “Now the apostles and the brothers who were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.”
Rom 10:17 “So faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”
I Pet 1:23 “having been born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God, which lives and remains forever.”
Hopefully we’re getting the picture, to remove “of God” does change it’s meaning! This “word” comes from God and belongs to God. We are to be doers of God’s “word”. By removing “of God” in John 1:1 an idol has been created out of Christ, by elevating him to be equal to God and God himself! This is a false belief created out of the Council of Nicea and has deceived everyone for the last 1700 years!
To answer your question of whether or not I’m applying Isa 63:3 and Rev 19:13 to God, ABSOLUTELY!! When the surrounding verses are placed into context, ask yourself who is the God of armies, who is known by many names, who can possible have a name only they know? All signs point to God Almighty, Hashem, Adonai, Yahweh, Yahweh-Maccaddeshem, Yahweh-Rohi, Yahweh-Shammah, Yahweh-Rapha, Yahweh-Tsidkenu, Yahweh-Jireh, Yahweh-Nissi, Yahweh-Shalom, Yahweh-Sabbaoth, Yahweh-Ghmolah, Elohim, El-Elyon, El-Gibhor, El-Roi, El-Olam, El-Shaddai-Rohi, El-Chuwl, El-Deah, Attiyq Youm.
@ DesireTruth
I specified the following verse: 3]
👉 I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me:
It is this verse that speaks of Christ, of his life on this earth
It is a prophecy about Christ.The other part is in parallel with Revelation 19:13
👉for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment.
🙏
@ désire Truth
Are you implying that ONLY Jesus knows his “new name” and is hidden from God? Doesn’t this “new name” come from God? Exactly as was the case with Abraham and Jacob?
Don’t you understand that this new name will be that of the Son and not of the Father?
Haven’t you read Rev. 3:12 that I mentioned, where Jesus speaks of his new name?
It is Jesus speaking (see context v.7-11)
KJB. v.12
Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him MY NEW NAMENow, I never insinuated that the Father does not know this name, since the Father IS THE ONE WHO SENT THE SON TO EARTH FOR A SPECIAL MISSION AND BOTH ARE ONE IN SPIRIT.
I AM IN THE FATHER AND THE FATHER IS IN ME.WHAT TO REMEMBER IS THAT THIS NEW NAME IS EQUAL TO AN EXPERIENCE, A UNIQUE, SPECIAL, GLORIOUS VICTORY, ABOVE EVERYTHING….
THIS NEW NAME, HE WOULD NOT HAVE OBTAINED IF HE HAD NOT OVERCOME THE ENEMY ON EARTH.
👉This new name will be communicated to THE WINNERS.
as mentioned before (Revelation 3:12)
This new name is equivalent to the perfection of the character of Christ, which is imparted to believers by faith.You are picking and choosing verses or parts of verses to support your religion. It’s like reading every other paragraph or starting in the middle of a book. You cannot possible hope to understand the story. We cannot use a “copy/paste” theology to understand what scripture is telling us! Thus your focus on a single part of a verse and say this part, and just this part, refers to Christ and then ignore the rest takes the original intent of the scripture out of context and changes the meaning of what is being said. This is false religion!
Rev 3:12 and Rev 19:12 are two separate situations. Rev 3:12 speaks of the “new name” for Christ that the Father will give him at the appointed time; Rev 19:12 speaks of a name only the one riding the white horse knows. Are you saying God and the Son both know this name? If so, then scripture lies; because it states only the one riding the white horse knows this “unknown” name. If it’s Christ on the horse then God doesn’t know it…explain! Again, the Son cannot know more than the Father.
@ desire Truth
We left from Rev.19:13
You suggested Isaiah 63:2,3 as an interpretation of Rev.19:13
your post
👇
“Rev 19:13 – are we understanding this correctly, YOU added Jesus in parentheses to emphasis the “he” is “Jesus”. This verse allusions back to Isaiah 63:2,3 and speaks of God’s day of vengeance. So who is it really being referenced, Jesus or God? Note in the next verse it is the armies who follow, who is the commander of heavens armies? Who is the “LORD Sabaoth” (not sabbath) – an interesting study if you dare.”Now explain yourself on Isaiah 63:3
👉”I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me;”….👈please EXPLAIN ON THIS first part of verse
and in what the Father is concerned.
THANKSHi Gene,
YOU: To all……..Jesus said, (not me),…..
“the words I am telling you are “NOT” MY words, but the words of him who sent me”.
ME: Gene, The above are not SCRIPTURE BUT YOUR OWN TWISTED WORDS, which I already made clear to you MORE THAN ONCE, and you never SPECIFICALLY denied.
So let’s start with the above “TWISTED” words of yours!
Scripture:
DRB: John 14:24 He that loveth me not, keepeth not MY WORDS.
And THE WORD which you have heard, is not mine;
but the Father’s who sent me.
AS YOU CAN WELL READ, “MY WORDS” IN THE PLURAL WITH A PERSONAL PRONOUN, ARE CLEAR REFERENCES TO JESUS’ TEACHINGS, HIS GOSPEL!
CONFIRMED ALSO IN THE NKJ, AND ALSO IN THE WORD “SAYINGS” IN THE KJB HEREUNDER BOTH IN THE PLURAL WITH THE PERSONAL PRONOUN!
THEN JESUS CONTINUED AND SAID:
And THE WORD which you have heard, is not mine;
but the Father’s who sent me.
AGAIN, AS YOU CAN WELL READ, IN THE ABOVE JESUS USED THE SINGULAR WITH THE ARTICLE. WHICH IS A CLEAR REFERENCE TO
THE SPIRIT OF THE FATHER WITHIN JESUS! Confirmed by Jesus Himself, by His own words, read again and be honest and admit the truth!
And the word/SPIRIT which you have heard, is not mine;
but the Father’s who sent me.
NKJ. He who does not love Me does not keep My WORDS;(PLURAL with the PERSONAL PRONOUN) and the WORD (SINGULAR with an ARTICLE) which you hear is not Mine but the Father’s who sent Me.
KJB: He that loveth me not keepeth not my SAYINGS: (PLURAL with the PERSONAL PRONOUN ) and the WORD (SINGULAR with an ARTICLE) which ye hear is not mine,
but the Father’s which sent me.
YOU: To all……..Jesus said, (not me),…..“the words I am telling you are “NOT” MY words, but the words of him who sent me”.
So the idea of saying Jesus is the word of God, is a lie,
by Jesus’ own mouth.
Me: NO Gene, YOU SAID THOSE PRECISE WORDS NOT JESUS!
So the idea of saying Jesus is the word of God, is a lie, by Jesus’ own mouth.
NO Gene, they are LIES by your own mouth!
You: GOD AND HIS WORD ARE ONE,
Me: confirmed by Jesus READ AGAIN:
And the word/SPIRIT which you have heard, is not mine;
but the Father’s who sent me.
Gene, JESUS’ OWN WORDS ARE SPIRIT AND LIFE! Confirmed hereunder:
John6: 63 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.
You: JUST AS YOU AND YOUR WORDS ARE YOU. NO ONE CAN BE YOUR WORD, NOR CAN YOU BE ANYONE ELSE’S WORD EITHER.
Me: YOUR WORDS AND ANY HUMAN WORDS ON EARTH ARE NOT SPIRITS AND LIFE, and THEY WILL NEVER BE AS SUCH WHILE THEY ARE STILL LIVING AS HUMANS ON EARTH IN FLESH AND BLOOD!
THIS DIDN’T APPLY TO JESUS AND HIS OWN WORDS WHEN HE WAS ON EARTH!
You: THE PRINCIPLE OF BEING “IN” , SOMEONE.
Jesus said (not me)……..“I am “in” the Father and the Father is “in” me”.
Question? How is Jesus, “IN” the Father and the Father “IN” him?
We all know God the Father is a Spirit, according to Jesus right,
So how can he be in Jesus and Jesus “in” him? ,
it works this way,
as Jesus Grow in the words of God, who was telling him what to say and do,
he was retaining the words of God “IN” HIM, and as he was retaining those words, the person or being, who said those words was existing “in” him, by those word remaining “IN” HIM.
THE SAME HOLDS TRUE WITH US , IF WE RETAIN THE FATHER’S WORD, AND Jesus’ words, they remain “IN” BY THEIR “WORDS”.
Remember Jesus said (not me), “the words I am telling you are “Spirit”. Yes they were God the Father’s word and he is Spirit, So “HIS” words are also Spirit”
when we become one with God the Father and Jesus their words remain in us, that is what makes us , “ONE” WITH THEM.” , they exist “in” us by their word and we exist in them by our words also.
ALL THE ABOVE IS YOUR CARNAL-MINDED REASONING MR Gene, WITH EVERY RESPECT. WHICH I WILL TACKLE AND CONTRADICT IN THE NEXT POST!
IN THE MEANTIME HERE ARE THESE SCRIPTURES IN RELATION TO YOUR REASONING ABOVE FOR YOU TO PONDER ON!
John14:9 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 9Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? 10Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. 11Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake. 20At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
John8:42 Jesus therefore said to them: If God were your Father, you would indeed love me. For FROM GOD I PROCEEDED, and came; for I came not of myself, but he sent me:
Joihn15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abide in the vine, so neither can you, unless you abide in me. 5I am the vine; you the branches: he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing.
John16:27 For the Father himself loveth you, because you have loved me, and have believed that I CAME OUT FROM GOD. 28I CAME FORTH FROM THE FATHER, and am come into the world: again I leave the world, and I go to the Father.
NOW YOU DID SAY “GOD IS A SPIRIT” BUT YOU ALSO SAID THAT THIS IS ACCORDING TO JESUS, SO IT SEEMS THAT YOU YOURSELF ARE NOT CONVINCED THAT GOD THE FATHER IS A SPIRIT, THIS IS CONFIRMED BY YOUR CARNAL-MINDED REASONING ABOVE. PLUS THAT YOU AND Jodi, PUT GOD IN THE SAME BASKET AS HUMANS ARE, AND DO NOT EVEN ACCEPT GOD THE FATHER’S OWN WORDS IN ISIAIH! Read please:
Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, saith the Lord.
9For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts.
10And as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and return no more thither, but soak the earth, and water it, and make it to spring, and give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
11So shall my word be, which shall go forth from my mouth: it shall not return to me void,
DOES YOUR WORD GOES FORTH OUT FROM YOUR MOUTH AND RETURN NOT TO YOU VOID?
but it shall do whatsoever I please,
OR PERHAPS IT DOES WHATEVER YOU SAY! DOES IT?
and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it.
MAYBE THIS ONE IS TRUE, AND IT REALLY APPLIES TO YOUR WORDS BY THE LOOK OF IT, WITH SO MANY FALSE TEACHING THAT YOUR WORD IS SPREADING.
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
@ Berean,
This is almost painful.
What I said was Rev 19:13 allusions back to Isa 63:2,3 – meaning it references back to, there’s a connection.
How can one single out a portion of a verse and use that for the basis of their understanding, if only a small portion is looked at (copy/paste theology) how can one see the wider picture? Now you’re asking me to explain a piece of a paragraph without viewing the rest of what has been written.
“I have trodden the wine trough alone, And from the peoples there was no man with Me.” This sentence simply says someone trodden a wine trough and no one helped. I find zero meaning in this sentence. NOW if I read the entire passage in the context of which it was written (verses 1-6); it speaks of God’s judgment upon Edom. Here he speaks of destroying them LIKE one who “treads in a wine press” and it’s going to be a bloodbath.
If my explanation isn’t what you believe, explain your belief and why you believe what you believe. Be prepared for questions and be ready to answer them.
@ Camel and Gene,
Why are we making this so difficult? There is NOTHING spiritual about the John 14:24. The whole summation of what Christ is teaching are the words which he is speaking; These words he speaks, come from one source; so grammatically the singular can be used – “the word of God”. So we are going to beat each other up over grammar?!?
In Deut 18:18 God states he will put his words (plural) in the prophets mouth. (this reference for another time as related to John 1:1 and the preexistence of Christ). So the words Christ speaks are in fact from God and belong to God and God alone. These words simple are passing through Christ to the hearer.
Concerning the “returning void”; if you are in a position of authority do the words you speak return to you “void” or are they actionable, requiring a result? Just as God’s words do not return “void”, our words don’t either when applied from the position of authority…remember, we are in the image of God.
A mountain out of a mole hill…move on!
If the concept of Jesus being the “word” is truth and is the original intent and meaning of John, why aren’t any other writers talking about it?!?
If the writer is John who was with Jesus, then perhaps he had a special relationship with God that was deeper than the others. Thus, God reveals a deeper understanding of Jesus Christ through him. If it is another John, then the same explanation could be true. Regardless, we are all different. We are like prisms. God is light and we reflect a certain part of that light into a colour or few. This John reflects God uniquely and reveals a deep understanding of God. Other apostles like Paul or Peter reflect truth and God in different ways with a different style.
The old testament says God is the creator all things and life comes from God. I think this understanding of “logos/word” meaning “divine reason” or “plan” scares people to death because it creates a trust issue with the “church system.” How can the “church” lie?
I don’t trust what we call the Church system so that is not my excuse. Instead, it is really simple. It is what the scripture is actually saying so that is what I believe. It’s that simple. I do not have money on a particular view. Instead, I just read scripture and believe it. And when I delve deeper into it, I see that it is all harmonious, that is, there is no contradiction.
He was WITH God, came in the flesh, obeyed God, gave up his life to save many, rose form the dead, and was raised up to where he was before with the Father in glory.
He has first place in ALL things.
Believing that Jesus Christ the Son of God was the first, is what scripture is telling us. It is not saying he is God, rather that he is the Son of God, and thus of God and the first. This is why he is special. He is the firstborn. If Jesus Christ is not the first to be with God then tell me who was. And further tell me why this other person is not the special person besides God?
Revelation 3:14
”To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation.since Jesus is the flesh, the flesh is the “word”, therefore Jesus is the “word”, since Jesus is the “word”, he must be the “word” of verse 1, therefore Jesus is God. This is called circular reasoning.
Jesus is the Word, and the Word is divine. The Word is God argument is incorrect. There is no definite article before theos in john 1:1c. Many scholars in the past and today understand this. Even many Trinitarian scholars understand this.
“We next notice John’s use of the article [“the”] in these sentences. He does not write without care in this respect, nor is he unfamiliar with the niceties of the Greek tongue. In some cases he uses the article, and in some he omits it. He adds the article to the Word, but to the name of theos he adds it sometimes only. He uses the article, when the name of theos refers to the uncreated cause of all things, and omits it when the Word is named theos. Does the same difference which we observe between theos with the article and theos without it prevail also between the Word with it and without it? We must enquire into this. As the theos who is over all is theos with the article not without it, so the Word is the source of that reason (Logos) which dwells in every reasonable creature; the reason which is in each creature is not, like the former called par excellence the Word. Now there are many who are sincerely concerned about religion, and who fall here into great perplexity. They are afraid that they may be proclaiming two theos [gods] and their fear drives them into doctrines which are false and wicked. Either they deny that the Son has a distinct nature of His own besides that of the Father, and make Him whom they call the Son to be theos all but the name, or they deny divinity of the Son, giving Him a separate existence of His own, and making His sphere of essence fall outside that of the Father, so that they are separable from each other. To such persons we have to say that “the theos” on the one hand is Autotheos [God of himself] and so the Saviour says in His prayer to the Father, “That they may know Thee the only true theos [God]; “but that all beyond the theos [God] is made theos by participation in His deity, and is not to be called simply “theos” but rather “the theos “. And thus the first-born of all creation, who is the first to be with the theos , and to attract to Himself deity, is a being of more exalted rank than the other theos [gods] beside Him, of which theos is the theos [God], as it is written, “The theos [God] of theos [gods], the Lord, hath spoken and called the earth.” It was by the offices of the first-born that they became theos [gods], for He drew from the theos [God] in generous measure that they should be made theos [gods], and He communicated it to them according to His own bounty. The true theos [God], then, is “the theos ,” [“the God” as opposed to “god”] and those who are formed after Him are theos [such as the Son of God], images, as it were, of Him the prototype. But the archetypal image, again, of all these images is the word of the theos [God], who was in the beginning, and who by being with the theos [God] is at all times deity, not possessing that of Himself, but by His being with the Father, and not continuing to be theos , if we should think of this, except by remaining always in uninterrupted contemplation of the depths of the Father.”
(Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John, Book II, 2)When the writers of the New Testament speak of God they mean the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ. When they speak of Jesus Christ, they do not speak of him, nor think of him as God. He is God’s Christ, God’s Son, God’s Wisdom, God’s Word. Even the prologue to St. John {John 1:1-18} which comes nearest to the Nicene Doctrine, must be read in the light of the pronounced subordinationism of the Gospel as a whole; and the Prologue is less explicit in Greek with the anarthrous theos [the word “god” at John 1:1c without the article] than it appears in English… The adoring exclamation of St. Thomas “my Lord and my god” (Joh. xx. 28) is still not quite the same as an address to Christ as being without qualification [limitation] God, and it must be balanced by the words of the risen Christ himself to Mary Magdalene (verse. 17) “Go unto my brethren and say to them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.” Jesus Christ is frequently spoken of in the Ignation Epistles as “our God”, “my God”, but probably never as “God” without qualification.
– John Martin Creed in The Divinity of Jesus Christ.The word for “god” in Greek is QEOS. In John 1:1 the last occurrence of QEOS is called “a predicate noun” or, “a predicate nominative”. Such a noun tells us something about the subject, instead of telling what the subject is doing. This use of QEOS has reference to the subject, the Word, and does not have the article preceding it; it is anarthrous. This indicates that it is not definite. That is to say, it does not tell what position or office or rank the subject (the Word) occupies. The verb HN “was” follows the predicate noun QEOS; this is another factor in identifying QEOS here as qualitative. This discloses the quality or character of the Word. Of course, the gentleman up above disagrees with me, and he has used Moulton and Colwell to buttress his argument. But what have other Grammarians said about this same type of construction? There is no basis for regarding the predicate theos as definite. In John 1:1 I think that the qualitative force of the predicate [noun] is so prominent that the noun cannot be regarded as definite.
-Philip Harner, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 92:1, 1973, pp. 85, 7.We must, then take Theos, without the article, in the indefinite [“qualitative” would have been a better word choice] sense of a divine nature or a divine being, as distinguished from the definite absolute God [the Father], ho Theos, the authotheos [selfgod] of Origen. Thus the Theos of John [1:1c] answers to “the image of God” of Paul, Col. 1:15.
-G. Lucke, “Dissertation on the Logos”, quoted by John Wilson in, Unitarian Principles Confirmed by Trinitarian Testimonies, p. 428.As mentioned in the Note on 1c, the Prologue’s “The Word was God” offers a difficulty because there is no article before theos. Does this imply that “god” means less when predicated of the Word than it does when used as a name for the Father? Once again the reader must divest himself of a post-Nicene understanding of the vocabulary involved.
-Raymond E. Brown, The Anchor Bible, p. 25.Heraclitus coined the term “logos” to explain away the divine reason or plan of a changing universe. Are we to ignore the originator of the word and substitute our own understanding? Using his definition and substituting “divine reason” or “plan” in place of “logos” (aka “word”), John 1:1 and the following verses take on a different meaning. In verses 3,4 the early modern translations (pre KJV) all have “it” in place of “him”; so all things where created by “it” and life was in “it”. It was the KJ translation the personified the “logos” by calling it “him”.
It’s the definite article that is used with logos and the definite article that is used and not used with theos that gives the correct interpretation. This in no way negates that logos can and is an attribute. But the context is talking about a specific logos that and not an attribute that was WITH God in the beginning. This does match Jesus Christ who is now in the glory that he had with the Father before the cosmos.
Further, we are told that all was made through the logos but elsewhere we read the same through Jesus Christ and again, through the Son. What is that telling you? That they are one and the same.
Finally, this Jesus Christ has a name, The Word of God. The final nail.
Those who can spiritually discern can see what this all means.
If you have the Spirit of Truth and you let scripture speak to you, this is the understanding you come away with because you have no favourite or wager on a particular view. If you start with a doctrine to begin with for whatever reason, you will unconsciously and maybe consciously bend all scripture to fit your own understanding.
As the saying goes, how do you get vinegar from a sponge? Easy, you first soak the sponge in vinegar.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
