JOHN 1:1 who is the WORD?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,14:12)

I am somewhat inclined to believe it is his thoughts as well.

Kerwin,

So you believe God's own thoughts became flesh, dwelled on earth, and had the glory of God's only begotten Son?

It seems to me that you don't quite know exactly what you believe yet.  Let me know when you do.

Then we can go through the first 4 chapters of John and see if it fits (like you said it did).  But we aren't able to test your understanding against the scriptures until you actually HAVE an understanding to test, right?  So let me know when you know what it is you're even claiming, okay?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 22 2013,12:08)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 22 2013,12:35) Gene?  4th post on the previous page? Look, I don't really care if you address the post or not.  I just get irritated when you butt into a discussion I'm having, but then fail to stand and defend the things you said. So I'm asking you to either defend your claims, or don't make them in the first place. Mike, I could care less if you post or not, but the tenth post, not the fourth, on the previous page was addressed to 2besee, in response to what he wrote to me, not you at all, so you need to take your own advice and just butt out, yourself. IMO gene

Gene,

I mistakenly said it was the 4th post on the previous page.  It was actually the 4th post on page 919. (I was a page off at the time I posted that comment.)

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,14:21)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 21 2013,00:00) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 20 2013,11:56) Either the Word was God or was a god will work………. NO Kerwin! It either IS God Himself, OR it is a god who is NOT God himself. Either/or does not work in this case. (Thank you for admitting that “a god” is an acceptable translation of John 1:1.   ) Mike, The Word is being personified and Jesus even stated that according to the sense in which those that received the Word were called gods he was God. In a similar way the Word can also be called God. Jesus is not claiming to be Jehovah nor is the Word Jehovah even if John called it God.  It is just a way of communicating ideas about Jesus and the Word.

Kerwin,

I can't make heads or tails of your first sentence. I believe a word is missing.

But I agree with you that the Word OF Jehovah cannot actually BE Jehovah.

Therefore, a translation of “the Word was WITH God, and the Word WAS God” is faulty.

Do you agree? If not, then please explain how something that ISN'T God Himself can be called God Himself.

[terraricca]

charles

Quote

WHEREFORE, a man THE WORD THE SON'S SPIRIT, shall leave Father ALMIGHTY GOD BEFORE THE WORLD WAS ,TO ACCOMPLISH HIS KINGDOM, AND CREATE OUR MATERIAL WORLD! and mother,

this is knitting to say the least

[2besee]

T,
Prayer can be words, silence, thoughts, song, most importantly, love.

Gene,
I have read your earlier post, thank you.

[terraricca]

Quote (2besee @ July 23 2013,05:33)

T, Prayer can be words, silence, thoughts, song, most importantly, love. Gene, I have read your earlier post, thank you.

2bee

Quote

T, Prayer can be words, silence, thoughts, song, most importantly, love.

prayer have to be words spoken or in thoughts,;songs are words but if they are prayers ???I know they are an expression of joy,
love are actions according to God

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 23 2013,04:06)

Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,14:21) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 21 2013,00:00) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 20 2013,11:56) Either the Word was God or was a god will work………. NO Kerwin! It either IS God Himself, OR it is a god who is NOT God himself. Either/or does not work in this case. (Thank you for admitting that “a god” is an acceptable translation of John 1:1.   ) Mike, The Word is being personified and Jesus even stated that according to the sense in which those that received the Word were called gods he was God. In a similar way the Word can also be called God. Jesus is not claiming to be Jehovah nor is the Word Jehovah even if John called it God.  It is just a way of communicating ideas about Jesus and the Word. Kerwin, I can't make heads or tails of your first sentence.  I believe a word is missing. But I agree with you that the Word OF Jehovah cannot actually BE Jehovah. Therefore, a translation of “the Word was WITH God, and the Word WAS God” is faulty. Do you agree?  If not, then please explain how something that ISN'T God Himself can be called God Himself.

Mike,

The Word is being personalized by given it the title of a person.

I used as an sort of example Jesus who give himself the title of God even though he is not Jehovah.

John 10:33-36
King James Version (KJV)

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

The title God expresses a relationship that can be applied to both Jesus and the Word.

I am not skilled enough in Koine Greek to venture an opinion nor do I believe it cares even for the idea that Jesus is an angel as Scripture often employs symbolic language.  From what I have seen both sides of the disagreement are supported by experts.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,18:11)

I used as an sort of example Jesus who give himself the title of God even though he is not Jehovah. 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came

Are you equating “God” with “gods”?

Was Jesus saying that those to whom the word of GOD came were called GOD?

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 23 2013,06:16)

Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,18:11) I used as an sort of example Jesus who give himself the title of God even though he is not Jehovah. 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came Are you equating “God” with “gods”? Was Jesus saying that those to whom the word of GOD came were called GOD?

Mike,

He was saying that he was greater than the ones Scripture called gods, the ones to whom the Word came.  Thus his title is God to their title of gods. I am assuming translator emphasis is correct.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,18:30)

He was saying that he was greater than the ones Scripture called gods, the ones to whom the Word came.

We agree there, Kerwin.  That's exactly what Jesus was saying.

I don't agree that he is “God” to their “gods” though.  The Jews accused him of making himself out to be a god.  He was saying, “What's wrong with that?  I'm better than these other ones who were called gods.”

I reserve “God” for the God OF Jesus alone, Kerwin.  And Jesus never once claimed to be God or equal to him.

Being a god is one thing.  Being God is another.

[jammin]

Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,07:21)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 21 2013,00:00) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 20 2013,11:56) Either the Word was God or was a god will work………. NO Kerwin! It either IS God Himself, OR it is a god who is NOT God himself. Either/or does not work in this case. (Thank you for admitting that “a god” is an acceptable translation of John 1:1.   ) Mike, The Word is being personified and Jesus even stated that according to the sense in which those that received the Word were called gods he was God. In a similar way the Word can also be called God. Jesus is not claiming to be Jehovah nor is the Word Jehovah even if John called it God.  It is just a way of communicating ideas about Jesus and the Word.

wrong. no version that supports your opinion.
the Word is Christ
that is what the bible says

[kerwin]

Quote (jammin @ July 23 2013,07:23)

Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,07:21) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 21 2013,00:00) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 20 2013,11:56) Either the Word was God or was a god will work………. NO Kerwin! It either IS God Himself, OR it is a god who is NOT God himself. Either/or does not work in this case. (Thank you for admitting that “a god” is an acceptable translation of John 1:1.   ) Mike, The Word is being personified and Jesus even stated that according to the sense in which those that received the Word were called gods he was God. In a similar way the Word can also be called God. Jesus is not claiming to be Jehovah nor is the Word Jehovah even if John called it God.  It is just a way of communicating ideas about Jesus and the Word. wrong. no version that supports your opinion. the Word is Christ that is what the bible says

Jammin,

We are not talking version, we are talking of a type of communication. It is called thinking like a First Century Jew and not a 21st Century Trinitarian.

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 23 2013,06:40)

Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,18:30) He was saying that he was greater than the ones Scripture called gods, the ones to whom the Word came. We agree there, Kerwin.  That's exactly what Jesus was saying. I don't agree that he is “God” to their “gods” though.  The Jews accused him of making himself out to be a god.  He was saying, “What's wrong with that?  I'm better than these other ones who were called gods.” I reserve “God” for the God OF Jesus alone, Kerwin.  And Jesus never once claimed to be God or equal to him. Being a god is one thing.  Being God is another.

Mike,

As I said I am assuming translators translated the emphasis correctly and the Jews accused him of claiming to be God.

[carmel]

terraricca,July wrote:

[/quote]

Quote

AT THAT TIME ADAM WAS PERFECT ,so no need to interpreting what does not need to be ,

Terraricca,

YES THAT'S MY POINT!

SO GOD WAS NOT REFERING TO THE KIND OF MARRIAGE WHICH ORIGINATED THROUGH SIN,THE ONE YOU ARE AWARE OF! SINCE IT WAS NOT YET HAPPENED!

BUT TO THE PERFECT MARRIAGE FIRST WHICH THE FIRST ADAM WOULD HAVE ACHIEVED IF HE REMAINED  PERFECT!

SECOND TO THE SECOND ADAM AND ONLY PERFECT MARRIAGE OF THE LAMB!

WHICH IS THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF HIS KINGDOM, BY HIS SON! THE ONLY PERFECT MAN!

ALL BY HIM, ALL IN HIM, AND ALL FOR HIM!

SO GOD IN THAT VERSE IS REFERING TO THE WHOLE PROCESS WHICH THE PERFECT MAN THE WORD, HIS SON, STARTED THE MOMENT HE LEFT HIS FATHER!

I STATED THAT GOD ENVISAGED THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF HIS KINGDOM NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT ADAM WAS GOING TO FAIL TO ACHIEVE!  OK?

SO GOD OBVIOUS KNEW ALL WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, DEFINITELY! IT WAS PREDESTINED BY HIM THEREFORE, THAT VERSE COMMENCED RIGHT FROM THE  VERY FIRST MOMENT THAT THE  SON THE WORD  LEFT HIS FATHER FIRST TO CREATE OUR WORLD, AND ENDED IN THE ACHIEVEMENT OF HIS KINGDOM  BY THE REDEMPTION THROUGH HIS SON THE WORD MADE FLESHWHICH GLORIFIED BOTH THE FATHER AND HIS SON, ACCORDING TO THE FATHER'S WILL!

SO NOW WE AGREE ON THE FIRST PART OF  THAT VERSE!

HERE IS THE SCRIPTURE AGAIN!

Genesis 2:Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be TWO IN ONE FLESH

WHEREFORE, a man THE WORD THE SON'S SPIRIT, shall leave Father ALMIGHTY GOD BEFORE THE WORLD WAS ,TO ACCOMPLISH HIS KINGDOM, AND COMMENCED AND  CREATED OUR MATERIAL WORLD! FIRST!

and mother, NOW I LEAVE THIS FOR YOU TO REFLECT AND EXPAND IN ORDER TO DISCOVER THE MOTHER

Peace and love in Jesus Christ

Charles

[terraricca]

Quote (carmel @ July 23 2013,12:46)

terraricca,July wrote: [/quote] Quote AT THAT TIME ADAM WAS PERFECT ,so no need to interpreting what does not need to be , Terraricca, YES THAT'S MY POINT! SO GOD WAS NOT REFERING TO THE KIND OF MARRIAGE WHICH ORIGINATED THROUGH SIN,THE ONE YOU ARE AWARE OF! SINCE IT WAS NOT YET HAPPENED! BUT TO THE PERFECT MARRIAGE FIRST WHICH THE FIRST ADAM WOULD HAVE ACHIEVED IF HE REMAINED  PERFECT! SECOND TO THE SECOND ADAM AND ONLY PERFECT MARRIAGE OF THE LAMB! WHICH IS THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF HIS KINGDOM, BY HIS SON! THE ONLY PERFECT MAN! ALL BY HIM, ALL IN HIM, AND ALL FOR HIM! SO GOD IN THAT VERSE IS REFERING TO THE WHOLE PROCESS WHICH THE PERFECT MAN THE WORD, HIS SON, STARTED THE MOMENT HE LEFT HIS FATHER! I STATED THAT GOD ENVISAGED THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF HIS KINGDOM NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT ADAM WAS GOING TO FAIL TO ACHIEVE!  OK? SO GOD OBVIOUS KNEW ALL WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, DEFINITELY! IT WAS PREDESTINED BY HIM THEREFORE, THAT VERSE COMMENCED RIGHT FROM THE  VERY FIRST MOMENT THAT THE  SON THE WORD  LEFT HIS FATHER FIRST TO CREATE OUR WORLD, AND ENDED IN THE ACHIEVEMENT OF HIS KINGDOM  BY THE REDEMPTION THROUGH HIS SON THE WORD MADE FLESHWHICH GLORIFIED BOTH THE FATHER AND HIS SON, ACCORDING TO THE FATHER'S WILL! SO NOW WE AGREE ON THE FIRST PART OF  THAT VERSE! HERE IS THE SCRIPTURE AGAIN! Genesis 2:Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be TWO IN ONE FLESH WHEREFORE, a man THE WORD THE SON'S SPIRIT, shall leave Father ALMIGHTY GOD BEFORE THE WORLD WAS ,TO ACCOMPLISH HIS KINGDOM, AND COMMENCED AND  CREATED OUR MATERIAL WORLD! FIRST! and mother, NOW I LEAVE THIS FOR YOU TO REFLECT AND EXPAND IN ORDER TO DISCOVER THE MOTHER Peace and love in Jesus Christ Charles

CHARLES

ALL YOUR TALKING IS LIKE KNITTING ,YOU ARE MAKING YOUR OWN INTERPRETATION ,SAYING WHAT GOD AD IN HIS MIND AND PLAN WITHOUT EVEN SHOWING THE SCRIPTURES THAT ARE GOING WITH IT ,

YOUR SCRIPTURE ;IN GENESES 2 MEANS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS ,AND IS FOR THAT PURPOSE ONLY,

BUT BECAUSE OF SIN MAN AS NEVER BE ABLE TO PRODUCE ONE SINGLE GODLY CHILD IN THE FLESH AS GOD AD PLAN IT ,

AND YOU DUPLICATE THIS QUOTE ,

[carmel]

terraricca,July wrote:

[/quote]

Quote

ALL YOUR TALKING IS LIKE KNITTING ,YOU ARE MAKING YOUR OWN INTERPRETATION ,SAYING WHAT GOD AD IN HIS MIND AND PLAN WITHOUT EVEN SHOWING THE SCRIPTURES THAT ARE GOING WITH IT ,

Terraricca,

HOW GOOD I AM!

UNLESS YOU BE SPECIFIC,

I WON'T BE ABLE TO KNOW WHAT PART YOU ARE REFERING TO!

DID ADAM HAS A MOTHER?  NO!

SO WHO'S THAT MOTHER WHICH IS MENTIONED IN THAT SCRIPTURE?

DID THE FATHER SENT HIS SON?  YES!

SO WE ALL KNOW THAT THE SON'S SPIRIT THE WORD LEFT THE FATHER TO CREATE ALL! BEFORE THE WORLD WAS!

John 1:1IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.

Peace and love in Jesus

Charles

[terraricca]

Quote (carmel @ July 23 2013,22:31)

terraricca,July wrote: [/quote] Quote ALL YOUR TALKING IS LIKE KNITTING ,YOU ARE MAKING YOUR OWN INTERPRETATION ,SAYING WHAT GOD AD IN HIS MIND AND PLAN WITHOUT EVEN SHOWING THE SCRIPTURES THAT ARE GOING WITH IT , Terraricca, HOW GOOD I AM! UNLESS YOU BE SPECIFIC, I WON'T BE ABLE TO KNOW WHAT PART YOU ARE REFERING TO! DID ADAM HAS A MOTHER?  NO! SO WHO'S THAT MOTHER WHICH IS MENTIONED IN THAT SCRIPTURE? DID THE FATHER SENT HIS SON?  YES! SO WE ALL KNOW THAT THE SON'S SPIRIT THE WORD LEFT THE FATHER TO CREATE ALL! BEFORE THE WORLD WAS! John 1:1IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made. Peace and love in Jesus Charles

CHARLES

God was not talking to Adam about marriage he already marry them ,SO HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THOSE THAT COME AFTER THEM their offspring ,

John 1;1 as nothing to do with Geneses 2 unless you quote verse 3 of John 1

Quote

SO WE ALL KNOW THAT THE SON'S SPIRIT

what do you think is THE SON'S SPIRIT

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,19:57)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 23 2013,06:40) Being a god is one thing.  Being God is another. Mike, As I said I am assuming translators translated the emphasis correctly and the Jews accused him of claiming to be God.

And when did Jesus ever claim to be God Himself, Kerwin?

[jammin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 24 2013,10:12)

Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,19:57) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 23 2013,06:40) Being a god is one thing.  Being God is another. Mike, As I said I am assuming translators translated the emphasis correctly and the Jews accused him of claiming to be God. And when did Jesus ever claim to be God Himself, Kerwin?

did you understand what kerwin said?

let me repeat
kerwin said
Jews accused him of claiming to be God

do you understand that mike?
now if you ask for the verse, you may read john.

[jammin]

Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,12:54)

Quote (jammin @ July 23 2013,07:23) Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,07:21) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 21 2013,00:00) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 20 2013,11:56) Either the Word was God or was a god will work………. NO Kerwin! It either IS God Himself, OR it is a god who is NOT God himself. Either/or does not work in this case. (Thank you for admitting that “a god” is an acceptable translation of John 1:1.   ) Mike, The Word is being personified and Jesus even stated that according to the sense in which those that received the Word were called gods he was God. In a similar way the Word can also be called God. Jesus is not claiming to be Jehovah nor is the Word Jehovah even if John called it God.  It is just a way of communicating ideas about Jesus and the Word. wrong. no version that supports your opinion. the Word is Christ that is what the bible says Jammin, We are not talking version, we are talking of a type of communication.  It is called thinking like a First Century Jew and not a 21st Century Trinitarian.

you do not think like the first century christian.
i said version bec you always say stories.
no bible supports your doctrine.

you cant read your opinion. you think but non sense

[Author]

Posts