- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 5 days, 13 hours ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,11:19) After the word became flesh it is said that The word is flesh.
Where?Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,11:19) You acknowledge that God is love means love is an aspect of God so you should see that The word is flesh means flesh is an aspect of the word. Given that the word was made flesh means that the word was made to have the aspect of flesh.
Again, you are talking in riddles. For one, love is never said to have BECOME God, where the Word IS said to have BECOME flesh.And saying, “the Word was made to have the aspect of flesh” is the same thing as saying, “the Word WAS MADE flesh”.
So the SCRIPTURAL teaching is that an entity called “the Word of God” actually CAME TO BE a flesh being called “Jesus”. And you are playing word games to avoid this scriptural teaching, but end up saying the same exact thing anyway.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,11:19) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) Are you saying that the qualities of wisdom and God's word (His knowledge, teachings, instructions, commands, etc.) are personified in the living breathing being Jesus Christ? Yes.
This is the only part that really matters anyway, Kerwin. Because if you are saying that the qualities of wisdom and God's word are personified as the living breathing being known as Jesus Christ, then there is NO good reason you can give for NOT believing the same thing BEFORE Jesus became flesh.So if “wisdom” was being personified as Christ AFTER Christ was flesh, what scriptural reason do you have to say wisdom was NOT being personified as the living breathing person Jesus Christ in Proverbs 8?
And if the Word of God was personified as Christ AFTER Christ was flesh, what scriptural reason do you have to say the Word of God, through whom all things were created, was not being personified as the living breathing person Jesus Christ in John 1:1-3, BEFORE Jesus became flesh?
See? You are stuck.
I, on the other hand, can take the things that are said about “the Word” BEFORE he became flesh, and point to scriptures where the same exact things are said about Jesus Christ.
Get it? Let me walk you through it:
1. You and I agree that the Word is personified as Jesus Christ.
2. You and I agree that all things came into existence through the Word.
3. But SCRIPTURE also says that all things came into existence through JESUS CHRIST, so I see the Word as being personified as Jesus Christ both before AND after he became flesh – which aligns with ALL of the scriptures.
But YOU “explain away” those scriptures that say all things came into existence through Jesus Christ, so you can imagine that the Word is personified as Jesus Christ only AFTER he became flesh.
See the difference? We both start off believing the same thing, but then for some reason, you have to start explaining away clear scriptures so that you can deviate AWAY FROM the scriptural teachings, and only believe the parts you WANT to believe.
I believe that's called “personal bias”, Kerwin.
Mike.
Quote
Again, you are talking in riddles. For one, love is never said to have BECOME God, where the Word IS said to have BECOME flesh.God has always been love but the word has not always been flesh. There was a time that it was made flesh. John is speaking of this time. It is a transitional period where it changed from the word not having the attribute of flesh to being given the attribute of flesh.
John 1:8 is speaking of the light and it teaches us the John does not have the attribute of the light but he bears witness to the one that does. Jesus is that one as Jesus later said “I am the light of the world” in John 9:5. It is the same pastern as used to show that love is an attribute of God.
Mike,
Quote
So if “wisdom” was being personified as Christ AFTER Christ was flesh, what scriptural reason do you have to say wisdom was NOT being personified as the living breathing person Jesus Christ in Proverbs 8?Wisdom is mentioned in other chapters than chapter 8 of Proverbs and it is spoken of as a female. Jesus is male. A major exhibit of evidence is that wisdom is what kings reign by. Jesus is the archetype of those kings.
Mike,
Quote And if the Word of God was personified as Christ AFTER Christ was flesh, what scriptural reason do you have to say the Word of God, through whom all things were created, was not being personified as the living breathing person Jesus Christ in John 1:1-3, BEFORE Jesus became flesh? “was” is the past tense of “is” and like God is love the word was God should not be taken literal. Instead it is saying God is an attribute of the word. I think that is where the translation the word is divine is coming from.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,12:22) Mike. Quote
Again, you are talking in riddles. For one, love is never said to have BECOME God, where the Word IS said to have BECOME flesh.God has always been love but the word has not always been flesh.
Start again, Kerwin.Has love always been God? Put the words in the right order, and try again.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,12:22) John 1:8 is speaking of the light and it teaches us the John does not have the attribute of the light but he bears witness to the one that does. Jesus is that one as Jesus later said “I am the light of the world” in John 9:5. It is the same pastern as used to show that love is an attribute of God.
It can't be the “same pattern” if you are reversing the order of the words.To match “love is an attribute of God”, you must say that “the word is an attribute of flesh”.
And that does not match with “flesh is an attribute of the word”. Can you see the difference?
Also, if John 1:8 teaches that John bears witness to the one who has the attribute of light, and that one is “Jesus”, then “Jesus” is also the one spoken of in John 1:1-7.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,12:34) Wisdom is mentioned in other chapters than chapter 8 of Proverbs and it is spoken of as a female. Jesus is male.
Kerwin, do you know the difference between “grammatical gender” and “physical gender”? Whether or not the “wisdom” in Proverbs 8 was Jesus, it was NOT a physical female. You do understand that, right?Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,12:34) A major exhibit of evidence is that wisdom is what kings reign by.
Only a part of Proverbs 8 describes the one through whom God created all things as “wisdom”. Other parts of it speak of literal wisdom.(Neither meaning refers to a female, though the word is grammatically feminine.)
Many other scriptural passages do the same. Many times in the NT, the writers attribute only certain parts of a psalm or other passage to Jesus. The entire psalm or passage doesn't refer to Jesus – only parts of it. Do you understand this? Are you then able to understand the same thing about Proverbs 8? Only verses 22-31 refer to Jesus as the first work God ever created.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,12:43) Mike, Quote And if the Word of God was personified as Christ AFTER Christ was flesh, what scriptural reason do you have to say the Word of God, through whom all things were created, was not being personified as the living breathing person Jesus Christ in John 1:1-3, BEFORE Jesus became flesh? “was” is the past tense of “is” and like God is love the word was God should not be taken literal. Instead it is saying God is an attribute of the word. I think that is where the translation the word is divine is coming from.
More riddles.First of all, you didn't actually address my question, nor show me a scripture that would prohibit Jesus from being the living breathing being who is the word personified BEFORE he was made in the likeness of a human being.
And secondly, God is not an attribute of the word. The word could be an attribute of God, but not the other way around.
Are YOU even sure what you're saying? Because it seems you are just placing words together in a sentence, without even knowing for sure what that sentence ends up saying.
mikeboll64,Feb. wrote:[/quote]
Quote If “The Word of God” DIDN'T used to be an individual living breathing being, but then BECAME an individual living breathing being, that individual living breathing being HAD A BEGINNING. Mike,
WHEN YOU LOOK AT GOD'S THINGS FROM A HUMAN SIDE POINT OF VIEW, YOU ARE RIGHT
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT GOD'S THINGS FROM GOD'S POINT OF VIEW YOU ARE WRONG
Now Mike,
Does your word goes out of your mouth and return back, NEVER MIND WHETHER IF IT SHALL PROSPER OR NOT!
BUT GOD'S WORD DID
YOU SAID THAT:
IF “The Word of God” DIDN'T used to be an individual living breathing being,AND BECAME SO IT HAD TO HAVE A BEGINNING!
FROM GOD SIDE NOT REALLY!
FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THAT SINCE GOD IS ETERNAL, WHATEVER HE DOES CONCERNING HIMSELF, WHICH INCLUDES ALSO THE WORD MADE FLESH IT WOULD BE ALSO ETERNAL, EVEN IF WE DETERMINE THE OPPOSITE!
SO IT DIDN'T HAVE A BEGINNING!
NOW ANSWER:
WHEN A BUTTERFLY COMES OUT OF HIS COCOON, WHICH HE HIMSELF PREVIOUSLY BUILT AS A CATERPILLAR,
WAS THE BUTTERFLY IN EXISTENCE BUT AS A CATERPILLAR ?
WAS THE BUTTERFLY THE SAME BEING BUT AS A CATERPILLAR?
DIDN'T THEREFORE THE BUTTERFLY ALTHOUGH HE HAD A BEGINNING, IN THE SAME TIME HE WAS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE PREVIOUSLY THEREFORE HE NEVER REALLY HAD A BEGINNING AT ALL, BUT SIMPLY WHAT WE CALL A COMPLETE TRANSFORMATION?
ALSO:
A transsexual person EXPERIENCES TWO COMPLETE DIFFERENT BEGINNINGS! ONE WHEN HE WAS BORN , WHICH HE COULD NEVER REMEMBER, AND ANOTHER NEW BIRTH WHICH HE HIMSELF GAVE TO ITSELF, AND TO HIMSELF WHICH REMAINS TILL DEATH!
THEREFORE ALTHOUGH THAT PERSON WAS BORN IN COMPLETE DIFFERENT BEING HE STILL WAS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE PREVIOUSLY BUT IN AN OPPOSITE KIND OF BEING!
SO! WITH THE SAME ARGUMENTS:
CAN GOD DO WHAT HE COULD AND DID WITH A MERE WORM
AND ALSO WHAT HIS CREATURES DO TO THEMSELVES?
THEREFORE TO HIMSELF, IN HIS UNIQUE MYSTERIOUS WAYS TO PLEASE HIMSELF AS HIS CREATURES PLEASED THEMSELVES?
SO
THE WORD WAS BORN AS A CHILD! BUT HE STILL DIDN'T HAVE A BEGINNING, SINCE HE WAS ALSO THE SON OF GOD,
THE WORD WAS BORN A CHILD IN THE SAME WAY THAT THE SUN ENTERS THROUGH A GLASS AND PASS ONTO THE OTHERSIDE AND IT REMAINS THE SAME SUN IN ALL ITS CHARACTERISTICS
THAT’S HOW MUCH GOD NEEDED THE WOMAN TO BE BORN IN THE WORD MADE FLESH!
BELIEVE IT OR NOT :
MARY WAS NOT A WOMAN LIKE ALL WOMAN BUT A NEW THING FOR GOD SINCE GOD NEVER NEEDED A MAN, A SPERM, THEREFORE ALSO WHATEVER A WOMAN NEEDED IN ORDER TO SERVE MAN!
AS A PROOF THAT HE NEVER HAD A BEGINNING IN THE TRUTH!
THIS IS CONFIRMED IN:
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, but it shall do whatsoever I please, and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it.
SO IF GOD SAID:
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.
THEREFORE:
ALL HUMANS IN ORDER TO BE BORN, A SPERM, AND AN OVUM MUST BE FUSED! SO THERE HAS TO BE AN ACT WHICH NEVER HAD BEEN BEFORE , BETWEEN TWO DIFFERENT ELEMENTS! THEREFORE A COMPLETE NEW BEGINNING!
THE WORD BECAME FLESH WITHOUT ANY SPERM AT ALL!
THE WORD BECAME FLESH WITHOUT ANY FUSION OF TWO DIFFERENT ELEMENTS AT ALL!
THE WORD BECAME FLESH FROM ONE ELEMENT, ONE SPIRIT! ONE ETERNAL SPIRIT! GOD'S!
THEREFORE ALWAYS ETERNAL NO MATTER WHAT REGARDING GOD'S PERSONAL ATTRIBUTES!
AND STILL LOOK THE OPPOSITE ACCORDING TO ISAIAH!
THIS IS CALLED PARADOX
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
charles
Quote A transsexual person EXPERIENCES TWO COMPLETE DIFFERENT BEGINNINGS! ONE WHEN HE WAS BORN , WHICH HE COULD NEVER REMEMBER, AND ANOTHER NEW BIRTH WHICH HE HIMSELF GAVE TO ITSELF, AND TO HIMSELF WHICH REMAINS TILL DEATH! THEREFORE ALTHOUGH THAT PERSON WAS BORN IN COMPLETE DIFFERENT BEING HE STILL WAS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE PREVIOUSLY BUT IN AN OPPOSITE KIND OF BEING!
you mean from a sinner to a total corrupted soul ,right
because all men have sinned but all men did not sold their soul to corruption
charles
THIS IS CONFIRMED IN:
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, but it shall do whatsoever I please, and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it.
those scriptures do not confirm anything you said that is for sure , those verses only mean that God does not speaks like men full of hot air ,say much but cannot do much ,ON THE OTHER HAND GOD DOES WHAT HE SAYS AND NOTHING CAN STOP FROM DOING IT ,AND AS FOR HIS WAY OF THINKING YEAH IT IS TO FAR BE ON OUR GRASP TO UNDERSTAND IT .
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,04:01) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Feb. 22 2014,10:40) Mike………So your Words are not a expression of yourself……….. Any on with half a brain can see a Persons words “ARE” a Representative of HIS MIND
See the word “OF”, Gene?Do you know what that word means? I learned it at a very early age. Have you not yet learned it?
If my words are an expression OF myself, then they can't possibly BE “myself”.
If they are a representative OF my mind, then they can't very well BE “my mind”.
Can you understand these things?
Mike……..Yes i do know what OF means , it means your word are FROM YOURSELF, and therefore are a reflection of YOUR SPIRIT, not someone else's, Jesus said clearly, “THE WORDS I AM TELLING YOU “ARE” SPIRIT AND LIFE”. If you understood that, then you would know the source of “ALL” words “ARE” Spirit, and Jesus also said GOD was, A “SPIRIT” , now if you can put it together, you will have it. Words can NEVER BECOME FLESH that is impossible why< because they are SPIRIT or (INTELLECTS), BEING EXPRESSED BY SOUND. Words are INTELLIGENT UTTERANCES From the"SPIRITS" within us.Jesus plainly said what comes out of a mans MOUTH, is what defiles him, Now Mike what is it that come out of a man MOUTH , His WORDS, right?, they are what express who that man IS> His words originate from his Spirit (INTELLECT) that is IN him in fact it is the mans Spirit itself, begin expressed out wordily Through sound coming from his own mouth.
No word ever “BECAME” FLESH, Because word are SPIRIT and Spirit is not FLESH. Word can come to be “IN” Flesh beings though. God who is Spirit was “IN” Jesus and Spoke through Him Just as Jesus said He was, so GOD's Words which are Spirit as God is Spirit also was in Jesus , so God the FATHER who is Spirit was “IN” Jesus. Jesus was never God or GOD'S word HIMSELF, He simply Spoke GOD'S word to us as the SPIRIT of GOD gave him UTTERANCE.
Haven't you read where Jesus told his disciples not to meditate beforehand on what they would say, if brought to trial , because it would be given them what to say (words) and it would not be them speaking, but the Spirit of GOD in their hearts speaking through them. Now Just transfer that to Jesus also, It was God the Father who is a Spirit (intellect) that was in Jesus speaking through Him also. None of the made Jesus the Word, nor his flesh either. Spirit is NOT FLESH MIKE, never was and never will be either.
This whole idea of a word being Flesh is a false teaching, because no Spirit is Flesh. Spirits are what is “IN” FLESH> Face it Mike you need to understand it the way you do so you can make John 1:1, say what you want it to and if you except the truth your whole house of cards will come crashing down, and you will have to admit you were in error. Now that is the reason for all of this right Mike , you simply can not stand to be proven wrong Mike, but none the less you are wrong Mike. IMO and others also I might add. IMO
peace and love to you and yours……………………….gene
Quote (carmel @ Feb. 23 2014,01:10) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,03:24) If “The Word of God” DIDN'T used to be an individual living breathing being, but then BECAME an individual living breathing being, that individual living breathing being HAD A BEGINNING. Mike,
WHEN YOU LOOK AT GOD'S THINGS FROM A HUMAN SIDE POINT OF VIEW, YOU ARE RIGHT
So since NONE OF US are able to look at it from anything other than a human side, and since God intended for HUMANS to be able to understand His written word, then let's just leave it as, “Mike, you are right.”Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Feb. 23 2014,09:08) Words can NEVER BECOME FLESH that is impossible……..
You need to tell that to Wakeup and Kerwin. They're the ones who believe a literal spoken word from the mouth of God became a flesh being. I have never believed such nonsense.Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Feb. 23 2014,09:08) Jesus plainly said what comes out of a mans MOUTH, is what defiles him, Now Mike what is it that come out of a man MOUTH , His WORDS, right?,
That's right Gene. A man's WORDS come out of his mouth – NOT the MAN HIMSELF, right?And if it is not the MAN HIMSELF that comes out of the man's mouth, then a man's words are NOT the man himself, right? So if you continue to preach that a person's words ARE the very person who spoke them, then you have to start teaching that THE MAN who comes out of a man's mouth is the one who defiles himself.
On the other hand, if you are NOT prepared to start preaching that nonsense, then be smart enough to STOP preaching that the words of a person ARE that person.
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Feb. 23 2014,09:08) Face it Mike you need to understand it the way you do so you can make John 1:1, say what you want it to……….
Gene, against my better judgment, I'm going to try once again to explain a few things to you. I am SINCERELY HOPING that you will consider the TRUTH of what I say.The following is YOUR understanding of John 1:1, Gene:
In the beginning, there was God. But then God spoke words out of His mouth. And since a person's words actually ARE the person who spoke them, God effectively spoke HIMSELF out of His own mouth.
Then the God who was spoken out of the mouth of the first God was both with that first God, and somehow also WAS that first God. So by some bizarre twist of logic and reason, we ended up with a new God who was both with God and was God.
Then the God who was spoken out of the first God's mouth became flesh, and ended up dwelling on earth as the SON of the first God – even though this second God still WAS the first God who spoke Him out of His mouth.
Does that REALLY make sense to you, Gene?
Now, my turn……………
1. It is CLEAR from scripture that Jesus is indeed called a god. You can't deny this, although you try to pretend Hebrews 1:8 doesn't exist.
2. It is CLEAR from scripture that all things, whether visible or invisible, whether in heaven or on earth, were created through JESUS.
3. It is CLEAR from scripture that JESUS is the ONLY one who ever became flesh and dwelled on earth with the glory of God's only begotten Son.
4. It is CLEAR from scripture that John the Baptist came to witness about none other than JESUS.
5. And it is CLEAR from scripture that JESUS is the one called “The Word of God” in Revelation 19:13.
Gene, which one of the above claims can you SCRIPTURALLY refute? None of them!
So the teaching in John 1 involves a being that John calls “the Word of God”. John also calls this same exact being “the Word of God” in Revelation 19:13. That is our first clue.
John tells us that this being called “the Word of God” was not only with “THE God Jehovah” in the beginning, but was also himself a god. (This is supported by at least 5 scriptures, including Hebrews 1:8)
John then tells us that Jehovah God created all things THROUGH this being. (The being Jehovah created all things through is listed as JESUS in three or four other scriptures.)
Then John tells us that this being was made flesh and dwelled on earth with the glory of the only begotten from the Father. (JESUS is the ONLY one that can be said about.)
Then John tells us that John the Baptist came to testify concerning this particular “light of the world, which was the life of men”. (John the Baptist only testified about ONE person……… JESUS. And this person is also called “the light of the world” and the “life of men” in other scriptures.)
And just in case there is any doubt about who “the Word” is, John CLEARLY tells us who it is in Revelation 19:13.
So Gene, I'm not being “forced” to understand it any particular way for personal reasons. I'm just understanding it as it was CLEARLY told to me through the scriptures. And this is the short list. There are many other things said about “the Word” in John 1 that are later said about JESUS in other scriptures.
My understanding aligns with each and every scripture out there, and is supported and confirmed by MANY various scriptures throughout the NT.
Now compare that with the travesty that you call “your understanding”.
Gene, this was a treat for you. I am trying to help. But don't expect me to get all bogged down in a bunch of Charles-sized manifestos from you. I don't spend a lot of time discussing these things with you because you have proven yourself to be a close-minded person, who only wants the scriptures to come out the way you WANT them to – despite the contradictions and clear TWISTING you have to do to those scriptures to make them come out that way.
But at any rate, I hope you were able to digest at least some of the meat I just fed you.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,01:07) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,12:22) Mike. Quote
Again, you are talking in riddles. For one, love is never said to have BECOME God, where the Word IS said to have BECOME flesh.God has always been love but the word has not always been flesh.
Start again, Kerwin.Has love always been God? Put the words in the right order, and try again.
Mike,They are in the order they appear in Scripture.
Perhaps you are thinking if the statement the word is God. Possibly you could say Love is God and it is equivalent to saying Love is divine but even though I suspicion that us true in Koine Greek I do not know if it is.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,01:11) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,12:22) John 1:8 is speaking of the light and it teaches us the John does not have the attribute of the light but he bears witness to the one that does. Jesus is that one as Jesus later said “I am the light of the world” in John 9:5. It is the same pastern as used to show that love is an attribute of God.
It can't be the “same pattern” if you are reversing the order of the words.To match “love is an attribute of God”, you must say that “the word is an attribute of flesh”.
And that does not match with “flesh is an attribute of the word”. Can you see the difference?
Also, if John 1:8 teaches that John bears witness to the one who has the attribute of light, and that one is “Jesus”, then “Jesus” is also the one spoken of in John 1:1-7.
Mike,I am not sure what you are trying to say. I do know that I checked the Geneva Bible version of Scripture for the words “was made” and came up with the phrase “all the house was made perfect” from 1 Kings 6:22. In that case the house is given the attribute of perfect. Another example is “Thus the field, and the cave that is therein, was made sure unto Abraham for a possession of burial by the Hittites” and once again the predicate on the right is made an attribute of the subject on the left. It is same with the statement God is love.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 23 2014,11:04) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2014,01:11) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,12:22) John 1:8 is speaking of the light and it teaches us the John does not have the attribute of the light but he bears witness to the one that does. Jesus is that one as Jesus later said “I am the light of the world” in John 9:5. It is the same pastern as used to show that love is an attribute of God.
It can't be the “same pattern” if you are reversing the order of the words.To match “love is an attribute of God”, you must say that “the word is an attribute of flesh”.
And that does not match with “flesh is an attribute of the word”. Can you see the difference?
Also, if John 1:8 teaches that John bears witness to the one who has the attribute of light, and that one is “Jesus”, then “Jesus” is also the one spoken of in John 1:1-7.
Mike,I am not sure what you are trying to say.
And that's because you're not even sure of what YOU'RE trying to say. Okay, look………….Love is an attribute OF God. So much so that one can poetically say “God IS love.”
Notice how “God” is the CONCRETE subject, and “love” is an ABSTRACT thing. So keeping the order of concrete and abstract, we can say:
The Word is an attribute OF flesh. So much so that one can poetically say “Flesh IS the Word.”
Do you see how it works out if you keep the same order between the concrete subject, and the abstract attribute? It's nonsensical, right?
Now here it is the other way – starting with your claim about the Word first………..
Flesh is an attribute OF the Word. So much so, that in the case of Jesus, one can poetically say, “The Word IS flesh.”
But let's try THAT order with “God” and “love”……….
God is an attribute OF love. So much so that one can poetically say, “Love IS God”.
Now do you see it? In your effort to make it seem like a viable comparison, you are reversing the orders of the concrete subject, and the abstract thing.
If you cannot say “Love is God”, then you cannot say “The Word is flesh”. And if you can say “God is love”, then you have to equate that with “Flesh is the Word”.
Because “flesh” and “God” are the two concrete subjects. While “love” and “the Word” are the two abstract things – according to you.
So if you want to consider “the Word” as an abstract attribute, then you are saying that John 1:14 teaches that an abstract attribute actually IS a concrete thing.
And that would be like saying the abstract attribute “love” actually IS the concrete thing “God”.
And since “love” is NOT actually “God”, your attempt fails.
Do you get it?
Mike,
So are you claiming a concrete thing can not become an aspect of an abstract thing.
That claim lacks support.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 22 2014,04:59) Quote (jammin @ Feb. 21 2014,19:55) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 21 2014,10:50) Quote (jammin @ Feb. 20 2014,22:43) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Feb. 21 2014,01:58) To All…….> The LORD our GOD and His words are ONE AND THE SAME, just as your words and you are, one and the same being. Not an OUNCE of Difference as concerning words, only you and I simple do not have HIS POWER, to bring about our words, like, God the Father does. Neither did or does Jesus. Jesus never did ONE MIRACLE “HIMSELF” it was GOD the FATHER who us “IN” him doing the WORKS. Just as He said. THE SON OF MAN CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF,THE FATHER WHO IS IN HIM, “HE” DOES THE 'WORKS” Jesus took no Glory for what the Father was doing through Him. IMO peace and love to you all………………………………………gene
my word can not be addressed as HE.do you understand that?
unless you do not know basic english
Jammin,In Koine Greek it is as word is masculine.
John 1:3-5
1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made.
4 In it was life, and that life was the light of men.
5 And that light shineth in the wilderness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not.
you dont know greek kerwin. your argument here proves that you do not have enough knowledge about the greek language.
Jammin,The writers of the Geneva bible used “it” instead of “he”.
what about MOST of the translations? do you ignore the HE?as i have told you, you do not know greek kerwin. dont pretend that you know the language. you still have a long long way to go
We know that “the Word” is the subject because it has the definite article, and we translate it accordingly: “and the Word was God.” Two questions, both of theological import, should come to mind: (1) why was θεός thrown forward? and (2) why does it lack the article?
In brief, its emphatic position stresses its essence or quality: “What God was, the Word was” is how one translation brings out this force. Its lack of a definite article keeps us from identifying the person of the Word (Jesus Christ) with the person of “God” (the Father). That is to say, the word order tells us that Jesus Christ has all the divine attributes that the Father has; lack of the article tells us that Jesus Christ is not the Father. John’s wording here is beautifully compact! It is, in fact, one of the most elegantly terse theological statements one could ever find. As Martin Luther said, the lack of an article is against Sabellianism; the word order is against Arianism.
To state this another way, look at how the different Greek constructions would be rendered:
καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν ὁ θεός
“and the Word was the God”
(i.e., the Father; Sabellianism)καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν θεός
“and the Word was a god” (Arianism)καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
“and the Word was God” (Orthodoxy).Jesus Christ is God and has all the attributes that the Father has.
BY DANIEL B WALLACE
who is daniel wallace?
Daniel Baird Wallace (born 1952) is professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. He is also the founder and executive director of the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, the purpose of which is digitizing all known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament via digital photographs.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
