- This topic is empty.
- Posts
T8,
I assume Nick knows he was essentially repeating himself when he stated “The Word was in the form of God. The Word was God” as both sentences are paraphrases of one another. Some Trinitarians realize this but they presume image and its synonyms means Jesus has the characteristic of literally being God even though he is not the Father. Note this presumption disappears when image or its synonyms is used in relation to anyone but Jesus.
The JW’s prefer to translate it as “a god” but that is unnecessary as even as it sits in most translations it is a paraphrase of the Word is the image of God and they just take that to mean the word is a being composed of spirit, at least when it refers to Jesus.
” Jesus was never GOD’S WORD,”
Not if one takes St John’s prologue simply as it says for it plainly declares Jesus to be the word that was with God and was God.If anyone studies at all it’s easy to see the author of these words got their ideas from Philo or other Jewish diaspora philosophers, who got them from Plato and applied them to Jehovah and Jesus.
“To all…..God and his words are one, just as we and our words are one and the same.”
This sounds like the teachings of Kenneth Copeland,Robert Tilton,or Charles Capps but they don’t deny the deity of Jesus Christ but rather uphold it.
Dear Gene seems to have taken the tangent of Dr.Anthony Buzzard off the deep end as I nearly did at once too and in so doing comes close to denying Christ altogether as so many so called “messianics” do too. As I’ve said to several on this site before,why not just become Jews and throw out the Christ of Christianity? But of course they’re “true Jews”-thus “true Christians” already,whatever that may mean to them.
Andrew,
Not if one takes St John’s prologue simply as it says for it plainly declares Jesus to be the word that was with God and was God
That is a presumption based on Catholic theology. John’s words in chapter 1 are vague doe to the fact there is unwritten context to it. This is know though many deny it preferring to see it as proving their doctrine is true.
There is no evidence to support the claim that the word in John 1:1 is Jesus and there is overwhelming evidence it is the word that come out of God’s mouth. Some of the evidence is not from such as the fact that Philo of God viewed the logos of God as an “archangel” but not a literal being. Jews today have their Adam Kadmon, aka primordial man. I am not sure if primordial man is considered to be a real being or just a construct’ These things are confusing to modern thinkers and seemed to have been confusing to the Gentiles even from early on.
In the beginning was God and he spoke his word and so it was with. His word contained his image. Through it he created all things that are created and nothing was created without it. In it is the life of humanity. His word, which contains his image, became human. John did not speak one word that was a new doctrine to the Jews that were his audience.
Dear Kerwin,
You must be one of the strange “jews” I spoke of as you plainly deny what St John’s prologue plainly speaks of. You must be of those who he came to but received him not. I pity your poor soul,but don’t worry I still love you. (:
Andrew,
So you do not realize that the ones who do not receive the word that comes out of God’s mouth are not God’s children?
The ones that receive the word of God are God’s children.
It is not rocket science or anything complicated.
Should I repeat the parable of the sower?
Do you not know that Jesus promised those that that hunger and thirst for righteousness that they will be filled with it in the new covenant?
They choose to believe Jesus is the one true God because they find believing he is a human beings convicts them of there evil deed and so they do not want to come out into the light of knowledge. They feel better hiding in the darkness of ignorance and deception.
Andrew AD,
Jesus embodies the word of God as he is the exact image of his righteousness and holiness and the one God chose to share the place of the word that comes out of his mouth.
Jesus is a human being, just as Scripture literally states.
You are losing me Kerwin. You say Jesus is the one true God but deny he is the Word? I don’t get your theology here.? Or are you saying that believing that Jesus is human is hard to believe? Yes I believe he was human but the parable of the sower has nothing to do with that as I see it. Jesus point in that parable was not about himself being divine or not.
But you do agree with Gene that Jesus was never God’s word? according to St John’s prologue? Can you answer me that plainly or will you only speak in parables?
Dear Kerwin, we must have replied at the same time since now I see your latest post.
You say Jesus somehow embodies the word and shares the place of the word but is somehow not the word? You have a very strange problem imo. Why not just say you don’t accept the gospel of John? Others do and if you feel that way it’s okay with me.I won’t damn you for that but you’re afraid God and Jesus might? Don’t worry i think they understand.
Andrew,
I am saying that those individuals who love darkness find that believing Jesus is a human being just like them as too much to handle because that knowledge reveals they have no excuse for their evil deeds. These people make him safe by claiming he is either God or a being composed of spirit.
There are some of those who will not come out into the light that adapted to the idea that Jesus is just a human being though he had elevated above the angels as far as his rank is concerned. They have their own teachings to keep them safe from the knowledge of the truth.
There is but one God and he is the one Jesus worships. He does not see being God as being loot to be grasped but rather makes himself a servant to God and man.
AndrewAD,
I simply take John at what he states. Since he says word it follows he is speaking about the word and not about Jesus Christ. Being as he is talking about the word that comes out of God’s mouth it is clear to see he is using the statement the word was God in the qualitative sense. There are Trinitarians who claim that the noun in the clause is a qualitative noun though was can be used that way in English and is in the statement “God is love”. “The Word became flesh” is another qualitative statement.
It is not me that disagrees with John, it is those that find his words hard to understand.
“Seeing God as being loot”-but according to Paul this being has been honored with a higher state than he had before his preexistence with God because of his humility in becoming a human and servant obedient unto death. Will you bow to this being called Jesus Christ? Do you bow to him now? If not you’re damned according to your own beliefs.
And that is real sweet and christian of you to avoid my question with more religion. Do you follow Gene in denying Jesus is or ever was the Word? I’ve been accused of being a follower of Gene on this site too.I don’t take offense to that if I agree with him even if it was my own idea.
Love you Gene-please excuse being a scapegoat here but rejoice in that you share in the sufferings of Christ!
And it doesn’t matter if Jesus is God,a god or not does it if our deeds be evil? We will all supposedly be judged for our own works according to some. So are you fearful to answer me directly? Or you fear your own incoherent religion?-and that’s just the nature of the beast.
Oh you threw something else in there before I answered and that is fine.And what you say just shows how you twist the words to make them fit what you want them to be.Bravo on being another good religionist!
AndrewAD,
He does not see being God as being loot to be grasped but rather makes himself a servant to God and man.
I am paraphrasing some of the words from Philippians 2:6-7.
I do not know what you mean by “higher state” but I used “higher rank” as in raising a soldier from one rank to another or the civilian equivalent of doing so.
I did not twist the words of Scripture but rather untwisted them from what you have been taught to understand they mean.
You know that Jesus told his disciple he was going to his God and so revealed he worshiped his Father and our Father. (John 20:17)
So we have John’s word that Jesus worships his Father and our Father as God and those that interpret John’s words in chapter 1 to disagree with John 20:17 and the ones that are twisting John’s words no me.
The Word was WITH God. Look up the word ‘WITH’. If something or someone is with me, then it is not me, but next to me.
And who is next to God? The one whom is called “The Word of God”. Coincidence, no. In fact he is with God now in the same glory he had with him before the cosmos. He existed in the form of God, emptied himself, took on flesh, died, rose again, and is with God in the same glory he had before. Even the first martyr saw him at the right-hand of God in a vision.
There is much opposition to Jesus ancient origins, but it is written and that is good enough for me. We should be wise and accept what is written, rather than trying to force it into our own understanding. The latter does not allow us to be changed by the renewing of the mind.
Some men love certainty rather than mystery, so they are happy to even trade lies for truth. But we should be patient. The knowledge of God unravels in its appointed seasons. This is a great adventure and as we go from glory to glory, we learn more about him. Settling on a view and not budging no matter the evidence shows a stubborn heart and the nature of a goat.
If we are sheep, we hear the shepherds voice. If we are goats, we hear our own voice or the voice of another. Goats do not follow the shepherd because they are not part of the flock. I am not kidding when I say this.
t8,
Isaiah 55:11Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
11
so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth:
it shall not return unto me void,
but it shall accomplish that which I please,
and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.and
Isaiah 45:23Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
23
I have sworn by myself,
the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return,
That unto me every knee shall bow,
every tongue shall swear.The word was with God and the word is sent from God and will return to God when it has accomplished the mission he assigned it.
Kerwin, your reasoning above is flawed and inadequate.
A person or being can exist who is called by the same name as an attribute of God. In fact this was and is common practice. Jesus called Peter a rock/stone for example. Most names of people are actually attributes. e.g., David means Beloved (I think).
I know a person called Grace, and grace is also an attribute of God. We need not be confused about this.
An attribute never rules out that a person may exist with the same title.
Jesus said he was the truth. Truth is an attribute of God, yet the Truth was also Jesus and he is a person.
Jesus is also called ‘The Word of God’ right. Does that negate the attribute? Your reasoning doesn’t work here either as you can see.
Attributes never rule out persons.
Another example is the reality of lies does not rule out that the fact that there is a person called ‘The Father of Lies’.
No amount of making reference to the logos as an attribute of God is going to have any bearing on the existence of the Word of God that was with God.
Revelation 19:13
He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.The word was with God and the word is sent from God and will return to God when it has accomplished the mission he assigned it.
I understand the logos in God and he can speak and his word will not come back void. But how did the Word exist WITH God? Explain your view.
t8,
All I can do it point to Philo of Alexander a contemporary of John who uses logos much as John does in his writings. According to Philo, the logos was the plan or ideas of the thing to be created. From that point of view the word with God as it is in his mind.
I am sure John had a deeper view of the logos than Philo seems in his interpretation of the creation of the world because John speaks of Jesus telling the Jews “If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world,…” (John 10:34-36)
I may be shorting Philo as he called an archangel as all of God’s angels obey it.
My opinion is that both John and Philo use “the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space” (Google, Oct. 28, 2015) which is why Jesus speaks of bread from above and being the light, as well other such concepts. I do not believe the other gospel employs that method of speech as much. What I remember and look for lately has been in John including the Samaritan woman at the well. Many seem to have a low opinion of that technique as metaphysics also has the definition of “abstract theory or talk with no basis in reality.” (Google, Oct. 28, 2015)
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Philo claims a scriptural support for these metaphysics saying that the creation of the world was after the pattern of an intelligible world (Gen. 1:17) which served as its model. During the first day God created Ideas or Forms of heaven, earth, air (= darkness), empty space (= abyss), water, pneuma (= mind), light, the intelligible pattern of the sun and the stars (Op. 29).
t8,
I understand a being can bear the title of a concept such as “the Word” or “”Wisdom” which makes it difficult determine whether a concept is being personalized or it is instead a person. The Koine Greek, Hebrew, and Latin use of gender of a pronoun to speak of the gender of the noun being replaces makes it more difficult to judge whether the object is a concept or a person. For that reason I do not consider John’s words in the first part of chapter 1 proof text.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
