- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Except the next few verses, even in the Greek, refer to the Word of verse 1 as “he” and “him”. So it seems that John had a person in mind.
You say that we must treat the Bible with the greatest respect, yet you don’t tell me where I can find anything that you’re telling me within it. You’re just saying things. You say “No men are divine but all are vessels in which The divine can live and work”, so show me where it says that in the Bible. Back up what you’re saying with references. I think you’re mixing another religious book into this, and that has no place when speaking strictly about what the Bible says.
mstrainjr,
The word is a male gender noun in Koine Greek so the correct Koine Greek pronoun no matter what the natural gender of the subject is male. For example “light” in John 1:5 is neuter and “it” is substituted for light is also “neuter”. Light remains “neuter” even when John implies Jesus is the “light” in verses 7-9.
I know that, and I’m glad you either took the time to look it up, or possibly you already knew it. Now, my point is this: what makes you right and me wrong? Or what makes me right and you wrong? The way it’s written, it could be either way. Therefore, it’s probably not logical to assume that you’re right when you give your interpretation of what the Word is. Unfortunately, it’s not clear. This is an example of why the best Biblical scholars have been arguing over things like this for centuries. Each one wants to be right, and they’ll argue their side instead of accepting that the passage can have multiple interpretations to the modern reader.
Mstrainjr,
Tradition favors my position as it holds the Anointed is a human being descended of David and not a being that existed before David came to be.
In addition Philo spoke about the word that comes from God’s mouth, aka Logos, much as John does but clearly did not intend it to be confused with a person even though he called it the first born of God and used are imagery that made it seem to be a person. Philo even describes it as God as John writes with the words “The word is God”. It can be confusing to outsiders but it was a way a certain subculture of Jews at that time spoke and wrote.
Hi mstr,
The bible is about the work of God in and among men.
If your God is our God then I think it is over to you to prove that some men are divine.
For us there is one God and one Lord Jesus Christ.
Hi mstr,
You say about jn1.1
“Except the next few verses, even in the Greek, refer to the Word of verse 1 as “he” and “him”. So it seems that John had a person in mind.”
Indeed that person is JESUS CHRIST, the anointed man.
But the flesh contributes nothing so the anointing is what matters.
The WORD that was with God and was God was made flesh and dwelled among us.
mstrainjr,
I like these words from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy that I linked to in my last post to you.
b.) When the scripture uses the Greek term for God ho theos, it refers to the true God, but when it uses the term theos, without the article ho, it refers not to the God, but to his most ancient Logos (Somn. 1.229-230).
Well, I’m in over my head. I just meant to make a simple post, but now I’m answering too many questions at once and I really want to move on with my life. This is an interesting topic and I have a lot to say on it, but I seriously have other things to do. I’ll try to answer later on, so be patient.
Hi KW,
Philos and Philosophy are of the world.
Why would you offer them as interpreters of the Spiritual?
Hi Mstr,
The wait is worthwhile
The world has filled our heads with carnal understandings of what is spiritual.
It is a long walk back.
Nick,
It is irrelevant that Philo is of the world as I was talking of culture and the ideas communicated within a culture. After all you have heard of being a Jew a Jew and a Gentile to a Gentile. If the words written to a Gentile are heard by a Jew then the later may misunderstand and vise versa.
Hi KW,
You would suggest that what is spiritual must be read through a cultural understanding?
Such is deception
Nick,
The Spiritual is written in many languages and those who do not understand the language it is written in do not understand the Spiritual message of the words. The same is true with culture which is why Paul wrote the words of 1 Corinthians 9:20-22. The bottom line is to communicate the gospel in the way your hearer will understand it and to listen to the truth in the way it is spoken.
Nick,
Philo wrote:
b.) When the scripture uses the Greek term for God ho theos, it refers to the true God, but when it uses the term theos, without the article ho, it refers not to the God, but to his most ancient Logos (Somn. 1.229-230).
and that is how John uses theos in John 1:1. John uses the article in the clause “The word was with God” but not in the clause “the word was God”. Experts today debate his words but his words are from the same basic time period that John wrote and like John he write in Koine Greek.
Hi KW,
Your justifications are flim flam.
Men cannot add to the Words of God.
The spirit that infuses philosophy is not holy.
To all……GOD who is SPIRIT was MANIFESTED in the human man JESUS, A REAL HUMAN SON WHO GOD PHYSICALLY FATHERED IN THE WOMB OF A HUMAN WOMEN, MARY, and GOD THE FATHER came to “SPIRITUALLY” indwell his human son Jesus, at the Jordan River, when he was baptized by John. So GOD was indeed “MANIFESTED” (MADE KNOWN) in and through the FLESH man JESUS.
Jesus plainly said over and over, GOD the Father Was “IN” HIM. So GOD, WAS MANIFESTED IN THE FLESH MAN JESUS, but that did not make the Flesh man JESUS a God of any kind.
THIS SHOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM FOR US TO UNDERSTAND HERE AT ALL. IMO
peace and love to you all and yours. …………..gene
Nick,
Hi KW,
Your justifications are flim flam.
Men cannot add to the Words of God.
The spirit that infuses philosophy is not holy.
Why do you disagree with Paul’s claims To be a Jew to a Jew and a Gentile to a Gentile and that a few words with understanding are worth a multitude without.
Why do you condemn what God does not for God does not condemn philosophy unless it is based on the principles of the flesh?
Scripture is fully behind me but your words to do not have support within.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
