John 1:1

John 1:1 says the Word was God. Does that mean that Jesus is God because he is the Word?
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

a) In the beginning was the Word, (en arch hn o logoV)
b) and the Word was with God, (kai o logoV hn proV ton qeon)
c) and the Word was God. (kai qeoV hn o logoV).

John 1:1b says that the Word was with God and John 1:1c says that the Word was God, so how can the Word be God and be with God at the same time? Well part of the answer to discovering the meaning of this verse is found in 1 John 1:1-2

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life and the life was manifested, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was made manifest to us”.

First when we read 1John 1:2, it suggests to us that the God in John1:1b is the Father himself.

Secondly, we see In John 1:1c, the last word God is missing the definite article, (THE). The definite article is before all other instances of the word ‘God’ and ‘Logos’ in John 1:1. (e.g., the Word, The God.), yet is absent in the last mention of God. Read on because this can be significant as you are about to find out.

Greek sentence construction affirms that if a noun doesn’t have a preceding article, (THE) it can be read as an adjective (a predicate adjective); and if such a noun does have a preceding article it should be considered a noun (a predicate nominative). Understanding this is a game changer. Scholars see the benefit of the rule for affirming the deity of Christ in John 1:1, but haven’t made the difference clear regarding the difference between identity and nature or definite and qualitative. Don’t worry if this makes no sense to you. It will.

Look at the difference between these two sentences.

1) You are an angel
2) You are THE angel.

Notice how the first one is using the word angel in a qualitative way while the second is definite. Hence the term ‘definite article’.

In John 1:1, all instances of the word ‘God” are preceded by the definite article ‘THE’, except the last one.

So it literally says:

John1:1
a) In the beginning was THE God.
b) THE Word was with THE God
c) And THE Word was god.

Why is the last word not capitalised? Where Greek uses the definite article in English we capitalise the word. e.g., the god = God.

So it is grammatically correct to read John 1:1c with a qualitative sense rather reading it as identifying the Word as God himself. It is not only grammatically correct to read it this way, it is also theologically correct because if we read it as THE Theos, then that would be saying that the Logos is exclusively God even to the exclusion of the Father. Now we have two good reasons for reading the last word ‘god/theos’ as qualitative and not as THE God or God.

In rebuttal to this, some say that God in the New Testament doesn’t always have a preceding definite article which is true, however looking at the verse contextually, we understand that there is clearly two being spoken of, i.e., one God and one called the Word with is clearly another who is next to God and is not that God he is with.

Let’s look at Adam and Eve as an example of two beings that were with each other. Before I give an example, it is important for you at this point to understand that the Hebrew word for ‘man’ is ‘adam’. This means that qualitatively, Adam and Eve are both adam. This is similar to the word theos which is translated as the ‘God’ & god. The absence of the definite article can qualify just as the word adam qualifies. As I said before, in English we use capitals to denote when being definite. So the difference between ‘Adam’ and ‘adam’ is that Adam refers to a specific man called Adam while the latter could refer to him as well as Eve and any other member of mankind. This is clearly stated in scripture in Genesis 1:27:

So God created man (adam) in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

The word for man is adam, so it says: God created ‘adam’ male and female. So saying that ‘Eve is adam’ is a true saying.

In English, If I said “John is the man”, then I am identifying John as a definite and particular person of the human race. But if I omit the definite article and say “John is man,” then I do not identify him, I classify him. I say “John is human; he belongs to the sphere/nature of man.” Can you see the difference now?

To understand how the article can make a big difference to a piece of text, look at this example. Have a guess as to which one is correct.

a) In the beginning was THE woman
b) and THE woman was with THE man
c) and THE Woman was THE man

a) In the beginning was THE woman
b) and THE woman was with THE man
c) and THE Woman was man

The correct one is the second example because it is saying that the woman belongs to mankind or man. Look at the next example:

a) Tools were used by man.
b) Tools were used by the man.

See how the first example is talking about mankind whereas the second example is talking of a specific man.

In other words the word ‘man’ can be used as an attribute or to describe one’s nature. It is not always used to identify a particular person and it can even refer to more than one person.

Now let’s have a look at the above example, but using Adam and Eve instead. Notice in English that we do not have the definite article preceding Adam or Eve, because capitalising both Adam and Eve leads us to view these words in a definite sense, the same way that Greek requires the definite article. Essentially THE adam/man in Greek is the same as Adam in English.

a) In the beginning was Eve,
b) and Eve was with Adam
c) and Eve was Adam

a) In the beginning was Eve,
b) and Eve was with Adam
c) and Eve was adam

Notice that the second example is still the correct one.

To further understand the important difference between identity and nature, take a look at John 6:70. When speaking of his betrayer Judas Iscariot, Jesus said, “One of you is a devil.” Did Jesus mean that Judas is actually Satan the Devil? No! He merely meant to say that Judas is like (class) a devil, or that he had the qualities or nature of a/the devil. The word “devil” here has no article in the Greek as you have probably guessed, but most translators deem it necessary to add the indefinite article “a” to complete the thought in English even though it is not present in Greek or any Greek. Greek has no indefinite articles, (a,an).

So Judas wasn’t Satan himself, rather he was diabolical, like the Devil. He had the qualities of the Devil. But that doesn’t rule out the fact that Satan is the Devil because it is not actually saying that Judas was the Devil himself. Rather Judas thought as the Devil; and acted as the Devil. He was not the Devil (definite), (Satan is); he was not an actual devil or demon, he was a devil (qualitative). He was one who had the mental disposition, the nature, of the Devil, who is Satan. So it is with John 1:1c.

The Logos was God has no definite article. It is really saying, The Logos was god. This is why the New English Bible and the Revised English Bible translate John 1:1 as “what God was, the Word was.” The TEV (1976) translates it, “the Word was the same as God.” Goodspeed translates this, “the Word was divine.” And Moffatt translates this, “the logos was divine.”

So what kind of being is Jesus then if the Word was theos (without the definite article)? The answer according to John 1:1 is that he must be a divine being if Jesus is the Word of God that was with God. In other words he is a being with God’s nature. A son possessing the nature of his Father. Not just an image, but THE image of God. He is the prototype, the firstborn. He is the mystery that was hidden but has been revealed in our time. He is all these things, but he is not THE God that he is the son of. That God is exclusively the Father and there are many scriptures to prove that which we will look at later in this page.

Many think that the word ‘theos’ and ‘elohim’ always refer to YHWH. They take instances of their choosing to try and prove that Christ is YHWH. In their ignorance they cannot see that there are indeed many god (theos) and many lords, but for true believers there is one God (theos) the Father.

In fact, the word ‘theos’ and ‘elohim’ in scripture are used in reference to God (YHWH), Christ, Man, angels, Satan and idols. So when we see the word ‘theos’ or ‘elohim’, we should ask ourselves what kind of god is being referenced. The god of this age? The Most High God? The Almighty God? The mighty god? A false god? A human? An angel? We must also understand that the word ‘theos’ proceeded by the article (the) is talking of a noun and without the article, it can be an adjective or used to describe or qualify.

Let us now look at some quotes from scholars and writers that understand this. NOTE: this is not an endorsement with all that these authors have written, rather I am appealing to their view regarding John 1:1.

One prominent scholar called Origen is sometimes quoted by Trinitarians who appeal to his wisdom for other purposes. However, they avoid this particular quotation for obvious reasons. Origen wrote in the early 200’s A.D and was a noted expert in Koine Greek.

“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)

“Irenaeus [in the second century] could still interpret MK. Xiii, 32 in the following manner: the Son confessed not to know that which only the Father knew; hence ‘ we learn from himself that the Father is over all’, as he who is greater also than the Son. But the Nicene theologians had now suddenly to deny that Jesus could have said such a thing about the Son. In the long-recognized scriptural testimony for the Logos-doctrine provided by Prov. Viii, 22 ff. The exegetes of the second and third centuries had found the creation of the preexistent Logos-Christ set forth without dispute and equivocation. But now, when the Arians also interpreted the passage in this way, the interpretation was suddenly reckoned as false…. A theologian such as Tertullian by virtue of his Subordinationist manner of thinking, could confidently on occasion maintain that, before all creation, God the Father had been originally ‘alone’, and thus there was a time when ‘the Son was not’. When he did so, within the Church of his day such a statement did not inevitably provoke a controversy, and indeed there was none about it. But now, when Arius said the same thing in almost the same words, he raised thereby in the Church a mighty uproar, and such a view was condemned as heresy in the anathemas of Nicaea.” e.a.]
-pp. 155-8. The Formation of Christian Dogma, by Martin Werner, D.D.

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.

The most natural reading of John 1:1 shows that there are two being mentioned (not three): God and a second who was ‘theos’. They are not presented as two coequal persons in a Binity or Trinity. What we really have is one with the character of THEOS who is with TON THEOS (the God), thus he cannot be the God he is with! The LOGOS is unique however. He/it is identified further in the gospel as “a son from a father, begotten, as a visible being verses the unseen God, Now, without redefining the word THEOS we need to explain how we can have two who are both referred to as “theos.” Either there were two equal Gods or persons called God, or it is talking about a godlike one that is with the Almighty God. When we read all the scriptures we see that the scriptures including the Book of John backs up the last view, that the Father is greater than the Son; that the Father is the only God and the Son is the image of The God.

So what conclusion are we to draw from John 1:1 and the Book of John? In John’s own words he explains the conclusion for his Book. This conclusion is not the Trinity Doctrine. Read the verse below to see what the conclusion is.

John 20:30-31.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. “

So John wrote this gospel so that we may come to the conclusion that Jesus is truly the Christ and the Son of God. In addition to this important truth we are also told that we may receive life through his name. The Trinity Doctrine is not the conclusion that one should draw from this writing. Belief that Jesus is the Christ and the Son is the foundation of true faith and Jesus built his Church on this truth. The Trinity Doctrine is not that foundation, rather it is another foundation.

So why don’t translations of the bible translate John 1:1 as the Word was divine. Well first of all it is not incorrect to say that the Word was god, but Trinitarians translators say the Word was God which makes readers think that Jesus is the God (the person). However, in order to bring out the true meaning, some translations actually use the word ‘divine’. See below:

“In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine.”
An American Translation, Edgar Goodspeed and J. M. Powis Smith, The University of Chicago Press, p. 173

“The Logos (word) existed in the very beginning, and the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine”
by Dr. James Moffatt

So the idea that Jesus Christ is God is often and supposedly supported by John 1:1. However the rest of John’s Gospel makes careful distinctions between Jesus and his Father as well as Jesus and God. This same distinction and separation is found throughout the rest of the New Testament too. The New Testament actually goes much further than merely distinguishing and separating the two. In John 17:3 Jesus, in prayer to his Father, refers to him as “the only true God”. In John 20:17 the resurrected Jesus refers to his Father as “my Father, and your Father; and… my God, and your God.” In I Corinthians 8:6 the Apostle Paul says of Christians, “to us there is but one God, the Father.” In I Timothy 2:5 Paul states, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” In Ephesians 1:17 Paul refers to the Father as “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory.” And in Revelation 3:12 the resurrected and glorified Jesus says, “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 name.”

We must also remember that the judges of Israel were called gods/theos. This doesn’t mean that they were part of God or part of the Trinity, it just means that they had authority given to them by God. It is also written that we can partake of divine nature, so that could also make us divine just as partaking in flesh makes us man. It must be noted though, that being divine or partaking in divine nature is different to actually being the Divine himself.

Also see John 10:34-35:
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, I have said you are gods” (theos).
35 If he called them gods (theos), to whom the word of God (ho theos) came, and the Scripture cannot be broken,

2 Peter 1:4
Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

Also Jesus said that he was one with his Father and he also prayed that we would be one with them. See John 17:21
that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

We humans were intended to share in the divine nature too, yet we are not the God. John 1:1 shows us that the Word was god (divine), not (the Word was/is the God, Yahweh) which many seem to think it says. The Word came from God, is of God, is like God, and this is consistent with the scriptures we have looked at thus far. 1 Corinthians 11:3 reinforces this statement because the word “head” in the Greek is translated “from”, source or authority. Remember that the woman came from Man and Man came from Christ and Christ came from God. This is the divine order.

Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Jesus Christ is the Word of God, Jesus wasn’t created, rather the Word was born from God in eternity and that is why Jesus is called the Only Begotten of the Father. (John 1:14) (John 1:18) (John 3:16 ) (John 3:18 ) (1 John 4:9 ). The word begotten means (only child, single of its kind). Notice that our spirits are born from God, but through his Word, and our spirits will go back to God who gave it (Ecclesiastes 12:7) . But Jesus was not begotten through the Word because he is the Word, this is why Jesus is unique because he is the only one begotten of the Father and therefore he is the image of his Father. That is why he is called the Image of God and the Firstborn of all creation (Colossians 1:15) and it is also why the Bible says in (Hebrews 1:5) For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father” Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”

Unlike his Father who is the invisible Spirit, Jesus does have a body and is visible. Jesus was born from God. We must remember that although his Father is greater than himself, he is also not just a man like us. Yes he partook of flesh and came as a man like us, but he also existed in the form of God as the Word or Logos. We are told that he resides between God and Man and as a man he is our mediator to God. It was indeed the Word that became flesh. God did not become flesh, instead God resided in Christ who came in the flesh. So just like us, God can be in us who are made of flesh, but God himself did not become flesh. God is not a man and never will be a man. It was the Word who came to us as a man and it was the Word that all things were created though. See John 1:3.
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

And to compliment the fact that God made all things through his Word, and that Jesus is the Word of God, even ignoring the fact that Jesus wears a title, “The Word of God” as recorded in the Book of Revelation, we are specifically told, that God created everything through Jesus Christ. See :Hebrews 1:2
but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

So Jesus was begotten not created and again, this is why he is called God’s only begotten Son and this is why he is unique. He is seated at the right hand of God and situated between God & Man. This is also why he is the only mediator between God & Man and the only name under heaven whereby Man can be saved. God made creation through him and for him and God redeemed creation through him too. God cannot fellowship with sin that is why he sent his Son into the world, so he could bring us back to himself through his mediator. Jesus came from God and he was in the beginning with God. So what does it mean when it says ‘beginning’? The Greek word for beginning, in John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word” is ‘arche’ and this word means the following:

1) beginning, origin
2) the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader
3) that by which anything begins to be, the origin, the active cause
4) the extremity of a thing
4a) of the corners of a sail
5) the first place, principality, rule, magistracy
5a) of angels and demons

Below I will show you a verse where the word “beginning” or ‘arche’ is also mentioned and I think you will agree that it is rather obvious from this verse that it does not mean eternity or eternal. The verse is John 8:44
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him.

Just for good measure, I will also throw in the first verse in the bible, which also uses the word beginning (note that this a Hebrew word). I am sure we can all agree that the earth has not been in existence for all of eternity.

Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Certainly if we read John 1:1 correctly and in context with all scripture, we see that it is not teaching that God is a Trinity.

← Go back to ‘Supporting the Trinity Doctrine‘.

Discussion

This topic has 26,009 replies, 117 voices, and was last updated 3 days, 7 hours ago by DesireTruth.

Viewing 20 posts - 22,701 through 22,720 (of 26,009 total)

←1 2 3…1,1351,1361,137…1,299 1,300 1,301 →

Author
Posts
July 27, 2021 at 7:29 pm#872404
Proclaimer
Participant
gadam, you make all these allegations and personally I don’t have time to address most of them.
What is your no1 reason why Jesus is not the Christ?
July 27, 2021 at 9:31 pm#872407
gadam123
Participant
gadam, you make all these allegations and personally I don’t have time to address most of them.
What is your no1 reason why Jesus is not the Christ?
Sorry this No 1 question was asked in other thread and was replied by me.
July 28, 2021 at 12:28 am#872409
Lightenup
Participant
Proclaimer,
Israel is a he/him also.
Exodus 4:22“Then you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the LORD, “Israel is My son, My firstborn. 23“So I said to you, ‘Let My son go that he may serve Me’; but you have refused to let him go. Behold, I will kill your son, your firstborn.”’”
YHVH is a He/Him. That does not mean YHVH is only one person. Israel is also a he/him in some contexts and obviously Israel is not just one person.
July 28, 2021 at 4:16 am#872411
Berean
Participant
THE SONSHIP OF CHRIST IS NOT A METAPHOR
Many Bible scholars today teach that Jesus only became the “Son of God” at His incarnation, often citing Luke 1:35 where it stated that, “…that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”
But when presented with Daniel 3:25 where the king of Babylon saw inside the fiery furnace with the three Hebrews a fourth man, and exclaimed, “…the form of the fourth is like the Son of God,” then the Bible scholars explained that while they believe that the fourth man was indeed Christ during His pre-incarnate state, but His title “Son of God” was only applied to Him in a proleptic sense, or in other words, only in the anticipation of His Sonship in the future as if it already existed, similar to His title as the “Lamb,” which He possessed even before the foundation of the world (see Rev. 13:8).
Obviously, the title “Lamb” was a metaphor, but what about the title “Son of God?” Was this also just a metaphor?
In this short study, I’ll present why the Sonship of Christ could not be a metaphor, because the Bible teaches that an actual process of divine birth took place.
Let me begin with this verse in Jeremiah 8:9, “The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, THEY HAVE REJECTED THE WORD OF THE LORD; AND WHAT WISDOM IS IN THEM?”
The verse strongly suggests that to reject the word of God is be devoid of wisdom; therefore, “wisdom” is from the word of God.
The apostle Paul wrote that “…Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor. 1:24); therefore, Christ was the personification of the wisdom of the Father, hence, “His name is called ‘The Word of God’” (Rev. 19:13).
But Christ was already called “the Word” even prior to His incarnation.
“IN THE BEGINNING was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same IN THE BEGINNING with God.” (John 1:1,2)
Unlike in Genesis 1:1 where the word “beginning” referred to the event which pertained to the creation of our world, the “beginning” in John 1:1 instead referred to the event pertaining to the Word, which was described by John as the “Word” being “with God,” and the “Word was God.”
I shall present how the Scriptures explain each other particular to this, but before that, let me first establish the timeframe of this “beginning” in John 1:1 as predating the works of creation because the Word was already with God, and was God before “all things were made..” (v.3).
This is key in understanding in order to correctly find that particular “beginning” in the Scriptures, which John alluded to.
Can we find a “beginning” that predates the works of Creation where Christ was already there with God, and was God? Absolutely! We can find this “beginning” in the book of Proverbs chapter 8.
Incidentally, this chapter speaks about the “wisdom” of God.
“Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice?” (Prov. 8:1)
And it’s not so hard to see in the following verses that “wisdom” of God in this narrative was Personified.
Wisdom declared:
“Unto you, O men, I CALL; and my voice is to the sons of man.” (v.4)
“Hear; for I WILL SPEAK of excellent things; and the opening of my lips shall be right things.” (v.6)
“For MY MOUTH shall speak truth…” (v.7)
“All the words of MY MOUTH are in righteousness…” (v.8.)
“Receive MY INSTRUCTION…” (v.10)
“I WISDOM DWELL WITH PRUDENCE…” (v.12)
“…I AM UNDERSTANDING; I HAVE STRENGTH.” (v.14)
“I LOVE them that love me…” (v.17)
“I LEAD in the way of righteousness…” (v.20)
“That I MAY CAUSE those that love me to inherit substance; and I WILL FILL their treasures.” (v.21)
Can wisdom love those that love wisdom if this was not referring to a Person?
But who alone is the Personification of the wisdom of God?
“For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom.” “…Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.” (1 Cor. 1:22,24)
Christ alone is the Personification of both the power and wisdom of the Father; therefore, Proverbs 8 was speaking of Christ, but as you shall now see, it spake of Him in His preincarnate state.
“‘THE LORD POSSESSED ME’ ‘IN THE BEGINNING’ of his way, ‘BEFORE HIS WORKS OF OLD.’” (Prov. 8:22)
Here was the “beginning” where we can find the existence of Wisdom, which was the Word of God personified, which predated “the works of old,” which referred to the works of creation; thus, we can safely connect this narrative in Proverbs 8 particularly beginning with verse 22 all the way to verse 30, with John 1:1-3. In other words, these first three verses in John had an allusion to Proverbs 8:22-30.
As mentioned already, this “beginning” had to do with the Word, and was not referring to the works of creation as in Genesis 1:1.
In fact, Wisdom Himself (which was Christ) declared the event that transpired concerning Himself at that “beginning.”
Christ said, “THE LORD POSSESSED ME’ ‘IN THE BEGINNING’ of his way…”
The event was when the LORD possessed Him, or as one being acquired.
Plus……go To
https://m.facebook.com/groups/HeavenlyTrioRevealed/permalink/782306212438234/?ref=m_notif&notif_t=group_activity
July 28, 2021 at 5:48 am#872412
Danny Dabbs
Participant
@gadam123
Hi Adam,
You are in great danger to accept the coming Antichrist as your Messiah.
Be aware of that.
Now I will take my break.
I just had to warn you.
Yahweh the Most High God loves you. He gave His Son Jesus Christ for your salvation.
July 28, 2021 at 3:16 pm#872417
gadam123
Participant
I just had to warn you.
Yahweh the Most High God loves you. He gave His Son Jesus Christ for your salvation
Hi Danny thanks a lot for your warning and blessings.
July 29, 2021 at 4:51 am#872433
Danny Dabbs
Participant
Hi Adam,
I am sorry to have forgotten to say God bless to you.
May God bless you and your family!
July 29, 2021 at 6:30 pm#872437
gadam123
Participant
Hi Adam,
I am sorry to have forgotten to say God bless to you.
May God bless you and your family!
Thank you so much Danny.
July 30, 2021 at 5:17 am#872444
Danny Dabbs
Participant
Hi Adam,
I got to be honest with you.
First I didn’t want to wish you a blessing because you
do reject our Lord Jesus as the Messiah.
But then I realized that we should be good to all people.
I’m sorry that I lied to you and that I was harsh on you.
We shouldn’t be that way.
But you got to understand that your constantly rejecting
our Lord Jesus as the Messiah did aggravate me.
I’m sorry.
I hope and pray you will accept the Lord Jesus as the Messiah.
God bless you.
August 1, 2021 at 4:47 am#872463
Danny Dabbs
Participant
@gadam123
Hi Adam,
Just remember, Yahweh the Most High God loves you.
He gave His Son Jesus Christ for your salvation.
Blessings,
Danny
August 1, 2021 at 6:48 am#872464
mikeboll64
Blocked
LU: Mike,
YHVH is our ONE creator and YHVH is God and Lord, Father and Son.
So the TWO of them together are our ONE Creator? Is our ONE Creator both your Father AND your brother? Will you state for the record that you consider yourself to be both the daughter AND the sister of our ONE Creator?
You seemed to have missed this one…
Based on the actual words that the Apostles of Jesus prayed in Acts 4 (as opposed to your personal suppositions about their innermost thoughts), it’s abundantly clear that they didn’t consider our ONE Creator to be both Father and Son. We know this because they clearly and distinctly identified the Son as someone OTHER THAN the Creator… namely, His holy servant Jesus.
How do you rectify this scriptural fact with your understanding?
LU: Regarding heaven, yes heaven is above both parts of the world all at the same time.
You answered the first part… that heaven is above you – as in over your head, up in the sky. The second part was asking if heaven was also above Proclaimer at the same time – as in over his head and up in the sky from his perspective. Your answer hearkens back to your table analogy, where the table is above both the top and bottom of the ball underneath it. But my question has to do with if heaven is above – as in up in the sky and over the head of A PERSON who is standing on the bottom of the ball. Maybe this will help…
Revelation 4:1-6… before me was a door standing open in heaven. And the voice I had first heard speaking to me like a trumpet said, “Come up here… At once I was in the Spirit, and there before me was a throne in heaven with someone sitting on it… Surrounding the throne were twenty-four other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders… around the throne were four living creatures…
Okay, so the angel told John to come UP here – to a place that is ABOVE him. In that place was the throne of God, surrounded by 24 other thrones, and 4 creatures. This is the description of that place taken directly from the scriptures…
As you can see, God’s throne surrounded by the 24 other thrones is ABOVE (as in over their heads up in the sky) everyone on earth – even those in Sheol. Below is the world you imagine – which isn’t based on a single scripture. And I’m asking the simple question of how God’s throne surrounded by the 24 other thrones can be above you (as in over your head up in the sky) and also be above Proclaimer (as in over his head up in the sky) at the same time…
Kathi, I’m asking if God’s throne can be above you (as in up in the sky over your head) at the same time it can also be above Proclaimer (as in up in the sky over his head). Do you see the dilemma yet? Do you see how there is no dilemma in the first image – which was commissioned by PhD Hebrew expert Michael Heiser to show what the Bible actually teaches – even though he believes in the spinning ball earth?
Now on top of this, I ask you to think about the very meaning of “heliocentric system”. It means that the earth and our entire system is CENTERED around the sun. Everything revolves around the SUN – not the earth that God created first and populated with living things. Why would that be? Why would God make the earth just one of a bunch of balls revolving around the sun – which He didn’t even create until day 4 – and called a “light” in the firmament?
LU: Any other easy questions that I can help you with?
Unfortunately, none of my questions to you are easy. They expose you and make you declare things like, “I, Kathi, am both a daughter AND a sister of our ONE Creator!” They make you admit that your understanding of our ONE Creator being TWO people doesn’t align with the Apostles’ understanding of our ONE Creator and His holy servant Jesus.
But that’s a good thing, right? Anything to bring us closer to the truth of the scriptures is a good thing.
August 1, 2021 at 7:10 am#872465
mikeboll64
Blocked
Berean: Ephesians 3
…God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.
So who created all things? The answer is right there in the verse you quoted… “God, who created all things”. And note how Jesus is once again distinguished as someone OTHER THAN the God who created all things – even in the verse YOU quoted! If Jesus was God, then it would just say God created everything – and Jesus would be included in that word God. But just like dozens of other times in the scriptures, Eph 3 once again distinguishes “God” from “Jesus Christ”. Get it? Jesus is clearly and undeniably someone OTHER THAN “God”.
(Also remember that the word “by” – which you continue to use because you think it means something it doesn’t – is actually the word “through”. Remember also the undeniable words of Eusebius: He who creates is ONE, and he through whom the thing is created is ANOTHER.)
So Berean, who is the ONE that created the heaven, the earth, the sea, and EVERYTHING in them? (Read the Apostles’ prayer in Acts 4 for the answer… and then BELIEVE that answer.)
August 1, 2021 at 7:14 am#872466
mikeboll64
Blocked
Mike: Is it scriptural that God did miracles through His holy servant Jesus? Is it scriptural that God has done miracles through many of His other servants throughout the Bible?
Carmel: Again Mike, NOT QUITE PRECISE…

Carmel, please just answer the two questions above this time. Thanks.
August 1, 2021 at 7:28 am#872467
Berean
Participant
Mike
Jesus Christ IS THE almighty SON OF GOD , HIS BEST WORKER.
JESUS IS GOD AND MAN .
DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND MIKE?
August 1, 2021 at 7:40 am#872468
mikeboll64
Blocked
Adam: Matthew knew as well as modern scholars do that Isaiah 7:14, quoted in Matthew 1:23, is talking about the birth of a child, likely Isaiah’s own son, whose name would remind the wavering people that “God is with us” and will defeat our pagan adversaries.
Well, it’s good to know that you have now come to understand that Immanuel means “God IS with us”, and is not an indication that Jesus was God on earth – as you used to argue when you posted here as jammin.
As for the rest…
Luke 22… 25 Then Jesus asked the two disciples, “Why can’t you understand? How can you be so slow to believe all that the prophets said? 26 Didn’t you know that the Messiah would have to suffer before he was given his glory?” 27 Jesus then explained everything written about himself in the Scriptures, beginning with the Law of Moses and the Books of the Prophets.
33The two disciples found the eleven apostles [including Matthew] and the others gathered together.
44 Jesus said to them, “While I was still with you, I told you that everything written about me in the Law of Moses, the Books of the Prophets, and in the Psalms had to happen.”
45 Then he helped them understand the Scriptures. 46 He told them: The Scriptures say that the Messiah must suffer, then three days later he will rise from death.
Adam, will your coming messiah have to suffer before he is given his glory? Will he be killed, and then rise from death? Tell me about him. We know that he will be a regular human born of a regular woman in the regular fashion. What else? What will he do? How will he affect the earth and the nation of Israel? What do you know about him from the OT? Give me some short notes to explain what you are expecting.
In the meantime, I accept and believe that Jesus continued to teach his disciples after his resurrection, and showed them all the things in the OT that were said about him thousands of years in advance. Matthew was one of those who received this teaching directly from Jesus – and so I believe Matthew had a much better grasp on OT prophecies about the messiah than you and your Jewish scholars have – since he learned these things directly from Jesus himself.
August 1, 2021 at 7:54 am#872469
mikeboll64
Blocked
Berean: Jesus Christ IS THE almighty SON OF GOD , HIS BEST WORKER.
JESUS IS GOD AND MAN .
DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND MIKE?
Very difficult to understand, I’m afraid. You are simultaneously saying that Jesus is God’s best worker, and that he IS the very God who he’s the best worker for. You are saying that God is a man. These are indeed very difficult things for any rational person to understand.
In my last post, I used a verse that YOU quoted to show you that, not only was it God who created all things, but that Jesus Christ is listed as someone OTHER THAN the God who created all things.
As a response, you hit me with this completely unscriptural idea that the worker IS the very God he works for.
If you were to use scriptures and make logical statements, perhaps it would make it easier for me to understand.
August 1, 2021 at 8:00 am#872470
mikeboll64
Blocked
Proclaimer: If I state the facts and someone is on the wrong end of the facts…
Well that’s among the things we’re trying to determine here. It’s clear that you don’t want to directly address my previous posts because you know that anything you say will expose your previous erroneous statements. But facts don’t care about your embarrassment, so here we go again…
King David said the sun runs a circuit above the earth.
1. Does this statement make King David a liar? YES or NO?
August 1, 2021 at 8:46 am#872471
mikeboll64
Blocked
These are the questions I asked…
Now please tell us about that liar King David. Did he lie about the sun intentionally? Or was he lying about the sun because he was deceived? Who deceived him? And how do you know he was lying about the sun in the first place? Who told YOU the truth about the sun, thereby proving that King David was a liar?
And this is the drivel with which you responded…
The heavens is the sky which is above my head in New Zealand and anywhere I travel around the globe. So there is the heavens and the earth.
Likewise with the moon, you see it is a globe too. If you stood on the surface, the good news is you wouldn’t slide off that either. Even if the surface was made of soap.
Same goes for the sun. Of course you would have to travel at night otherwise your shoes would melt.
If the earth was a floating peperoni pizza and hades was inside the pastry so to speak, then what is below the pastry? The heavens right? Boom!
So the heavens is above but also below in the flat earth model at least. Doesn’t make sense right? Whereas in the globe model, it is always above.
Where in all of that nonsense can I find a single answer to any of the questions I asked you? 🙄
Proclaimer: If the earth was a floating peperoni pizza and hades was inside the pastry so to speak, then what is below the pastry? The heavens right? Boom!
Where do you get the idea of a FLOATING pizza? The Biblical earth isn’t floating, but is fixed on pillars and foundations so that it cannot be moved… all according to actual scriptures.
As for what’s below the earth, the Bible says it’s water… specifically referred to as “the great deep” in scripture. Remember, God separated the waters above from the waters below with the firmament, and then caused dry land to appear in those waters below. We are not told what – if anything – is below the waters that are below the earth… only that below the earth is water.
Exodus 20:4… Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Heaven is above us. Earth is below heaven. Water is under the earth. Like this…
Do you see the great deep of waters under the earth? Do you see the foundations of the earth? Do you see that God’s throne is above every person on the earth – even those in Sheol? Do you see the windows of heaven, which God opened to let waters in to flood the earth at the same time He burst open the fountains of the great deep to let the waters below flood the earth? Noah’s earth was flooded by the waters above the firmament and the waters below it at the same time.
Now compare to the earth you imagine we live on…
Where are the waters below the firmament? Where are the waters above it? Heck, where is the firmament, in which God placed the sun, moon, and other lights and set them on appointed circuits over the earth so we could determine times and seasons? Where are the windows of heaven that God opened in Noah’s day to let the flood waters in from above?
And… as I’ve been asking for a while… how can you look up above your head into the sky towards God’s throne AT THE SAME TIME that Kathi is looking up above her head into the sky towards God’s throne?
(Don’t think I haven’t noticed how both you and Kathi tried to divert from the true meaning of my question. She tried to say even the bottom of the ball is under the table, and you try to say that wherever YOU go, heaven is beyond the sky above you. But my question pertains to how both of you can look up into the sky from opposite sides of a ball and both be looking towards God’s throne in heaven. Maybe one of you will address the actual question this time. Because if heaven is UP from your perspective and UP from Kathi’s at the same time, then it is also DOWN from your perspective and DOWN from hers at the same time, right? God’s throne surrounded by 24 other thrones of elders would be above your head AND below your feet at the same time.)
Proclaimer: So the heavens is above but also below in the flat earth model at least. Doesn’t make sense right? Whereas in the globe model, it is always above.
So hopefully now you can see the error of your statement. It is actually the opposite. In the Biblical model, heaven is up and waters are below. In your model, heaven is both above and below you at the same time it is both above and below Kathi on the opposite side of the ball.

August 1, 2021 at 9:38 am#872472
mikeboll64
Blocked
LU: Proclaimer,
Israel is a he/him also.
Exodus 4:22“Then you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the LORD, “Israel is My son, My firstborn. 23“So I said to you, ‘Let My son go that he may serve Me’; but you have refused to let him go. Behold, I will kill your son, your firstborn.”’”
YHVH is a He/Him. That does not mean YHVH is only one person. Israel is also a he/him in some contexts and obviously Israel is not just one person.
Okay, so God can poetically refer to a nation of thousands as “my son” and use the pronoun “he” as He also poetically calls this nation of thousands His “firstborn”. We know that this is poetic language (like calling a seafaring vessel “she”) because we know that Israel isn’t God’s firstborn in any literal sense of the word – nor is a nation of thousands literally a singular son or a singular he. Here’s another example…
Hosea 11… 1When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son. 2But the more I called Israel, the farther they departed from Me. They sacrificed to the Baals and burned incense to carved images…
The latter plural forms make it clear that although God begins with the poetic singular, He and we all know that He’s talking about more than one person, right?
Now what we have to do is find this same type of thing concerning YHWH. We need to find clear scriptural examples whereby we can know for certain that YHWH truly is a combination of more than one person, and back that up with how every single instance of plural pronouns concerning Him (them?) are strictly poetic, because the writer and his readers clearly know and understand that YHWH is a plural Godhead.
Can you do that, Kathi? Because short of doing that, we have no choice but to conclude that each and every time a Bible writer referred to YHWH with singular pronouns, that writer did so because he knew YHWH to be a singular entity – not a plurality.
Understand? Since we KNOW that Israel is a nation of thousands, we also know that God using singular pronouns for them on occasion is poetic, and not literal. Likewise we must first come to KNOW that YHWH is a plurality in order to know that every time any writer of scripture used singular verbs and pronouns to describe the plural God, it was merely poetic language, not meant to literally mean that God was a singular being.
I’m interested to see what you’re able to find. Let us know as soon as you have something.
August 1, 2021 at 9:50 am#872473
Lightenup
Participant
Mike,
Regarding your question:
So the TWO of them together are our ONE Creator? Is our ONE Creator both your Father AND your brother? Will you state for the record that you consider yourself to be both the daughter AND the sister of our ONE Creator?
You seemed to have missed this one…
Based on the actual words that the Apostles of Jesus prayed in Acts 4 (as opposed to your personal suppositions about their innermost thoughts), it’s abundantly clear that they didn’t consider our ONE Creator to be both Father and Son. We know this because they clearly and distinctly identified the Son as someone OTHER THAN the Creator… namely, His holy servant Jesus.
How do you rectify this scriptural fact with your understanding?
Yes YHVH who is our one creator, who is both God and Lord, Father and Son, are my Father and my Brother.
What is abundantly clear is that the “believers” in Acts 4 identified Jesus as the anointed one spoken about in Psalms 2 and that Jesus, the anointed one belongs to YHVH.
Author
Posts