Does John 1:1 say Jesus is God

[Matthias]

I recently quoted another trinitarian scholar, Gordon Wenham, on Genesis 1:26 in Word Biblical Commentary:

“Christians have traditionally seen this verse as adumbrating* the Trinity. It is now universally admitted that this was not what the plural meant to the original author.”

A couple of things stand out to me in Dr. Wenham’s comment.

First, tradition. What could possibly go wrong with that? (I have Fiddler On The Roof tunes running through my mind.)

Second, universally admitted. Universally admitted by whom? Certainly not Joe Average Trinitarian. Admitted by trinitarian scholars.

Third, not what it meant to the original author. Who is that? Moses. So what did it mean to Moses? JAT either thinks Moses was a trinitarian (thus taking a non-historical posture) or that Moses didn’t know what it meant, he just wrote it down (disrespecting Moses.) I was fortunate not to have been raised to believe Moses was a trinitarian. The key for those of us who were taught to understand scripture from a historical perspective was in the phrase “progressive revelation”. Moses wasn’t, and didn’t need to be, a trinitarian in order for the Trinity to be the one true God.

What did it mean to Moses? Recently someone responded to that by asking, “what does it matter?” It doesn’t matter what people who lived in biblical times believed?

So where did this “tradition” come from? It came from the Church. The key question to ask is, when? Church history has the answer. Who (besides me) reads Church history? (Circling back now to trinitarian scholars.)

* foreshadowing (i.e. “hinting”)

 

[Wrangler]

If you come across other good sources of information on the angelic court, please let me know.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/108781498...olid=1FUWB43664PV7&psc=1&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it

https://www.amazon.com/dp/031033953...olid=1FUWB43664PV7&psc=1&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it

https://www.amazon.com/dp/108781525...olid=1FUWB43664PV7&psc=1&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it

 

[Matthias]

I'd be interested if you cared to reconcile how God was not talking to a co-creator when He said, let US make man in OUR image . . . I think that's where it went off the rails. It's up to you.

Much love!

I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on something I read which was posted on the forum today.

The Father did not free the Israelites from their bondage in Egypt. It was the God of Israel who freed them. Who created the heaven, and the earth. Who was sent by the Father and the Spirit who freed them.

Is that what you’ve heard in the trinitarian circles you frequent? Is that what you believe?

 

[Peterlag]

Jesus is Gods word in human form. Every part of God is eternal, and any part expressed in any form is God and eternal.
I used to think God to be God had to be all of Him in any one place. But the Lord is eternal, so dwarfs anything created.

How we perceive the eternal will always be limited as created beings. We have but that which He reveals to us.
Independent, able to think and express Himself, Jesus, was still part of God and who He is. They are one and also 3.

One advantage of eternity, is the smallest thing is infinitely greater than created things. Our expression or voice could
not become a being, because it is bounded by our limited existence.

Are we real, and what is existence? We do not know we just know we are here and now and driven by our emotional
loyalties to others and sometimes to our desires alone. Jesus calls us to make things complete, to trust, to become open
and bow the knee and follow in repentance and learning. And not because of a name or a claim, but because we desire to
know love and follow its ways. Which is a strange contradiction. To love that which is love, is a bit of a no brainer unless
sin has gripped ones soul and lost it in hurt and darkness.

God bless you

Do you have a verse or two to go along with your beliefs?

 

[Peterlag]

Also notice in that scripture vs. 8, the Father calls the Son, "O God" your throne is forever.

The English language makes a clear distinction between "God and "god." In English Bibles, the heavenly Father is called "God" while lesser divinities, people with God's authority on earth and important people such as kings are also called "god." The Hebrew and Aramaic languages cannot make the distinction between "God" and "god." Since Hebrew and Aramaic have only capital letters, every use is "GOD." The Greek language has both upper case and lower case letters as English does, the early Greek manuscripts did not blend them. It was the style of writing at the time of the New Testament to make manuscripts in all capital letters. The Greek manuscripts were like the Hebrew that had all upper case script. These are called "uncials" and that style was popular until the early ninth century when a smaller script was developed for books.

 

[Peterlag]

Back up to vs.4 and read it through, you will see who is speaking to who.

It is God the Father speaking to God the Son as Paul dictates.

Verse 4 is talking about Jesus. What's your point because Hebrews 1:10 is a quote from Psalms 102:25.

 

[WalkInLight]

Do you have a verse or two to go along with your beliefs?

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men.
John 1:1-4

1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched--this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.
2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.
3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.
1 John 1:1-3

14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world.
15 If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God.
16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him.
1 John 4:14-16

It is interesting you using the word, your beliefs.
I look at it that I am discovering how the apostles expressed their beliefs. It is like a complex interrelationship of ideas which in the end form a whole. They are interwoven and interact, so you only get a fuller picture over time, as you see the foundations and slowly the details start to emerge.

One important issue for me is the nature of human interaction. Can we ever know another or be one together? We seem to have this desire to be known and to know. I have come to realise we are fully independent with an open door, so when needed we can close it off and withdraw. We are not alone because in everything we share, but it is not assumed it is chosen. So those closest to us can be strangers if we let them or push them away. It is why community can be a blessing and also a curse depending on how the group generally shares and is honest.

I used to think Jesus knew His apostles so well and they just go it. But even until their deaths, they had disagreements, and needed to debate certain issues, falling out with each other and then getting back together again. There is no in group, there is just reaching out, helping and being helped, blessed. We want so deeply to know God, yet in us is all we need to see how things are. The emotional hurts, the staggering insecurities and disabling experiences can be healed, if we get the Lords focus, but this takes time, and space.

God bless you

 

[Peterlag]

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men.
John 1:1-4

1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched--this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.
2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.
3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.
1 John 1:1-3

14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world.
15 If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God.
16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him.
1 John 4:14-16

It is interesting you using the word, your beliefs.
I look at it that I am discovering how the apostles expressed their beliefs. It is like a complex interrelationship of ideas which in the end form a whole. They are interwoven and interact, so you only get a fuller picture over time, as you see the foundations and slowly the details start to emerge.

One important issue for me is the nature of human interaction. Can we ever know another or be one together? We seem to have this desire to be known and to know. I have come to realise we are fully independent with an open door, so when needed we can close it off and withdraw. We are not alone because in everything we share, but it is not assumed it is chosen. So those closest to us can be strangers if we let them or push them away. It is why community can be a blessing and also a curse depending on how the group generally shares and is honest.

I used to think Jesus knew His apostles so well and they just go it. But even until their deaths, they had disagreements, and needed to debate certain issues, falling out with each other and then getting back together again. There is no in group, there is just reaching out, helping and being helped, blessed. We want so deeply to know God, yet in us is all we need to see how things are. The emotional hurts, the staggering insecurities and disabling experiences can be healed, if we get the Lords focus, but this takes time, and space.

God bless you

Yeah we already posted a lot of data on this "logos." Logos does not mean Jesus is God. If Jesus was God there would be a lot of verses that would say I am God. And not I am the son of God.

 

[marks]

I’m not interested in debating. I’m interested in discussion.

Good morning!

Debate or discussion, shall I say, disagreement? I commonly find this to be the case when I'm disagreeing with someone over the correct understanding of some doctrine, that one or the other of us are reading a verse and not fully receiving it's saying. Sometimes I find that is me, and I gain something for it.

I've learned, it all means what it says in the normal use of language and in harmony with the rest. In this instance, then I'm saying, God said, "Let Us" with specific meaning and purpose, indicating the truth of what was happening, and about to happen.

God said let us make man in our image, this is either the speech of a co-creator, or the speech of someone who says "Us" but really means "Me". I go with the understanding that allows the passage to be exactly true. Father, Son, Spirit, each are credited with creation, btw. So I have no difficulty accepting this as the statement of a Co-Creator.

Much love!

 

[marks]

I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on something I read which was posted on the forum today.

The Father did not free the Israelites from their bondage in Egypt. It was the God of Israel who freed them. Who created the heaven, and the earth. Who was sent by the Father and the Spirit who freed them.

Is that what you’ve heard in the trinitarian circles you frequent? Is that what you believe?

No. Basically I just stick with the Biblical language.

Exodus 19:3-4 KJV
3) And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;
4) Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.

God, YHWH, carried them out on eagles' wings.

Much love!

 

[theefaith]

the KJV says trinity or triune God!

1 Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

one what? One God! One divine nature!

 

[Wrangler]

Father, Son, Spirit, each are credited with creation, btw.

Except the Bible does not say this. The Bible explicitly says God - in his unitarian nature - is the Creator.

Regarding relationship, the Bible further explicitly says only the Father is God.

So I have no difficulty accepting this as the statement of a Co-Creator.

Supposing "Let us make man in our image" means there is a co-creator is one supposition, sure. But there are equally valid suppositions, like he was invoking the royal we or talking to angels - who could have assisted him in creation. And I believe we've talked about this in great detail numerous times.

I know you want ambiguous verses to be definitive and definitive verses to be ambiguous - when it suits your doctrine. What you certainly do not want is to take ambiguous verses as definitive when it undermines your doctrine. That's called bias. You don't want to have a discussion. You want to have an indoctrination. Compare how vague John 1:1 is to Isaiah 44:6
This is what Yahweh says: I am the first and the last, and there is no Elohim except me. NOG
I am the LORD All-Powerful, the first and the last, the one and only God.

Yahweh is God and the one (not 3in-1) and only God. Jesus says the same thing in John 17:3. To this, you just ignore it.

 

[marks]

I know you want ambiguous verses to be definitive and definitive verses to be ambiguous - when it suits your doctrine. What you certainly do not want is to take ambiguous verses as definitive when it undermines your doctrine. That's called bias. You don't want to have a discussion. You want to have an indoctrination.

Then I suppose our discussion comes to an end.

Much love!

 

[Wrangler]

Then I suppose our discussion comes to an end.

Much love!

Did our discussion ever start? Did you ever admit there is ANY valid Scriptural support to reject the trinity? Seems to me tha is the STARTING point of a conversation.

In the beginning <tennis balls> already existed. <tennis balls> were with God, and the <tennis balls> were God --> That proves Jesus is God. Huh?

 

[marks]

Supposing "Let us make man in our image" means there is a co-creator is one supposition, sure. But there are equally valid suppositions, like he was invoking the royal we or talking to angels - who could have assisted him in creation. And I believe we've talked about this in great detail numerous times.

Yes indeed. One view credits God with being truthful and accurate, the other credits God with using speech that disagrees with the intent of the statement.

The "royal we"? That's how people talk. In words other then what they mean.

You are suggesting that angels were co-creators? That we are made in the image of God and angels? I don't think that's the correct answer, no matter how may people tell me I'm being biased, or indoctrinated . . . For me, it's simply believing what is written.

You suggest that we cannot have a discussion without first agreeing the Bible teaches against the Trinity? How is that a discussion? I get it . . . there are passages which you think disallow the Trinity, but I don't agree that they do.

If we've already been through this in such detail, no need to repeat it.

Much love!

 

[theefaith]

Only God is eternal!

Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

 

[Wrangler]

The "royal we"? That's how people talk.

Yes. Look it up.

You are suggesting that angels were co-creators? That we are made in the image of God and angels? I don't think that's the correct answer, no matter how may people tell me I'm being biased, or indoctrinated . . . For me, it's simply believing what is written.

I too believe what is written. The difference is you impose trinitarian dogma onto unitarian text. I do not.

While I agree that the text CAN BE taken to 'point' to the trinity, you DENY the text can be taken to point away from the trinity.

You suggest that we cannot have a discussion without first agreeing the Bible teaches against the Trinity?

I said it would be the START of a conversation ... to admit there is ANY valid Scriptural support to reject the trinity.

How is that a discussion?

Given the trinity is not in the Bible, it is a discussion that begins by you showing some humility regarding what you have to say.

 

[theefaith]

Only God is the Lord of Glory!

1 Corinthians 2:8
Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

James 2:1
My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

Jesus is God!

Only God is eternal!

Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

1 Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

How can they be one unity without being divine?

Rev 19 shows Jesus to be the Lord our God! “The king of kings”!

 

[Matthias]

Good morning!

Debate or discussion, shall I say, disagreement? I commonly find this to be the case when I'm disagreeing with someone over the correct understanding of some doctrine, that one or the other of us are reading a verse and not fully receiving it's saying. Sometimes I find that is me, and I gain something for it.

I've learned, it all means what it says in the normal use of language and in harmony with the rest. In this instance, then I'm saying, God said, "Let Us" with specific meaning and purpose, indicating the truth of what was happening, and about to happen.

God said let us make man in our image, this is either the speech of a co-creator, or the speech of someone who says "Us" but really means "Me". I go with the understanding that allows the passage to be exactly true. Father, Son, Spirit, each are credited with creation, btw. So I have no difficulty accepting this as the statement of a Co-Creator.

Much love!

1. People from ancient cultures don’t think like 21st century Americans.

2. Isaiah 44:24 is a control passage for me. That constrains me to believing that Yahweh didn’t have a co-creator.

 

[marks]

While I agree that the text CAN BE taken to 'point' to the trinity, you DENY the text can be taken to point away from the trinity.

I maintain that "us" is plural, and describes the Creator, Who is God, not God + angels. Can someone take this to point away from the Trinity? I'm sure that's so!

I've recently seen someone take a passage quoting Jesus in the heavenly realm as if it supported their erroneous idea that it was Michael the archangel talking, lying, saying he was Jesus. But I don't agree that this is what it's meant to show.

Can "us" be taken to mean "me"? Yes, apparently it can. I don't agree that this was what was being said. I think when God said, "let Us make man in Our image", that was exactly what He meant.

If pointing the a plural word somehow to you mean "injecting the Trinity", I don't know what to say. I suppose that could be a reasonable conclusion. But again, I'm pointing to the plural use. You do see that this is plural, right? Just that you think it doesn't really mean plural, and if it does, it means the angels, that we were co-created by angels, sharing their image as well as God's image. Or just that it says plural and means singular. I see that sort of thing a lot too.

Much love!