More on the deity of Christ

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Pierac

Active Member
Nov 15, 2021
919
235
43
62
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Davis Lamb.... You need more Spiritual education... Grab your ankles boy... time for a spiritual spanking... like Jesus gave in the temple...

The various popular English translation are at odds as to whether the Son is "the first-born over all creation" (as in the NIV and NK JV), thus first in rank, or whether he is "the firstborn of all creation" (which reflects a literal translation of the genitive case, as in the KJV, RV and NASB), meaning first in time, which would refer to Christ being the first-created being of creation.

We evidently need the wider context to determine which nuance fits best. It is clear that Paul continues his line of thought in the next verse, as he uses the conjunction “for”: "For in Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities- all things have been created through him and for him" (v.16).
Jesus never claimed credit for the original Genesis creation of the heavens and the earth. He was in no doubt that the universe was God's handiwork.

Mat 19:4 He answered, "Have you not read that he (God) who created them from the beginning made them male and female,

Remember Jesus has a God…"Blessed be God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Peter 1:3). Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, (1Co 8:6)

Mar 13:19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God (my Father) created until now, and never will be.

Hebrews 11:3 By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word (ῥῆμα/ rhēma) of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

Please note that the word used here is not Logos as it is used in John 1 but rhēma .

Observe in Colossians 1 that "all things" created are not “the heavens and the earth” as per Genesis 1:1, but rather “all things in the heavens and [up]on the earth." These things are defined as "thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities." Evidently, Jesus has been given authority to restructure the arrangements of angels as well as being the agent for the creation of the body of Christ on earth, the Church.

This is the thought as we soon shall see in Hebrews 1 where the Angels are told to worship the Son. It is also the thought that Peter mentions in 1 Peter 3:21-22 where, after “the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who he is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to him, " it is the new Messianic order that God has brought in through Christ the Son that is under discussion. Just before his ascension into heaven at the father's right hand of power, Jesus declares that "all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me" (Matt.28:18). His resurrection has Jesus a new status, "far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come" (Eph.1:21).

All of this is to reiterate that this hymn of praise concerns the new order of things that now exist since the resurrection of the Son. An eschatological shift of the ages has begun with Christ’s exaltation to the Father's right hand. God has "put all things in subjection under his [the resurrected Christ’s] feet" (Eph. 1-22). Paul repeats this thought in the next chapter of Colossians: "and he is the head over [or of] all rule and authority" (Col 2:10). In the words we looked at in Philippians 2, God has rewarded Jesus’ obedient death on the cross by highly exalting him, and bestowing on him "the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Phil 2:8-10).

It is highly significant that in verse 18 Jesus attains to a supreme position, meaning that it he did not have it already. Thus he cannot have preexisted as God. If he did his final status would be more of a demotion than the promotion described by Paul.

If Jesus was God in the flesh then it is impossible to be a man. He would have been something entirely else. Not a man. This is why Jesus has to learn wisdom, Luke 2:40, Luke 2:52. God is all knowing. He does not need to learn anything. Paul tells us Jesus is a priest after the order of Melchizedek, and something else.

Heb 5:6 "You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek." 5 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. 8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered.

It is an insult to say that God learned obedience! Jesus learned obedience because he was a man, a man like you and me not a hybrid. Most fail to understand the concept of Agency. When you kiss the Agent of the one sent, you are actually kissing the one whom the Agent represents. When you worship Jesus you are actually worshiping the One who sent Him. Thus Jesus comments

NASB Joh 8:42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me.

Joh 12:49 "For I did not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak.

There is no God in the flesh hybrid (Theos aner) in these verses.

If Jesus is already God in the flesh then He can not have a God because it would be two Gods not one.
Yet, scripture clearly tell us he does have a God, both before and after His resurrection. Philippians 4:20; Ephesians 4:6; John 20:17; Matthew 27:46; Revelation 3:12; Revelation 3:2.

One issue is God can not die. So if Jesus was God then he would have had to pretend to die and thus there would not be any forgiveness of sin because he really didn't die.

Let's see who can forgive sins.

Mat 9:2 And they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. Seeing their faith, Jesus said to the paralytic, "Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven."

Mat 9:6 "But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins"--then He said to the paralytic, "Get up, pick up your bed and go home."

Mar 2:7 "Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?"

John 20:21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them,"Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 "If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained."

Jesus never forgave sins before He was anointed with God's Spirit. And now the Apostles have the ability to forgive sins, once again only after Jesus gave them the Holy Spirit. The Apostles are now Agents of Jesus the Christ and "have authority on earth to forgive sins". How? Because as the Father has sent Me, I also send you

Hebrews 11:3 By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word

(ῥῆμα/ rhēma) of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

Again please note that the word used here is not Logos.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things;

Rev 4:11 "Worthy are You, our Lord and our God, to receive glory and honor and power; for You created all things, and because of Your will they existed, and were created."











 

soberxp

Active Member
Mar 6, 2025
456
247
43
42
Xi'an
m.youtube.com
Faith
Christian
Country
China
Davis Lamb.... You need more Spiritual education... Grab your ankles boy... time for a spiritual spanking... like Jesus gave in the temple...

The various popular English translation are at odds as to whether the Son is "the first-born over all creation" (as in the NIV and NK JV), thus first in rank, or whether he is "the firstborn of all creation" (which reflects a literal translation of the genitive case, as in the KJV, RV and NASB), meaning first in time, which would refer to Christ being the first-created being of creation.

We evidently need the wider context to determine which nuance fits best. It is clear that Paul continues his line of thought in the next verse, as he uses the conjunction “for”: "For in Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities- all things have been created through him and for him" (v.16).
Jesus never claimed credit for the original Genesis creation of the heavens and the earth. He was in no doubt that the universe was God's handiwork.

Mat 19:4 He answered, "Have you not read that he (God) who created them from the beginning made them male and female,

Remember Jesus has a God…"Blessed be God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Peter 1:3). Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, (1Co 8:6)

Mar 13:19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God (my Father) created until now, and never will be.

Hebrews 11:3 By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word (ῥῆμα/ rhēma) of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

Please note that the word used here is not Logos as it is used in John 1 but rhēma .

Observe in Colossians 1 that "all things" created are not “the heavens and the earth” as per Genesis 1:1, but rather “all things in the heavens and [up]on the earth." These things are defined as "thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities." Evidently, Jesus has been given authority to restructure the arrangements of angels as well as being the agent for the creation of the body of Christ on earth, the Church.

This is the thought as we soon shall see in Hebrews 1 where the Angels are told to worship the Son. It is also the thought that Peter mentions in 1 Peter 3:21-22 where, after “the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who he is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to him, " it is the new Messianic order that God has brought in through Christ the Son that is under discussion. Just before his ascension into heaven at the father's right hand of power, Jesus declares that "all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me" (Matt.28:18). His resurrection has Jesus a new status, "far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come" (Eph.1:21).

All of this is to reiterate that this hymn of praise concerns the new order of things that now exist since the resurrection of the Son. An eschatological shift of the ages has begun with Christ’s exaltation to the Father's right hand. God has "put all things in subjection under his [the resurrected Christ’s] feet" (Eph. 1-22). Paul repeats this thought in the next chapter of Colossians: "and he is the head over [or of] all rule and authority" (Col 2:10). In the words we looked at in Philippians 2, God has rewarded Jesus’ obedient death on the cross by highly exalting him, and bestowing on him "the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Phil 2:8-10).

It is highly significant that in verse 18 Jesus attains to a supreme position, meaning that it he did not have it already. Thus he cannot have preexisted as God. If he did his final status would be more of a demotion than the promotion described by Paul.

If Jesus was God in the flesh then it is impossible to be a man. He would have been something entirely else. Not a man. This is why Jesus has to learn wisdom, Luke 2:40, Luke 2:52. God is all knowing. He does not need to learn anything. Paul tells us Jesus is a priest after the order of Melchizedek, and something else.

Heb 5:6 "You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek." 5 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. 8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered.

It is an insult to say that God learned obedience! Jesus learned obedience because he was a man, a man like you and me not a hybrid. Most fail to understand the concept of Agency. When you kiss the Agent of the one sent, you are actually kissing the one whom the Agent represents. When you worship Jesus you are actually worshiping the One who sent Him. Thus Jesus comments

NASB Joh 8:42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me.

Joh 12:49 "For I did not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak.

There is no God in the flesh hybrid (Theos aner) in these verses.

If Jesus is already God in the flesh then He can not have a God because it would be two Gods not one.
Yet, scripture clearly tell us he does have a God, both before and after His resurrection. Philippians 4:20; Ephesians 4:6; John 20:17; Matthew 27:46; Revelation 3:12; Revelation 3:2.

One issue is God can not die. So if Jesus was God then he would have had to pretend to die and thus there would not be any forgiveness of sin because he really didn't die.

Let's see who can forgive sins.

Mat 9:2
And they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. Seeing their faith, Jesus said to the paralytic, "Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven."

Mat 9:6 "But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins"--then He said to the paralytic, "Get up, pick up your bed and go home."

Mar 2:7 "Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?"

John 20:21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them,"Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 "If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained."

Jesus never forgave sins before He was anointed with God's Spirit. And now the Apostles have the ability to forgive sins, once again only after Jesus gave them the Holy Spirit. The Apostles are now Agents of Jesus the Christ and "have authority on earth to forgive sins". How? Because as the Father has sent Me, I also send you

Hebrews 11:3 By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word

(ῥῆμα/ rhēma) of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

Again please note that the word used here is not Logos.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things;

Rev 4:11 "Worthy are You, our Lord and our God, to receive glory and honor and power; for You created all things, and because of Your will they existed, and were created."
It can be understood simply as Jesus Christ was the goal of God's first thought. He was God's goal of creating man from the beginning.so every thing were created based on Jesus Christ.
But many believers will not allow me to say that Jesus Christ was created by God because it undermines their faith.
 

Pierac

Active Member
Nov 15, 2021
919
235
43
62
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It can be understood simply as Jesus Christ was the goal of God's first thought. He was God's goal of creating man from the beginning.so every thing were created based on Jesus Christ.
But many believers will not allow me to say that Jesus Christ was created by God because it undermines their faith.T
Kinda.... Jesus is the second/last Adam...

1Co 15:45 So also it is written, "The first MAN, Adam, BECAME A LIVING SOUL." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

Adam was the first Son of God... Luk 3:38 the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

Rom 11:30 For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience,
Rom 11:31 so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy.
Rom 11:32 For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all.
 
Last edited:
  • Wow
Reactions: soberxp

David Lamb

Member
Feb 21, 2025
132
94
28
75
Paignton
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Why did the trinitarian translators translate it that way? Why would they - assuming that they did - have ignored “what John writes just a few verses later about the same Word”?
Who do you mean, I wonder, by the trinitarian translators? I ask this because as far as I am aware, the translators of versions like the KJV, the NKJV, and others that refer to the Word as "He" were all believers in the Trinity. Besides, what is more important is what John actually wrote in the context, which as I said refers to "the Word" as a Person that John and the other disciples had seen, so he wasn't talking about an "it."
 

David Lamb

Member
Feb 21, 2025
132
94
28
75
Paignton
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
I think your missing the point.... Your Church teaches that Jesus is the Logos!!!

John 12:48 "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word ( logos ) I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.

Again… Jesus spoke the Logos, He is not the Logos!

Now... did Jesus make the worlds... What saith the scriptures...

NOW DAVID.... If I said the world was made
through you... Does that mean you actually made the worlds or did something/one else make the worlds
through you...

Let's look at this little word "through" ie. Greek word (DIA)!!!

G1223
διά
dia; a prim. prep.; through, on account of, because of: - account (4), after (2), afterward (1), always *(2), because (111), between *(1), briefly *(1), charge *(1), constantly (1), continually *(6), during (1), forever *(1), gives (1), means (3), over (1), presence (1), reason (40), sake (41), sakes (5), since (1), so then *(1), so *(1), therefore *(16), this reason *(1), this *(1), though (1), through (225), through the agency (1), through *(1), view (2), way (3), what (1), why (3), why *(27).

And the little word “of” better known by the Greek word ek
1537 ἐκ, ἐξ ek ex ek, ex

A primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), from, out (of place, time or cause; literally or figuratively; direct or remote): - after, among, X are, at betwixt (-yond), by (the means of), exceedingly, (+ abundantly above), for (-th), from (among, forth, up), + grudgingly, + heartily, X heavenly, X hereby, + very highly, in, . . . ly, (because, by reason) of, off (from), on, out among (from, of), over, since, X thenceforth, through, X unto, X vehemently, with (-out). Often used in composition, with the same general import; often of completion.

Dia is the “preposition of attendant circumstances" and signifies instrumental agency. Put simply, this means that dia denotes the means by which an action is accomplished. And Scripture tells us that God the originator is bringing His purpose, His logos to fulfillment through Jesus Christ. Jesus is the Agent, the Mediator of God's master plan. Jesus is always seen as secondary, or subordinate to the Father. There are occasional exceptions to this general use of the preposition dia. Sometimes blessings are said to come to us through God (e.g. 1 Cor 1:9; Heb.2: 10). But usually there is a clear distinction made between God’s initiating activity and the means through which God brings that activity to pass. The prepositions used of God's action are hypo and ek which point to primary causation or origin. Let's cement this idea in our minds by looking at one or two verses that highlight the difference: “yet for us there is but one God, the father, from [ek, ‘out from’ ] whom are all things, and we exist for [ eis, ‘to’ ] Him; and one lord, Jesus Christ, through [dia] him” (1Cor.8:6).

Prepositions are the signposts that point out the direction of a passage. Ek indicates something coming out from its source or origin, and indicates motion from the interior. In other words, all things came out from the loving heart of God, or God's “interior”, so to speak.

This agrees with Genesis 1:1 which says, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”. Both verses say that the source of “all things” is the one true God, the Creator of the heavens and the earth and the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. In contradistinction to this "one God and Father" out of Whom all things originate, the "one Lord, Jesus Messiah” is giving the preposition dia which means "through." In other words, Jesus is God's agent through whom God accomplishes His plan for our lives. This is a consistent pattern all the way through the N.T. God the Father is the source, the origin of all blessings, and Jesus His Son brings those blessings of salvation to us:

"Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ" (2 Cor.5:18).

"God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ… has blessed us… in Christ. He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to himself” (Eph.1:3-5).

"For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thess.5:9).

"God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus” (Rom. 2:16).

"For God… has saved us, and called us... according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity" (2 Tim 1:9).

"Blessed be God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has caused us to be born-again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3).

"To the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen" (Jude 25).

"Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which god performed through him in your midst" (Acts 2:22).

Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Paul tell us in 1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through (dia) whom we exist.

Always God the Father is the source and origin of all works, deeds and salvation which come to us through the mediatorship of his son. From Him comes all to us through our Lord Jesus Christ so that to God the Father made all the praise be directed. The Father is the sole origin and Creator of "all things." In contrast, Jesus is the Father's commissioned Lord Messiah through whom God's plan for the world is coming to completion. The whole Bible from cover to cover categorically states that God created the universe and all the ages with Jesus Christ at the center of his eternal purpose. Jesus is the diameter running all the way through.

HOW DO YOU NOT KNOW THESE THINGS... DAVID LAMB!
You start your post claiming to know what my church teaches, but as far as I am aware, we don't know each other, so you don't know what church I belong to or what it teaches.

I agree that "logos" is often used in the bible to refer to words spoken or written by God or others. But for the reason I have stated (that John says that the Word he is talking of in John 1 was made flesh, he had the other disciples had seen Him. Spoken/written words don't become flesh.
 

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,421
13,491
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Who do you mean, I wonder, by the trinitarian translators? I ask this because as far as I am aware, the translators of versions like the KJV, the NKJV, and others that refer to the Word as "He" were all believers in the Trinity. Besides, what is more important is what John actually wrote in the context, which as I said refers to "the Word" as a Person that John and the other disciples had seen, so he wasn't talking about an "it."

I‘m sorry I wasn’t clear in my post about the translations I was asking about. Post #197 quoted the prologue of John’s Gospel from the Tyndale, Cranmer, Bishops and Geneva translations. The translators of all four of those translations were trinitarians.

I was asking for your thoughts on why the trinitarians who produced those four translations decided to translate logos as “it”. You had said in post # 198 that doing so “ignores what John writes just a few verses later about the same Word”.

The question restated:

Why would the trinitarians who produced the Tyndale, Cranmer, Bishops and Geneva Bible translations, all of which render logos as ”it” in John’s prologue, have ignored what John writes just a few verses later about the same Word?
 

christsavedme

Member
Jun 19, 2024
38
31
18
41
Berlin
Faith
Christian
Country
Germany
The deity of Christ at the Council of Nicea (c. AD 325)??
I am sick and tired of people claiming that the Council of Nicea (c. AD 325) made Jesus into God. This is a claim that you will hear from both cultists and skeptics. For example, Jehovah's Witnesses are famous for making this claim. In their publication Should You Believe in the Trinity? they write, "Constantine's role was crucial. After two months of furious religious debate, this pagan politician intervened and decided in favor of those who said that Jesus was God." On this view, Emperor Constantine invented the deity of Christ in the fourth century.
This view was also propagated to millions of people in the bestselling book The Da Vinci Code: "Jesus' establishment as 'the Son of God' was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicaea.... By officially endorsing Jesus as the Son of God, Constantine turned Jesus into a deity who existed beyond the scope of the human world, an entity whose power was unchallengeable." Given the enormous popularity of The Da Vinci Code, this belief has become fully ingrained into the consciousness of the rank-and-file.
How should we respond to this claim? I have a two-pronged approach. First, I ask a question: How did you come to that conclusion? This is the second Columbo question in Greg Koukl's book Tactics. It is one thing to make a historical claim, but it is another thing to back it up with historical facts. And this often-recited claim lacks any kind of historical support.
At this point, don't be surprised if the person who raised the challenge cannot answer your question. The fact is, most people in our culture make claims they are not equipped to defend. This is not the time to insult; this is the time to inform. The person who made the claim is deeply misinformed, and you now have the opportunity to correct him. This leads to the second prong of your response.
Second, I look at the facts. This is the Just the Facts Ma'am tactic. Quite often we can correct a person's false beliefs by appealing to the facts. When answering questions about what happened in the past, it is a good idea to consult reputable historians. In his book Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code, agnostic historian Bart Ehrman writes,
Constantine did call the Council of Nicea, and one of the issues involved Jesus' divinity. But this was not a council that met to decide whether or not Jesus was divine.... Quite the contrary: everyone at the Council—in fact, just about every Christian everywhere—already agreed that Jesus was divine, the Son of God. The question being debated was how to understand Jesus' divinity in light of the circumstance that he was also human. Moreover, how could both Jesus and God be God if there is only one God? Those were the issues that were addressed at Nicea, not whether or not Jesus was divine. And there certainly was no vote to determine Jesus' divinity: this was already a matter of common knowledge among Christians, and had been from the early years of the religion.
So belief in the deity of Jesus existed since "the early years of the religion." Just how early? The New Testament is full of references to the deity of Christ. Certainly Paul (Rom. 9:5; Titus 2:13; Phil. 2:5–8), Peter (2 Pet. 1:1), and John (John 1:1; 8:58; 20:28) believed that Jesus is God.
However, to show that Christians believed in the deity of Christ before the Council of Nicea, you can also consult the early church fathers. The person claiming that Nicea invented the deity of Jesus will be surprised to learn that the earliest church fathers explicitly affirmed the deity of Christ. Here is a small sample.
Polycarp (AD 69-155) was the bishop at the church in Smyrna and a disciple of John the Apostle. In his Letter to the Philippians, he writes,
Now may the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the eternal high priest himself, the Son of God Jesus Christ, build you up in faith and truth...and to us with you, and to all those under heaven who will yet believe in our Lord and God Jesus Christ and in his Father who raised him from the dead.


I really appreciate this post about the Council of Nicea myth. I see this misconception pop up ALL THE TIME in my conversations with people.

The Da Vinci Code did a real number on folks' understanding of church history! It's like how movies about historical events often become people's "facts" even when they get things totally wrong. Our brains tend to remember dramatic stories better than actual history.

What I love about this post is how it shows a clear trail of evidence. When people claim "Jesus wasn't considered God until Nicea," they're skipping over HUNDREDS of years of written documents that say otherwise! It's like claiming hamburgers weren't invented until McDonald's came along.

I think many people struggle with this because they want simple explanations for complicated things. It's easier to blame one event (Nicea) or one person (Constantine) than to understand the complex development of early Christian beliefs.

The quotes from those early church leaders are so helpful! I especially like seeing how these beliefs passed from John to Polycarp to Irenaeus and so on. It's like a family tree of faith ideas being handed down.

When I talk with people who believe the Nicea myth, I find it helpful to ask exactly what KUWN suggested: "Where did you learn that?" Most folks can't remember – they just "heard it somewhere." That's a perfect opening to share some actual history.

As Christians, we don't need to be afraid of historical facts. If our faith is true, then honest history will only confirm it. The evidence shows that belief in Jesus' divinity goes back to the very beginning of Christianity.

Thanks for sharing this great information! It's super helpful for conversations with friends who might have picked up these misconceptions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KUWN

Jay Ross

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2011
7,923
2,969
113
QLD
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
The question restated:

Why would the trinitarians who produced the Tyndale, Cranmer, Bishops and Geneva Bible translations, all of which render logos as ”it” in John’s prologue, have ignored what John writes just a few verses later about the same Word?

Perhaps it was their "political" ambition within the politicking of the churches at that time.

Attached is a PDF file of Strong's definition for the meaning of G:3056, Logos
 

Attachments

  • G3056 - Logos - per PC Study Bible software.pdf
    417.1 KB · Views: 1

Pierac

Active Member
Nov 15, 2021
919
235
43
62
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You start your post claiming to know what my church teaches, but as far as I am aware, we don't know each other, so you don't know what church I belong to or what it teaches.

I agree that "logos" is often used in the bible to refer to words spoken or written by God or others. But for the reason I have stated (that John says that the Word he is talking of in John 1 was made flesh, he had the other disciples had seen Him. Spoken/written words don't become flesh.
So... you disagree with your Church too! I noticed you did not disagree with my comment... but shifted from your church... to your beliefs!

You see... John told you exactly why He wrote this very Gospel...

Joh 20:31 and these have been written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye may have life in his name.' The word Christ is a Man who has been anointed by GOD!!!

John did not write
"these have been written that ye may believe that Jesus is God" John could have saved a lot of ink..

Gnostics not unlike you... started to change the meaning of what he wrote... so John after many years... started all over again... to show how very wrong they and you were wrong to say the logos in his first letter... Read my post again!!!


1Jo 1:1 That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we did behold, and our hands did handle, concerning the Word of the Life-- 2 and the Life was manifested, and we have seen, and do testify, and declare to you the Life, the age-during, which was with the Father, and was manifested to us-- 3 that which we have seen and heard declare we to you, that ye also may have fellowship with us, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ; 4 and these things we write to you, that your joy may be full.

1Jo 1:5 And this is the message that we have heard from Him, and announce to you, that God is light, and darkness in Him is not at all;


I think we do know each other!
 
Last edited:

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,421
13,491
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Perhaps it was their "political" ambition within the politicking of the churches at that time.

Attached is a PDF file of Strong's definition for the meaning of G:3056, Logos

I haven’t read anything like that about any of the translators of those versions but maybe someone else has and will share it with us.

It was suggested that the translators of those Bibles may have ignored the verses which follow the prologue. I don’t think translators of their quality would have done that and, if they had, their translations would not have been used (which they were and sometimes still are) nor held in high esteem (which they were and are).

There’s a simple explanation for their decision to translate logos as “it”. I think there’s also a simple explanation for why the decision doesn’t make sense to most people, in spite of the fact that it made perfect sense to the translators of those versions and to their audience.
 

David Lamb

Member
Feb 21, 2025
132
94
28
75
Paignton
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
I‘m sorry I wasn’t clear in my post about the translations I was asking about. Post #197 quoted the prologue of John’s Gospel from the Tyndale, Cranmer, Bishops and Geneva translations. The translators of all four of those translations were trinitarians.

I was asking for your thoughts on why the trinitarians who produced those four translations decided to translate logos as “it”. You had said in post # 198 that doing so “ignores what John writes just a few verses later about the same Word”.

The question restated:

Why would the trinitarians who produced the Tyndale, Cranmer, Bishops and Geneva Bible translations, all of which render logos as ”it” in John’s prologue, have ignored what John writes just a few verses later about the same Word?
Thanks for explaining. It makes much more sense to me now. As to why those translators chose to call the Word "it", I have no idea, because to judge from the way they translate John 1:14, they also believe that this same Word became flesh. I suppose it is similar to the way in which some translations use the word "which" to relate to God the Father: "Our Father which art in heaven." Normally, we use "who" for people, and "which" for things. Going back to John 1, I think we need only to read the whole chapter to know that "the Word" does indeed refer to the Lord Jesus Christ, despite the use of the pronoun "it" in some translations.
 

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,421
13,491
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Thanks for explaining. It makes much more sense to me now. As to why those translators chose to call the Word "it", I have no idea, because to judge from the way they translate John 1:14, they also believe that this same Word became flesh. I suppose it is similar to the way in which some translations use the word "which" to relate to God the Father: "Our Father which art in heaven." Normally, we use "who" for people, and "which" for things. Going back to John 1, I think we need only to read the whole chapter to know that "the Word" does indeed refer to the Lord Jesus Christ, despite the use of the pronoun "it" in some translations.

Thanks.

John is a Jewish monotheist. The translators recognized that he was drawing on his Hebraic background. In the Old Testament, Hebrew davar = Greek logos. Davar is a person’s self-expression, never another person.
 

David Lamb

Member
Feb 21, 2025
132
94
28
75
Paignton
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Thanks.

John is a Jewish monotheist. The translators recognized that he was drawing on his Hebraic background. In the Old Testament, Hebrew davar = Greek logos. Davar is a person’s self-expression, never another person.
Yes, that's why Jesus Christ is referred to as the Word, because it is through Him that the Father speaks to mankind:

“God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;” (Heb 1:1-2 NKJV)
 

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,421
13,491
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Yes, that's why Jesus Christ is referred to as the Word, because it is through Him that the Father speaks to mankind:

“God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;” (Heb 1:1-2 NKJV)

Jesus is the incarnation, the enfleshment, of God’s self expression.

God’s self-expression,”it”, becomes “he“ when the self-expression of God, davar / logos, became flesh. This happened at the supernatural conception / birth of Jesus.

This harmonizes John with the birth narratives contained in Matthew and Luke.
 

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,421
13,491
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Yes, that's why Jesus Christ is referred to as the Word, because it is through Him that the Father speaks to mankind:

“God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;” (Heb 1:1-2 NKJV)

The insightful connection that you made between John’s prologue, the incarnation of God’s davar / logos in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and Hebrews 1:1-2 is more important than most people seem to realize. If I were going to recommend a passage of scripture today for someone to meditate on, it would be this passage in Hebrews.

It encapsulates the relationship between God and his Son and their relationship to us.
 

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,421
13,491
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
With all of the agreement which @David Lamb and I have, we are still 4,000 miles apart. I’m not speaking about geographically; I’m speaking about theologically.

David, being British, might recognize the Anglican scholar A.E. Harvey. It is Harvey who understood and explained so well to me (in his book) this theological chasm.

”Jesus, in his teaching, his prophetic actions, and in the obedience which led to his death, was acting as God’s agent and representative on earth. It was as if he, when he spoke and acted, God himself was present. In Luke’s phrase, ‘God was with him’; in Paul’s, ‘God was in Christ’. That this was so had been demonstrated by the resurrection, after which Jesus had necessarily been given the highest place, under God, which could be awarded to any living being. Christians could now confidently join in the worship and praise due to the one who had been given (again under God) a name which is above every name, and through whom the Holy Spirit was now active among those who acknowledged his lordship. It was as far as one could possibly go (these Christians felt) in ascribing unique dignity to Jesus consistently with respecting the constraint of monotheism. In later times the church, no longer perceiving the power and decisiveness of the agent-son-representative model, and having among its members men used to a more philosophical analysis, felt it necessary to go further in the direction of metaphysical identity between Jesus and his heavenly Father: released from the constraints of Jewish monotheism, gentile Christians began to think of Jesus as also, in some sense God.”

(Jesus and the Constraints of History, p. 173)

Bold is mine.

Harvey recognizes and acknowledges my place as a Jewish monotheist in the church without attacking or harming his own place, as a trinitarian, in the church. He has briefly, but well, summarized church history.

I’m bound by Jewish monotheism. David isn’t.

I don’t make a metaphysical identification between Jesus and his heavenly Father. David does.

I’m grounded in 1st century primitive Christianity. David is grounded in 4th century Nicene Christianity.

This explains how we can use the exact same passages of scripture but arrive at a different understanding of them.

There is no reason, and certainly no excuse, for me (or anyone) to speak down to David. I recognize that he is someone who is representing Nicene Christianity and I treat him the way that I would like to be treated. I distance myself from non-trinitarian Christians who don’t follow the example I’ve tried to set.