next »

[RRD]

In the beginning was the Word [LOGOS}, and the Word [LOGOS] was with God [TON THEON], and the Word [LOGOS} was God [THEOS]. The same was in the beginning with God [TON THEON].
John 1:1,2  -- transliterations taken the Westcott & Hort Interlinear, as found in the Bible Students Library (CDs).

It should be obvious that by using THEOS of the LOGOS, that John was not saying that the LOGOS was the only true God who sent the LOGOS into the world of mankind. (John 1:14; 10:36; 17:1,3,5; 1 John 4:9) John, by his emphasis twice that the LOGOS was "with" TON THEON, in effect, shows that his usage of THEOS regarding the the LOGOS was not intended to be understood in the same manner as it is applied to the only true God who sent the LOGOS into the world. Additionally, by putting this in the past, "the LOGOS *was* THEOS, John is agreeing with Jesus' statement that this glory that he had with the only true God before the world mankind was something that Jesus did not have while he was a human, else why would he ask for this glory to be given to him again? -- John 17:1,3,5

Rather than adding to the scriptures a story of three persons in one God, we should look at it harmony with the rest of the scriptures, and how the Hebrews used their Hebrew words el, elohim, and theos of others than the only true God. Jesus himself presents this alternative usage of the word "theos", when he uses the plural form of this word (theoi) in John 10:34,35:

John 10:34 - Jesus answered them, "Isn't it written in your law, 'I said, you are gods?'
John 10:35 - If he called them gods, to whom the word [LOGOS] of God came (and the Scripture can't be broken),

Jesus' reference here is to Psalm 82, which details God's chastisement of the sons of God, whom He refers to by the Hebrew words for "god", el and elohim, and to whom Jesus said the Logos of God came. Was Jesus referring to these sons of God as false gods? No, for that would have actually have been pointless. Jesus is pointing out that those spirit-begotten sons of God to whom he came are also referred to as gods, which is the record of the scriptures that cannot be disputed, thus there was no reason for those Jewish leaders to be upset at his claim to be the Son of God.
See:
http://godandson.reslight.net/you-are-gods.html

But if there is only one true God, whom Jesus identifies as his Father (John 17:1,3), then how can others be legitimately referred to as "gods". This is only so because of the dual usage of the words revealed in the scriptures. In other words, when used of others than the only true God, these words take on a more basic meaning of "strength", "power", "might".

Many translations have recognized this usage, but it is not readily apparent to most readers of these translations. For instance, when considering the Hebrew word *EL*, which is most often rendered "God", the King James translators recognize the usage of this word in its basic meaning many times. Carefully note the following texts from the King James Version, in which English translations of the Hebrew word El (and its variations) are in denoted by *..*: "It is in the *power* of my hand." (Genesis 31:29) "There shall be no *might* in thine hand." (Deuteronomy 28:32) "Neither is it in our *power*." (Nehemiah 5:5) "Like the *great* mountains." (Psalm 36:6) "In the *power* of thine hand to do it." (Proverbs 3:27) "Who among the sons of the *mighty*." (Psalm 89:6) "God standeth in the congregation of the *mighty*." (Psalm 82:1) "Who is like unto thee, O Lord [Yahweh] among the *Gods* [mighty ones or ruling ones]?" (Exodus 15:11) "Give unto the Lord [Yahweh] of ye *mighty*." (Psalm 29:1) "The *mighty* God even the Lord [Yahweh]." (Psalm 50:1) "The *strong* among the mighty shall speak." -- Ezekiel 32:21.

Likewise, the Hebrew word "elohim" can mean "mighty" or "great" as can be seen by the way the KJV translators have rendered it in various verses. Again, the word(s) that are used to express the Hebrew word "elohim" are denoted by **: "a *mighty* prince" (Genesis 23:6) "And Rachel said, With *great* wrestlings have I wrestled with my sister, and I have prevailed: and she called his name Naphtali." (Genesis 30:8) "It was a very great trembling." (1 Samuel 14:15) "Now Nineveh was an *exceeding* [false god?] great city of three days' journey." -- Jonah 3:3.

Many scholars recognize theos as applied to the LOGOS in John 1:1 is that of a noun being used as adjective. Applying this principle, then, the phrase could be rendered as "the Logos was mighty", since it is obvious that the Logos is not the only true God who sent the Logos into the world of mankind. Taking THEOS as being applied as a noun, then it could be rendered, "a mighty one". Jesus *was* (past tense) indeed "mighty", a mighty spirit being with the only true God before the world of mankind was made, and before he became flesh in a body that the only true God prepared for him. -- Hebrews 10:5.

http://godandson.reslight.net/john-1.html

Christian love,
Ronald

[RRD]

A trinitarian has stated in another forum that in John 1:1,2 the word "God" is interchangeable in throughout.

Even most trinitarian scholars will deny that John was saying the the LOGOS was the the One whom the LOGOS was with. If the LOGOS had been TON THEON whom the LOGOS was with, then, this would mean that Jesus was his Father before coming into the world of mankind, since Jesus was with his Father before the beginning of the world of mankind. (John 17:1,5) Of course, trinitarians deny that Jesus is his Father. Nevertheless, those trinitarians scholars go on to advance that John was indeed saying that Jesus was "God" in the qualitative sense as supposedly having all the attributes of "God", including being uncreated and being the Supreme Being. This, of course, is basically pure supposition that has to be added to and read into what John wrote, and such leads one to add more and more philosophy to many other scriptures in order to get those scriptures to appear to harmonize with the added-on philosophy that Jesus is Yahweh, in order to avoid the simplicity of Christ as the Son of the Living God, not the Living God of whom he is the Son.

James White, while he is convinced that Jesus is the One who the Bible identifies as the God of Jesus, states:

What he [John] wishes to emphasize here is the personal existence of the Logos in some sense of distinction from "God" (i.e., the Father). The Logos is not the Father nor vice-versa - there are two persons under discussion here.
***
Hence, the term "God" is the predicate nominative, and it functions just as "love" did in 1 John 4:8 - it tells us something about the Logos - and that is, that the nature of the Logos is the nature of God, just as the nature of God in 1 John 4:8 was that of love. Now, John does emphasize the term "God" by placing it first in the clause - this is not just a "divine nature" as in something like the angels have - rather, it is truly the nature of Deity that is in view here
(hence my translation as "Deity"). Dr. Kenneth Wuest, long time professor of Greek at Moody Bible Institute rendered the phrase, "And the Word was as to His essence absolute Deity."

http://aomin.org/GERM_JWS.html

The provision of this link does not mean that I agree
with everything Mr. White states. Indeed, I disagree with
most of his conclusions.

This, in effect, denies that THEOS, applied to the LOGOS, is interchangeable with TON THEON, applied to the Father, whom the LOGOS was with.

Oddly, enough, many, perhaps most, Bible Students would agree with most of the exact statements of White as given above, but would not see in any of this that John was saying that the LOGOS is the Most High Yahweh, as Mr. White does in the context of the quotes given.

God, by means of his holy spirit, reveals through the scriptures the simple truth that Yahweh (Jehovah) is the only true God, the God and Father of the Lord Jesus. Jesus has One who is the Supreme Being over him; Jesus is not his Supreme Being whom he worships, prays to, and
who sent him, and whose will he carried out in willful obedience. -- Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Matthew 4:4 (Deuteronomy 8:3; Luke 4:4); Matthew 4:7 (Deuteronomy 6:16); Matthew 4:10 (Exodus 20:3-5; 34:14; Deuteronomy 6:13,14; 10:20; Luke 4:8); Matthew 22:29-40; Matthew 26:42; Matthew 27:46; Mark 10:6 (Genesis 1:27; Genesis 2:7,20-23); Mark 14:36; 15:34; Luke 22:42; John 4:3; 5:30; 6:38; 17:1,3; 20:17; Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 1:3; 11:31; Ephesians 1:3,17; Hebrews 1:9; 10:7; 1 Peter 1:3; Revelation 2:7; 3:2,12.
http://godandson.reslight.net/jesusnotyhwh.html

The most simple way of viewing THEOS as applied to the LOGOS in John 1:1 is by applying the Hebraic usage of the title to a person or thing that is not Yahweh, that is, in the sense of being mighty or powerful, since it is obvious that John was not saying that the LOGOS was TON THEON whom the LOGOS was with, thus, in keeping with the rest of the scriptures, the LOGOS was mighty (as one like Yahweh). The idea that John was saying that Jesus is Yahweh, the God of Jesus, has to be added to and read into what John said. One does not have to add a tremendous amount of extra-Biblical philosophy, as one has to do to
support the extra-Biblical trinitarian philosophy, and such a view expressed by the scriptures above is in complete harmony with the entire Bible. Especially, it is in harmony with the atonement philosophy as revealed in the scriptures.
http://atonement.reslight.net
http://godandson.reslight.net/hebraictitles.html
http://godandson.reslight.net/john-1.html

In service of Jesus and his God,
Ronald