are you kidding, Colossians 2:9: “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily.” is POST RESURRECTION. so that is rebuked.
@101G is intellectually dishonest.
the term "WITH" expose your error, for the term WITH shows that this is the same one person. so, that is rebutted also.
This is what happens when you take snippets of my post!
Καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν
(Kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon)
"Καὶ ὁ Λόγος
ἦν" (Kai ho Logos ēn):
"And the Word was" - The Word (Logos), which is eternal, is introduced as existing continuously (ēn is in the imperfect tense, implying an ongoing state).
"πρὸς τὸν Θεόν" (pros ton Theon):
"With God" - The preposition pros is particularly significant. While it can mean "with," it more vividly conveys a sense of proximity, relationship, or even orientation toward.
Pros implies the Word was not only with God but in intimate communion, "face-to-face" with Him,
as two persons in close fellowship.
Rendering the Concept Creatively:
If we want to emphasize the idea of face-to-face intimacy implied in pros, we might poetically rephrase it:
"The Word was in direct, personal fellowship with God, perfectly aligned, face-to-face in eternal relationship."
The choice of pros paints a picture of dynamic closeness, suggesting not just spatial proximity but a relationship of harmony, unity, and shared purpose. It highlights that the Word (Jesus) and God were eternally distinct yet inseparably united in divine essence.
Third ERROR, for the flesh is not Godly, but natural..... blood is Natural Life, but the Spirit is not natural.. so that is rebutted.
Jesus is one person with two natures-fully God and fully man.
@101G needs to study.
and not fully man... LOL, for the NATURAL FLESH is a corruption. so a fourth ERROR, AND REBUTTED.
Jesus is one person with two natures-fully God and fully man.
@101G needs to study.
5th. ERROR. listen, John 10:15 "As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep."
NOW, what "LIFE" did he God Lay down? blood. which is the LIFE of the flesh, and God is NOT NATURAL FLESH. see Leviticus 17:11. so, that's ERROR #6. and rebutted.
Jesus, in His Incarnation, retained the fullness of His deity while voluntarily veiling His divine glory and choosing to live in dependence on the Father.
The Word (ho logos). Logos is from legō, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. Logos is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (anima mundi) and Marcus Aurelius used spermatikos logos for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew memra was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in Pro_8:23. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (The Origin of the Prologue to St. John, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce.
At any rate John’s standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term Logos, but not John’s conception of personal pre-existence. The term Logos is applied to Christ only in Joh_1:1, Joh_1:14; Rev_19:13; 1Jn_1:1 “concerning the Word of life” (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of “the Word of God” in Heb_4:12. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Co_8:9; Php_2:6.; Col_1:17) and in Heb_1:2. and in Joh_17:5. This term suits John’s purpose better than sophia (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the aeon Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos “became flesh” (sarx egeneto, Joh_1:14) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once.
With God (pros ton theon). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1Jn_2:1 we have a like use of pros: “We have a Paraclete with the Father” (paraklēton echomen pros ton patera). See prosōpon pros prosōpon (face to face, 1Co_13:12), a triple use of pros. There is a papyrus example of pros in this sense to gnōston tēs pros allēlous sunētheias, “the knowledge of our intimacy with one another” (M.&M., Vocabulary) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, Origin of Prologue, p. 8) that the use of pros here and in Mar_6:3 is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is Koiné, not old Attic. In Joh_17:5 John has para soi the more common idiom.
And the Word was God (kai theos ēn ho logos). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying ho theos ēn ho logos. That would mean that all of God was expressed in ho logos and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (ho logos) and the predicate without it (theos) just as in Joh_4:24 pneuma ho theos can only mean “God is spirit,” not “spirit is God.” So in 1Jn_4:16 ho theos agapē estin can only mean “God is love,” not “love is God” as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, Grammar, pp. 767f. So in Joh_1:14 ho Logos sarx egeneto, “the Word became flesh,” not “the flesh became Word.” Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.
Robertson.
Php 2:7 but emptied Himself [without renouncing or diminishing His deity, but only temporarily giving up the outward expression of divine equality and His rightful dignity] by assuming the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men [He became completely human but was without sin, being fully God and fully man].
emptied Himself -- Christ emptied Himself of His heavenly glory, Joh_17:5. He humbled Himself and did the Father bidding (Php_2:8; Joh_4:34; Joh_6:38; Joh_15:10; Joh_17:4;
It does not mean he emptied Himself of his God-hood, or Deity.
form of a bond-servant -- This speaks of Jesus humbling self to become a servant. Mat_20:28; Mar_10:45.
made in likeness of men -- This is speaking of the incarnation, Emmanuel, "God with us."
Jesus' Steps In His Self-Emptying Life
1) He emptied Himself - v. 7
2) He took a human body - v.7
3) He became a servant - v. 7
4) He obeyed all the way to the cross - v.8
verse 7 Not a surrender of Divinity but a self-renunciation, a denial of self and becoming a servant. He set aside the glory.
Set Aside His Privileges
1) heavenly glory
2) independent authority
3) divine prerogative (attributes)
4) eternal riches
5) a favorable relationship with the Father (Mat_27:46)
@101 needs to study.
Pride comes in all forms and manifestations, be careful.
J.
