The Eternal Son

[TibiasDad]

the Apostle John does not agree for he opens the Gospel with Elohim Word from Genesis 1:1-3
@civic

1) Isa 9:6 language has nothing to do with understanding John 1:1 language.

2 John does not use Elohim. He uses Logos and Theos.

3) Elohim means God as a whole; thus the plural. God is one.

4 Using the combined understanding of both verses, we understand that Jesus who created all things is equated with Elohim who created, which infers that Jesus is God in nature of being, and part of the plurality of the whole Godhead expressed by Elohim.

Doug

 

[DavidTree]

1) Isa 9:6 language has nothing to do with understanding John 1:1 language.

2 John does not use Elohim. He uses Logos and Theos.

3) Elohim means God as a whole; thus the plural. God is one.

4 Using the combined understanding of both verses, we understand that Jesus who created all things is equated with Elohim who created, which infers that Jesus is God in nature of being, and part of the plurality of the whole Godhead expressed by Elohim.

Doug

The NT was not written in Hebrew to fulfill Prophecy
AND
for the Purpose of the Holy Spirit
AND
for the Purpose of the FATHER's Good Pleasure

 

[DavidTree]

1) Isa 9:6 language has nothing to do with understanding John 1:1 language.

2 John does not use Elohim. He uses Logos and Theos.

3) Elohim means God as a whole; thus the plural. God is one.

4 Using the combined understanding of both verses, we understand that Jesus who created all things is equated with Elohim who created, which infers that Jesus is God in nature of being, and part of the plurality of the whole Godhead expressed by Elohim.

Doug

4 Using the combined understanding of both verses, we understand that Jesus who created all things is equated with Elohim who created, which infers that Jesus is God in nature of being, and part of the plurality of the whole Godhead expressed by Elohim.

@civic = here it is

 

[Runningman]

I respect your commitment to Scripture, but you really need to be open to the idea Christ may be something more in Scripture.

If a verse comes that could possibly be interpreted in more than one way, prior commitments and presuppositions hold sway.

This is why we must turn to prayer first of all, because these truths ultimately must come by revelation from God himself.

Anything can be interpretted in any way. Do you believe what the Bible explicitly says and understand words for what their textbook definition are or do you redefine words to fit the interpretation you prefer?

 

[Runningman]

The Word was God
Jesus =the Word
Jesus is God

Doug

John 1 never says Jesus is the Word.

 

[civic]

@civic = here it is

thats someones answer not yours. I'm engaging you not anyone else to defend John 1:1.

so far you are coming up empty.

 

[civic]

The NT was not written in Hebrew to fulfill Prophecy
AND
for the Purpose of the Holy Spirit
AND
for the Purpose of the FATHER's Good Pleasure

and the logos is a greek word which I gave you the definition.

Lexical Summary
logos: Word, speech, message, account, reason, doctrine
Original Word: λόγος
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: logos
Pronunciation: LO-gos
Phonetic Spelling: (log'-os)
KJV: account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say(-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work
NASB: word, words, statement, message, speech, account, matter
Word Origin: [from G3004 (λέγω - said)]

1. something said (including the thought)
2. (by implication) a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive
3. (by extension) a computation

 

[DavidTree]

thats someones answer not yours. I'm engaging you not anyone else to defend John 1:1.

so far you are coming up empty.

That answer is the word of Truth and i have given that specific answer to you and @TibiasDad days ago....

 

[DavidTree]

and the logos is a greek word which I gave you the definition.

Lexical Summary
logos: Word, speech, message, account, reason, doctrine
Original Word: λόγος
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: logos
Pronunciation: LO-gos
Phonetic Spelling: (log'-os)
KJV: account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say(-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work
NASB: word, words, statement, message, speech, account, matter
Word Origin: [from G3004 (λέγω - said)]

1. something said (including the thought)
2. (by implication) a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive
3. (by extension) a computation

i know what 'logos' means and i know why John wrote what he wrote via the 'Holy Spirit'

Since it is "Impossible for God to lie" you must adjust your thinking to His words of Truth = no Son in John 1:1

There is no: "The Son", = until the Moment the Word became flesh = John 1:14

The Son is Eternal = not for the reasons you believe but for the fact that HE is the Word that was Elohim in the Beginning

The Word precedes The Son = any attempt to reverse that Order is synonymous with jw false doctrine

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

if Jesus is not God and is mere man

1. He has no authority. to judge anyone. His opinion is just as valid as any other man's opinion.
2. He could die for 1 man. at most. Only an eternal God can die for an eternity of sin.
3. He himself is a lier. as even the pharisees understand his claim of diety. when he said before abraham was. I AM.. (in the hebrew. Jesus said he was) always existed)

Jesus himself declaired himself to be eternal

 

[civic]

i know what 'logos' means and i know why John wrote what he wrote via the 'Holy Spirit'

Since it is "Impossible for God to lie" you must adjust your thinking to His words of Truth = no Son in John 1:1

There is no: "The Son", = until the Moment the Word became flesh = John 1:14

The Son is Eternal = not for the reasons you believe but for the fact that HE is the Word that was Elohim in the Beginning

The Word precedes The Son = any attempt to reverse that Order is synonymous with jw false doctrine

You have yet to prove Logos in John 1:1 is anything but Gods spoken word.

You are avoiding the context like the plague. Let’s stick to the text you claimed you could defend.

Elohim is not in John 1:1 it is Theos. We are discussing the Greek text in John 1:1 not Hebrew.

 

[DavidTree]

You have yet to prove Logos in John 1:1 is anything but Gods spoken word.

You are avoiding the context like the plague. Let’s stick to the text you claimed you could defend.

Elohim is not in John 1:1 it is Theos. We are discussing the Greek text in John 1:1 not Hebrew.

You have yet to prove Logos in John 1:1 is anything but Gods spoken word.

We are discussing the Holy Scriptures that begins with Genesis which the Holy Spirit EMPHASIZES thru the Apostle John in
the very FIRST sentence, which is the Foundation of ALL Scripture.

John 1:1 is CLEAR = the Word is God/logos and is UNDER the Irrevocable Definition of 'Elohim' which supersedes 'logos'

Thusly, "God's Spoken Word" is God = "In the beginning was the Word, He was in the beginning with God and the Word was God"

Only when "The Word that was God" became flesh - John 1:14 - did HE become the only begotten of the FATHER

You cannot separate Genesis 1:1-3/Elohim from John 1:1/logos
Any attempt to do so is SIN

Which @TibiasDad confers within his post #661 = which confers to my previous posts days ago.

 

[DavidTree]

John 1 never says Jesus is the Word.

Only a person who is unlearned in the Holy Scriptures would say this.

You desperately need JESUS to pray for you to the FATHER.

No one comes to the FATHER but thru ME/JESUS

 

[civic]

We are discussing the Holy Scriptures that begins with Genesis which the Holy Spirit EMPHASIZES thru the Apostle John in
the very FIRST sentence, which is the Foundation of ALL Scripture.

John 1:1 is CLEAR = the Word is God/logos and is UNDER the Irrevocable Definition of 'Elohim' which supersedes 'logos'

Thusly, "God's Spoken Word" is God = "In the beginning was the Word, He was in the beginning with God and the Word was God"

Only when "The Word that was God" became flesh - John 1:14 - did HE become the only begotten of the FATHER

You cannot separate Genesis 1:1-3/Elohim from John 1:1/logos
Any attempt to do so is SIN

Which @TibiasDad confers within his post #661 = which confers to my previous posts days ago.

You are not dealing with the text but attacking the person. When ad hominems begin the argument has been lost.

Debating Basics 101.

 

[DavidTree]

You are not dealing with the text but attacking the person. When ad hominems begin the argument has been lost.

Debating Basics 101.

Where do you get these ideas from?

Where is the "attack"???

 

[civic]

Where do you get these ideas from?

Where is the "attack"???

Accusing me of sin when we are discussing John 1:1 not other verses

 

[DavidTree]

Accusing me of sin when we are discussing John 1:1 not other verses

I did not accuse you of sin!!!

You and i know this = Proverbs 30:5-6

Every word of God is flawless;
He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.
Do not add to His words,
lest He rebuke you and prove you a liar.

We, @DavidTree and @civic, are commanded by God not to add or take away from His words.
If we do, then we sin against the Truth which proceeded from the Mouth of God.
This is Genesis chapter 3 Foundational Truth.

Do you know where Proverbs 30:5-6 came from???

 

[civic]

I did not accuse you of sin!!!

You and i know this = Proverbs 30:5-6

Every word of God is flawless;
He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.
Do not add to His words,
lest He rebuke you and prove you a liar.

We, @DavidTree and @civic, are commanded by God not to add or take away from His words.
If we do, then we sin against the Truth which proceeded from the Mouth of God.
This is Genesis chapter 3 Foundational Truth.

Do you know where Proverbs 30:5-6 came from???

Let’s stay on topic which was your request to defend John 1:1 and the logos. I was taking the opposite position of the Trinitarian view. In fact there are orthodox Trinitarians that do not hold to the logos in John 1:1 as a person. They use other passages to defend it.

 

[DavidTree]

Let’s stay on topic

We are!!!

We cannot stay on topic if we rearrange Scripture = you know this my Brother

 

[civic]

We are!!!

We cannot stay on topic if we rearrange Scripture = you know this my Brother

The discussion is John 1:1- logos remember