The Trinity and all of its supporting doctrines are all circular in reasoning

[Doug Brents]

You're conflating two different beginning points. The beginning of Jesus' ministry (John 1) and the beginning of Creation (Genesis 1) are not really related aside from some common language.

Gen 1 and John 1 both talk about the creation of everything that was made. This is the same "Beginning". There are not two beginnings. John 1 starts with the Creation (as the one from Genesis), and goes on to describe the beginning of Jesus' ministry. But as with the genealogy of Jesus, it goes all the way back to Creation.

The Bible doesn't say what God was doing before creation aside from a few hints here and there, but there is no suggestion that God begin speaking until during the creation event.

So your theory about the Word pre-existing before there were Words doesn't really make any sense. We can demonstrate the silliness of what you're proposing by a simple statement: was God speaking to create before God was speaking to create?

You keep using the word "Word" as if it is the spoken words God uttered. That is not the case. The word "Word" is Logos, which is not just the words which God spoke, but is actually God (John 1:1). This is Jesus (John 1:14).

You have based your entire multi-person god hypothesis around one verse that says "Us" and "Our" so what you could do to support your story is show something in-line with your premise.

It is not based solely on that one verse. It is based upon the sum total of what Scripture says. God is both an "I" and a "We", and "He" and a "They", because the Father is not the Son, but both the Father and Son are God (the same God, not multiple Gods).

If God is an us our as you say, then the Bible should say God is a "We, they, or them" but it never does. So your plural personal pronoun argument doesn't hold any water, lacks any support with additional examples, or descriptions.

It doesn't matter that there are not other examples of "We", "They" or "Them" in Scripture. As you have already admitted, each and every word used in Scripture is important, meaningful, and must be considered when formulating any doctrine. If God is called an "Us" even one time, then there is a reason, a purpose behind that usage. We cannot just come in and change it to an "I", because we don't like the ramifications of what "Us" means.

Why? Because your foundation is off. You are sitting the entire Bible on top of one badly-translated, which is John 1:1, and attempting to orbit the entire Bible around it.

You keep saying that John 1:1 is "badly translated", yet you have not ever shown how it is "badly translated". In what way is it "badly translated"? In what way is the original Greek text corrupted when brought into English? Or is it that you have some "secret" original Greek text that demonstrates something different than all of the other Greek manuscripts in existence?

 

[e v e]

Wrong again. All the way back in Gen 1, we see that the Word was with God, and was consulted as God in the formation of man in Their image. "Their image" indicates, first of all, that they had the same image. Only God had the image of God until man was made in God's image.

and His souls will be restored to His image soon , and restored to His image = his type eden nature, and also His souls will be restored to our eden land, promised by Him to be restored, our promised land.

He declared all He made Good

and so it will be again soon.


His original creation. No second one.

 

[e v e]

You're conflating two different beginning points. The beginning of Jesus' ministry (John 1) and the beginning of Creation (Genesis 1) are not really related aside from some common language. The Bible doesn't say what God was doing before creation aside from a few hints here and there, but there is no suggestion that God begin speaking until during the creation event.

So your theory about the Word pre-existing before there were Words doesn't really make any sense. We can demonstrate the silliness of what you're proposing by a simple statement: was God speaking to create before God was speaking to create?

You have based your entire multi-person god hypothesis around one verse that says "Us" and "Our" so what you could do to support your story is show something in-line with your premise. If God is an us our as you say, then the Bible should say God is a "We, they, or them" but it never does. So your plural personal pronoun argument doesn't hold any water, lacks any support with additional examples, or descriptions. Why? Because your foundation is off. You are sitting the entire Bible on top of one badly-translated, which is John 1:1, and attempting to orbit the entire Bible around it. As you can see, I have shown you where the Bible contradicts what you're saying. God is a HE thousands of times in the Bible, never a they or them.

a person and a being are the same thing...

the greek platonic person thing is based on plotinus, a platonist and his 3 hypostases
(read Augustine's on the trinity if in doubt)...
it relies on platonic (type of) substance

i just like the real version of trinity . .
it's lovely so i skip thr common today
augustine version from the vatican
: )

for don't forget protestantism sects
are but roman catholic branches
...

His souls will be restored
to His type nature and land in eden
versus
where we are now
a foreign land , death
and really that's all what matters!
to return to Him which is to be saved from
this mimic land

 

[synergy]

You are sitting the entire Bible on top of one badly-translated, which is John 1:1

So now you've taken it upon yourself to dictate to us what is badly translated in the Bible. Give us a break.

 

[FreeInChrist]

"The Word" shouldn't be capitalized because it's not a proper noun, but rather a thing.

Ai ~word like your user name here.

Common Noun vs. Proper Noun​

• Common Noun: The term "word" is a common noun. It refers to a general concept of a unit of language that carries meaning.
• Proper Noun: A proper noun names a specific person, place, or thing and is always capitalized. Examples include "London" or "Alice."

Ai ~ Word same source as above

In the context of John 1:1, "Word" is used as a proper noun referring to Jesus, indicating His unique identity as the Logos of God. This capitalization signifies that it is a title for a person rather than a general term for a thing.

Understanding "Word" in John 1:1​

Proper Noun vs. Common Noun​

In the context of John 1:1, "Word" is used as a proper noun. This is because it refers specifically to Jesus Christ, identifying Him as the second person of the Trinity. The capitalization of "Word" indicates that it is a title for a person, not just a general term.

Theological Significance​

The term "Word" (Greek: logos) carries deep theological meaning. It signifies Jesus as the divine communication of God, embodying both the essence and nature of God. This usage aligns with the concept of the Trinity, where Jesus is recognized as fully God and distinct from the Father.

Conclusion​

Thus, in John 1:1, "Word" is a proper noun that denotes Jesus, emphasizing His unique role in the divine relationship within the Trinity.

As you can see all the way back in Genesis 1, God used spoken words to create, but as Genesis 1 states, God created alone, not with someone else. So no error on my part, the error is your misunderstandings.

God is a He, His, not a They or Them, meaning God isn't multi-person. So your doctrine doesn't work.

Genesis 1
27So God created man in His own image;
in the image of God He created him;
male and female He created them.

 

[Doug Brents]

and His souls will be restored to His image soon , and restored to His image = his type eden nature, and also His souls will be restored to our eden land, promised by Him to be restored, our promised land.

He declared all He made Good

and so it will be again soon.


His original creation. No second one.

What are you talking about?

 

[JesusFan]

You're conflating two different beginning points. The beginning of Jesus' ministry (John 1) and the beginning of Creation (Genesis 1) are not really related aside from some common language. The Bible doesn't say what God was doing before creation aside from a few hints here and there, but there is no suggestion that God begin speaking until during the creation event.

So your theory about the Word pre-existing before there were Words doesn't really make any sense. We can demonstrate the silliness of what you're proposing by a simple statement: was God speaking to create before God was speaking to create?

You have based your entire multi-person god hypothesis around one verse that says "Us" and "Our" so what you could do to support your story is show something in-line with your premise. If God is an us our as you say, then the Bible should say God is a "We, they, or them" but it never does. So your plural personal pronoun argument doesn't hold any water, lacks any support with additional examples, or descriptions. Why? Because your foundation is off. You are sitting the entire Bible on top of one badly-translated, which is John 1:1, and attempting to orbit the entire Bible around it. As you can see, I have shown you where the Bible contradicts what you're saying. God is a HE thousands of times in the Bible, never a they or them.

The Logos/Word of God the ftaher existed befoe any beginnings, and he was the agent used to create all that was created

 

[JesusFan]

Ai ~word like your user name here.

Common Noun vs. Proper Noun​

• Common Noun: The term "word" is a common noun. It refers to a general concept of a unit of language that carries meaning.
• Proper Noun: A proper noun names a specific person, place, or thing and is always capitalized. Examples include "London" or "Alice."

Ai ~ Word same source as above

In the context of John 1:1, "Word" is used as a proper noun referring to Jesus, indicating His unique identity as the Logos of God. This capitalization signifies that it is a title for a person rather than a general term for a thing.

Understanding "Word" in John 1:1​

Proper Noun vs. Common Noun​

In the context of John 1:1, "Word" is used as a proper noun. This is because it refers specifically to Jesus Christ, identifying Him as the second person of the Trinity. The capitalization of "Word" indicates that it is a title for a person, not just a general term.

Theological Significance​

The term "Word" (Greek: logos) carries deep theological meaning. It signifies Jesus as the divine communication of God, embodying both the essence and nature of God. This usage aligns with the concept of the Trinity, where Jesus is recognized as fully God and distinct from the Father.

Conclusion​

Thus, in John 1:1, "Word" is a proper noun that denotes Jesus, emphasizing His unique role in the divine relationship within the Trinity.

So clear that John point was that there eternally existed the word of God, who always existed with the Father, and that both were God, and that word assumed human Flesh and became the man Jesus

 

[amazing grace]

Ai ~word like your user name here.

Common Noun vs. Proper Noun​

• Common Noun: The term "word" is a common noun. It refers to a general concept of a unit of language that carries meaning.
• Proper Noun: A proper noun names a specific person, place, or thing and is always capitalized. Examples include "London" or "Alice."

Ai ~ Word same source as above

In the context of John 1:1, "Word" is used as a proper noun referring to Jesus, indicating His unique identity as the Logos of God. This capitalization signifies that it is a title for a person rather than a general term for a thing.

Understanding "Word" in John 1:1​

Proper Noun vs. Common Noun​

In the context of John 1:1, "Word" is used as a proper noun. This is because it refers specifically to Jesus Christ, identifying Him as the second person of the Trinity. The capitalization of "Word" indicates that it is a title for a person, not just a general term.

Theological Significance​

The term "Word" (Greek: logos) carries deep theological meaning. It signifies Jesus as the divine communication of God, embodying both the essence and nature of God. This usage aligns with the concept of the Trinity, where Jesus is recognized as fully God and distinct from the Father.

Conclusion​

Thus, in John 1:1, "Word" is a proper noun that denotes Jesus, emphasizing His unique role in the divine relationship within the Trinity.

Trinitarian bias being read into the scripture.
Only about five times is 'word' capitalized in the whole of scripture, approximately 31,000 scriptures.
---- Original Hebrew/Greek manuscripts did not capitalize pronouns. The decision on whether to capitalize or not was totally up to the prerogative and interpretive choice of the translators NOT the original authors.

 

[Doug Brents]

Trinitarian bias being read into the scripture.
Only about five times is 'word' capitalized in the whole of scripture, approximately 31,000 scriptures.
---- Original Hebrew/Greek manuscripts did not capitalize pronouns. The decision on whether to capitalize or not was totally up to the prerogative and interpretive choice of the translators NOT the original authors.

SMH, grace, read the context of John 1:1-3. What does it say about the Word?
The Word was there in the Beginning, this means it came before the Beginning. It was already there, meaning it is eternal.
The Word was with God.
The Word was God.
This makes the Word unique, a living being, meaning that "Word" is a proper noun in the entire passage of John 1.

It is not the translators who made the decision to make this a proper noun, but the author (GOD) who gave evidence in the text that it is a proper noun.

 

[FreeInChrist]

The Logos/Word of God the ftaher existed befoe any beginnings, and he was the agent used to create all that was created

Why do you suppose that it is so difficult for people to understand this?

Anyway @JesusFan , you are spot on in your thoughts.

You’re on solid biblical ground here.

According to Gospel of John 1:1–3, the Word already was in the beginning, was with God, and was God... and all things were made through Him. That places the Logos before creation and identifies Him as the agent of creation, not part of it.

This is reinforced in Colossians 1:16–17, which says all things were created through Him and that He is before all things.

John doesn’t say the Word began in the beginning — he says the Word already was when the beginning occurred. Everything that began to exist came through Him, which places Him outside the created order.

And for anyone who needs it here is very strong supporting text.

Colossians 1:17 “He is before all things.”

Notice, Not “at the start of things.” But before all things.

And Micah 5:2 “His goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.”

That’s pre-creation language.

So affirming the eternal preexistence of the Logos and His role in creation is simply following the text.

 

[amazing grace]

SMH, grace, read the context of John 1:1-3. What does it say about the Word?
The Word was there in the Beginning, this means it came before the Beginning. It was already there, meaning it is eternal.
The Word was with God.
The Word was God.
This makes the Word unique, a living being, meaning that "Word" is a proper noun in the entire passage of John 1.

It is not the translators who made the decision to make this a proper noun, but the author (GOD) who gave evidence in the text that it is a proper noun.

Am I wrong that capitalization was not up to the prerogative of the translators?

I know the word was there in the beginning with God ---- wisdom was also in the beginning with God.

The word was God........the word is qualitatively God NOT equal to BEING God - God is not a word.
The word was not a living being in Genesis nor in John 1:1 nor 1-3 nor anywhere previously used before John 1:1.

It is the translators who make the decision on leaving a word capitalized or not ----- all the script used only capital letters without spaces or punctuation. Men were translators NOT God.

 

[Doug Brents]

Am I wrong that capitalization was not up to the prerogative of the translators?

No, it was not. It was completely based upon the context in which the word "Word" is found.

I know the word was there in the beginning with God ---- wisdom was also in the beginning with God.

Nope, Wisdom was a creation of God (Prov 8:22, "The Lord created me at the beginning of His way, Before His works of old.")

The word was God........the word is qualitatively God NOT equal to BEING God - God is not a word.

It doesn't say that God is a "word". It says that the Word (which is the Greek word Logos which encompasses the concept of a rational, divine, or universal order that governs the universe) was God.

The word was not a living being in Genesis nor in John 1:1 nor 1-3 nor anywhere previously used before John 1:1.

That is not what Scripture says.

It is the translators who make the decision on leaving a word capitalized or not ----- all the script used only capital letters without spaces or punctuation. Men were translators NOT God.

Proper translation of a text requires that the translator be absolutely honest, and include details within the translation that are present in the original. These details include things like tense of verbs, gender of nouns, the identity of proper nouns and pronouns, quotations said directly by a person, etc. John 1 indicates clearly that the Logos of God is also the unique man we know as Jesus of Nazareth. That make "Logos" a proper noun in all of John 1.

 

[mikesw]

I know the word was there in the beginning with God ---- wisdom was also in the beginning with God.

Nope, Wisdom was a creation of God (Prov 8:22, "The Lord created me at the beginning of His way, Before His works of old.")

Good point. The Word is not said to be created. John 1:3 says all things were made through him. He could not make himself. Worse yet, there is no passage to say the Word is wisdom. That is seemingly a made-up concept and thus veers from the hyperliteralist approach of unitarians.

 

[amazing grace]

No, it was not. It was completely based upon the context in which the word "Word" is found.

You need to study about the original MSS ---- I can't write Greek but let's say it was an English text it would look like this:
TOTHESAINTSWHOAREINEPHESUSANDARETHEFAITHFULINCHRISTJESUSGRACEANDPEACEFROMGODOURFATHERANDTHELORDJESUS but in Greek:

Nope, Wisdom was a creation of God (Prov 8:22, "The Lord created me at the beginning of His way, Before His works of old.")

Wisdom is God's wisdom and is personified as a female figure. This language is personification God did not have to create his wisdom --- He has wisdom, He is all wise.

It doesn't say that God is a "word". It says that the Word (which is the Greek word Logos which encompasses the concept of a rational, divine, or universal order that governs the universe) was God.

I know it doesn't say God is a word. I know what logos means and a 'person' is not part of the definition.

That is not what Scripture says.

When did the word become a living being? Not until John 1:14 in the person of the only begotten from the Father ---- via his conception and birth.

Proper translation of a text requires that the translator be absolutely honest, and include details within the translation that are present in the original. These details include things like tense of verbs, gender of nouns, the identity of proper nouns and pronouns, quotations said directly by a person, etc. John 1 indicates clearly that the Logos of God is also the unique man we know as Jesus of Nazareth. That make "Logos" a proper noun in all of John 1.

I am not saying that any translator wasn't honest. They translated to the best of their ability with the tools that they had with which to translate.

John 1:1c the word was God --- God is a noun used as a predicate nominative, an adjective. That is the correct grammar.
God's logos and God's wisdom became embodied, became flesh in the man, Jesus, the only begotten from the Father. Jesus speaks for God and is full of God's wisdom.

 

[Doug Brents]

Wisdom is God's wisdom and is personified as a female figure. This language is personification God did not have to create his wisdom --- He has wisdom, He is all wise.

Scripture says it was created (I quoted the Scripture above. If you aren't going to accept the clear words of Scripture, then we have nothing more to discuss, because these are not my words, not my concepts; Scripture is, and must be, the only authority here.

I know it doesn't say God is a word. I know what logos means and a 'person' is not part of the definition.

Again, read Scripture. The Logos of God, which was with God (the Father) and is God (the Son) became/took on flesh in the man we know as Jesus (John 1:1, 14).

When did the word become a living being?

The Word was a living being before Creation, because it is God.

Not until John 1:14 in the person of the only begotten from the Father ---- via his conception and birth.

That is when He became a human, not when He became a living being. He was always a living being, because He was always God.

I am not saying that any translator wasn't honest. They translated to the best of their ability with the tools that they had with which to translate.

John 1:1c the word was God --- God is a noun used as a predicate nominative, an adjective. That is the correct grammar.

Correct, it describes who and what the Logos of God is.

God's logos and God's wisdom became embodied, became flesh in the man, Jesus, the only begotten from the Father. Jesus speaks for God and is full of God's wisdom.

Nope, God's wisdom was never embodied in/as anything. The Logos, which is God, took on flesh in the form of Jesus. But the wisdom of God, which is possessed by both the Father and the Son, never took on flesh or became a human.

You need to get over this obsession you have with trying to link the Logos of God and the wisdom of God as similar things. Wisdom is something God made, while the Logos of God is God, and was never made; it has ALWAYS existed.

 

[amazing grace]

Scripture says it was created (I quoted the Scripture above. If you aren't going to accept the clear words of Scripture, then we have nothing more to discuss, because these are not my words, not my concepts; Scripture is, and must be, the only authority here.

Again, read Scripture. The Logos of God, which was with God (the Father) and is God (the Son) became/took on flesh in the man we know as Jesus (John 1:1, 14).

The Word was a living being before Creation, because it is God.

That is when He became a human, not when He became a living being. He was always a living being, because He was always God.

Correct, it describes who and what the Logos of God is.

Nope, God's wisdom was never embodied in/as anything. The Logos, which is God, took on flesh in the form of Jesus. But the wisdom of God, which is possessed by both the Father and the Son, never took on flesh or became a human.

Ever read Proverbs 31 and compared the lines there describing the 'wife' in that section? If you would study it; you would find some parallel virtues in the 'wife' that are stated as being virtues of the personified female figure 'wisdom' - the 'wife' was an embodiment of God's wisdom which is why the original audience of John's gospel would have understood how the 'word' also was being personified in the prologue of John. The original audience of John's gospel would NOT have understood a Trinitarian doctrine being inserted into the prologue of John. The Trinitarian doctrine was a LATER formulated doctrine and is not appropriate to this period of time - a text cannot mean what it never would have meant to the author or it's original readers.

Here: Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; at the head of the noisy streets she cries out; at the entrance of the city gates she speaks: ..... 'wisdom' is not literally crying aloud in the street!!! Throughout Proverbs God is begging his people to get wisdom, get instruction, get knowledge --- that's called personification.
Here: He makes peace in your borders; he fills you with the finest of the wheat. He sends out his command to the earth; his word runs swiftly..... God's word doesn't literally run swiftly --- that's called personification.

You need to get over this obsession you have with trying to link the Logos of God and the wisdom of God as similar things. Wisdom is something God made, while the Logos of God is God, and was never made; it has ALWAYS existed.

God's wisdom and God's word have always been with God......God's wise thoughts, plans, and purposes brought into existence through God's powerful creative speech ---- both of which became flesh in the only Son from the Father.

 

[Runningman]

Gen 1 and John 1 both talk about the creation of everything that was made. This is the same "Beginning". There are not two beginnings. John 1 starts with the Creation (as the one from Genesis), and goes on to describe the beginning of Jesus' ministry. But as with the genealogy of Jesus, it goes all the way back to Creation.

No, when the word "beginning" appears in the Bible it doesn't necessarily mean it is referring to the beginning of creation.

Is this the beginning of creation here?

Mark 1:1 "“The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ…”

You keep using the word "Word" as if it is the spoken words God uttered. That is not the case. The word "Word" is Logos, which is not just the words which God spoke, but is actually God (John 1:1). This is Jesus (John 1:14).

Yes it's spoken words. Do you know what the word logos means?

It is not based solely on that one verse. It is based upon the sum total of what Scripture says. God is both an "I" and a "We", and "He" and a "They", because the Father is not the Son, but both the Father and Son are God (the same God, not multiple Gods).

God is never a We or They in the Bible. Please show references to support your statements.

It doesn't matter that there are not other examples of "We", "They" or "Them" in Scripture. As you have already admitted, each and every word used in Scripture is important, meaningful, and must be considered when formulating any doctrine. If God is called an "Us" even one time, then there is a reason, a purpose behind that usage. We cannot just come in and change it to an "I", because we don't like the ramifications of what "Us" means.

Yes it matters. If God is multiple persons then it would follow God is a They or Them. You say it doesn't matter because this is a losing point for you. You surely have already researched this and you have found that God isn't a they or them based on the broad testimony of Scripture, which explains why you are being dismissive and evasive about this.

You keep saying that John 1:1 is "badly translated", yet you have not ever shown how it is "badly translated". In what way is it "badly translated"? In what way is the original Greek text corrupted when brought into English? Or is it that you have some "secret" original Greek text that demonstrates something different than all of the other Greek manuscripts in existence?

In John 1:1, the Word is theos with ton Theon. See the difference? This is god with The God so the Word is not The God. Agree?

 

[Doug Brents]

Ever read Proverbs 31 and compared the lines there describing the 'wife' in that section? If you would study it; you would find some parallel virtues in the 'wife' that are stated as being virtues of the personified female figure 'wisdom' - the 'wife' was an embodiment of God's wisdom

All of this is completely irrelevant.

which is why the original audience of John's gospel would have understood how the 'word' also was being personified in the prologue of John. The original audience of John's gospel would NOT have understood a Trinitarian doctrine being inserted into the prologue of John. The Trinitarian doctrine was a LATER formulated doctrine and is not appropriate to this period of time - a text cannot mean what it never would have meant to the author or it's original readers.

That is disproved by Matt 2:15. Matthew is quoting Hos 11:1, and there is no way that Hosea, or his immediate audience, would have suspected that this was a prophecy about the coming Christ. EVERYONE who read this up until Matthew wrote his Gospel saw Hos 11:1 as a look back at the Exodus, and the Jewish nation coming out of Egypt. But Matthew gave the verse a whole new meaning, and an understanding that this was a prophecy of the coming Christ.

Here: Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; at the head of the noisy streets she cries out; at the entrance of the city gates she speaks: ..... 'wisdom' is not literally crying aloud in the street!!! Throughout Proverbs God is begging his people to get wisdom, get instruction, get knowledge --- that's called personification.
Here: He makes peace in your borders; he fills you with the finest of the wheat. He sends out his command to the earth; his word runs swiftly..... God's word doesn't literally run swiftly --- that's called personification.

God's wisdom and God's word have always been with God......God's wise thoughts, plans, and purposes brought into existence through God's powerful creative speech ---- both of which became flesh in the only Son from the Father.

There is NO correlation between wisdom and the Word. As you have been shown, wisdom was created, but the Word is eternal. Wisdom is, as you have pointed out, female. But the Word, and God, are male. Wisdom is personified, but the Word is a person (Jesus).

 

[Doug Brents]

No, when the word "beginning" appears in the Bible it doesn't necessarily mean it is referring to the beginning of creation.

Is this the beginning of creation here?

Mark 1:1 "“The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ…”

You are correct, the word "beginning" does not always indicate Creation. But the parallels between John 1 and Gen 1 are irrefutable. Gen 1 starts with God creating all of what was made "in the Beginning". John 1 starts with the Word, which is God, creating everything that was made "in the Beginning". This makes them the same "Beginning", the beginning which included Creation.

Yes it's spoken words. Do you know what the word logos means?

I do indeed. And it does not mean spoken words.
Logos (λόγος) in Greek fundamentally means "word," "speech," "reason," or "principle". It transcends mere vocabulary to represent the divine, universal order governing the cosmos in philosophy

Yes it matters. If God is multiple persons then it would follow God is a They or Them. You say it doesn't matter because this is a losing point for you. You surely have already researched this and you have found that God isn't a they or them based on the broad testimony of Scripture, which explains why you are being dismissive and evasive about this.

In John 1:1, the Word is theos with ton Theon. See the difference? This is god with The God so the Word is not The God. Agree?

There is no difference.
Theos and Theon are different grammatical cases of the same Greek noun for "God," not different words. Theos is the nominative form (subject), while Theon is the accusative form (direct object or object of a preposition). Their usage is dictated by sentence structure, not by a difference in deity or essence.

Word
Λόγος (Logos)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's 3056: From lego; something said; by implication, a topic, also reasoning or motive; by extension, a computation; specially, the Divine Expression.

was
ἦν (ēn)
Verb - Imperfect Indicative Active - 3rd Person Singular
Strong's 1510: I am, exist. The first person singular present indicative; a prolonged form of a primary and defective verb; I exist.

with
πρὸς (pros)
Preposition
Strong's 4314: To, towards, with. A strengthened form of pro; a preposition of direction; forward to, i.e. Toward.

God,
Θεόν (Theon)
Noun - Accusative Masculine Singular
Strong's 2316: A deity, especially the supreme Divinity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very.

and
καὶ (kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.

the
ὁ (ho)
Article - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.

Word
Λόγος (Logos)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's 3056: From lego; something said; by implication, a topic, also reasoning or motive; by extension, a computation; specially, the Divine Expression.

was
ἦν (ēn)
Verb - Imperfect Indicative Active - 3rd Person Singular
Strong's 1510: I am, exist. The first person singular present indicative; a prolonged form of a primary and defective verb; I exist.

God.
Θεὸς (Theos)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's 2316: A deity, especially the supreme Divinity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very.