The Trinity and all of its supporting doctrines are all circular in reasoning
- Thread starter Runningman
- Start date
unitarians are hyperliteralists but miss the obvious verses.
Doug Brents
Active Member
John 1:1 - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
From Scripture!
so the unitarian defies convention and says the Jesus does not have qualities of God just because his father is God.
Peterlag
Active Member
Okay, no I'm not refusing to believe Scripture like you say. John 1:1 does not say "In the beginning was Jesus." Jesus Christ is not a lexical definition of logos.
Doug Brents
Active Member
You asked why I believe the Logos is God. That is in John 1:1. Are we agreed now that the Logos is God?
Then the next step to understand is:
John 1:1 doesn't say that the Logos is Jesus. But John 1:14 DOES!
John 1:14 - "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."
Jesus is the Son of God (Matt 3:17). And Jesus is the one whom John the Baptizer came as the forerunner to (John 1:29, 34).
Because Jesus is the Logos, and the Logos is God, that means that Jesus IS God.
A repeated hyperliteralist point shared without recognition of allegorical assignment. The hyperliteralist misses the obvious.
Peterlag
Active Member
No John 1:1 does not say the logos is God. And neither does John 1:14.
John 1:14 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. The "Word" is the wisdom, plan or purpose of God and the Word became flesh as Jesus Christ. Thus, Jesus Christ was the Word in the flesh, which is shortened to the Word for ease of speaking. Scripture is also the Word in writing. Everyone agrees that the Word in writing had a beginning. So did the Word in the flesh. In fact, the Greek text of Matthew 1:18 says that very clearly: "Now the beginning of Jesus Christ was in this manner..." The modern Greek texts all read "beginning" in Matthew 1:18. Birth is considered an acceptable translation since the beginning of some things is birth, and so most translations read birth. Nevertheless, the proper understanding of Matthew 1:18 is the beginning of Jesus Christ. In the beginning God had a plan, a purpose, which became flesh when Jesus was conceived.
The trinitarian has only 3 to pick from...
1.) Use a verse from a bad translation.
2.) Use a verse that is taken out of context.
3.) Not understand how the words were used in the culture they were written in.
And basically that's all trinitarians have. And I mean 100 percent of what they have. They have nothing else.
Doug Brents
Active Member
The Word is not JUST the "wisdom, plan, or purpose of God". The Word also IS God, just as John 1:1 says, and you said:
So if you are not refusing to believe what Scripture says, then you MUST believe that the Logos of God IS God (because that is what Scripture says about It). It is not just some "wisdom, plan, or purpose", but actually is God.
Not in the same meaning of the word "word". Scripture is God's words, but it is not the Logos of God.
Who was born first? John the Baptizer or Jesus? Who was conceived first? John the Baptizer or Jesus?
The obvious answer to both of these is that John the Baptizer was the older of the two (by three months). So then, why and how could John the Baptizer say that Jesus existed before Him (John 1:30)? Jesus did not "begin" when He was born, nor when He was conceived. He existed before John, before Abraham, before Creation.
It seems that you do refuse to believe what Scripture says.
Good point. No prophet was described as saying "before an older person was born, I exist before him." This is shared in John 1:30 and when Jesus says "before Abraham was, I am." The wording would have to be "before Abraham was, scripture prophesied of someone like me." Peterlag won't see this though.
What other prophet ever stated that I came down from heaven?
Similar threads
