Thomas... My Lord and my God
- Thread starter Peterlag
- Start date
Finally you acknowledge the passage that points to God announcing his divine Son on earth. That is a good point for Christmas. God with us.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
But as for God speaking to 'the other persons' in himself . . . nope.
That is because you cannot understand who God truly is.
I see things like this.
If the Word is God and all things were made through him, as John states, then the creative commands in Genesis 1–2 cannot originate apart from the Word. This would mean that the Word is the divine speaker through whom the Father creates and speaks.
this is backed up even with the skewed JW translation of the NWT that calls the Word a god... it goes on to say
2 This one was in the beginning with God.3 </a> All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence 4 by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men.
I would like for you to show me any verse in any translation that denies that the Word was the creator.
I found this, to get you started.
All extant Christian Bibles affirm creation “through” the Word
Every complete Christian Bible tradition that includes the New Testament contains texts like:
John 1:3 – “All things came into being through him”
Colossians 1:16 – “All things were created through him and for him”
Hebrews 1:2 – “Through whom he made the ages”
This includes:
Greek NT manuscripts
Latin (Vulgate)
Syriac (Peshitta)
Coptic
Armenian
Georgian
Ethiopic
None contain a verse saying “the Word did not create” or “creation was not through the Word.”
So I shall wait for your irrefutable proof.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
I will repeat to you what I just posted to @amazing grace
That is because you cannot understand who God truly is.
I see things like this.
If the Word is God and all things were made through him, as John states, then the creative commands in Genesis 1–2 cannot originate apart from the Word. This would mean that the Word is the divine speaker through whom the Father creates and speaks.
this is backed up even with the skewed JW translation of the NWT that calls the Word a god... it goes on to say
2 This one was in the beginning with God.3 </a> All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence 4 by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men.
I would like for you to show me any verse in any translation that denies that the Word was the creator.
I found this, to get you started.
Every complete Christian Bible tradition that includes the New Testament contains texts like:
John 1:3 – “All things came into being through him”
Colossians 1:16 – “All things were created through him and for him”
Hebrews 1:2 – “Through whom he made the ages”
This includes:
Greek NT manuscripts
Latin (Vulgate)
Syriac (Peshitta)
Coptic
Armenian
Georgian
Ethiopic
None contain a verse saying “the Word did not create” or “creation was not through the Word.”
So I shall wait for your irrefutable proof.
WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE AFRAID OF? IT IS BIBLICAL>>>>> Not just by John but by Colossians and Hebrews.
Peterlag
Active Member
The Word is not God. The word is logos that is translated differently 140 times in the New Testament and never refers to Jesus.
Peterlag
Active Member
You guys need to terminate your Preacher if you ask questions like this...
“YOU MUST BE BORN AGAIN”
Why if we’re already made in God’s image?
“YOU MUST BE BORN AGAIN”
Why if we’re already made in God’s image?
That image is spirit that Adam with the help of Eve lost. The Christ got it back for us. But you don't have the image of God until you get the spirit back from Jesus Christ.
amazing grace
Active Member
I know who God is by the language used in reference to him. singular verbs, adjectives, singular personal pronouns indicate ONE singular person, being. He is not claiming to be one while being 3.
Oh, I have never disagreed that God did not create through his word. It was God's powerful creative speech which created everything that was made and nothing was made without it! AND GOD SAID ...... AND IT WAS SO, etc., etc. ---- very simple right in the beginning of the word of God.
But that wasn't being discussed. What was being discussed was the 'us', and 'our' in Genesis 1:26.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Oh Peter,
Then I do hope that you have redacted the book of John from your bible for I'm certain it must be an affront to you.
For it is John that states... undeniably
the Gospel of John explicitly states that the Logos (translated as "the Word") is God in John 1:1.
The original Greek text reads:Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
This is most commonly translated as:"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
The term "Logos" (λόγος) here refers to the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ, as clarified later in John 1:14 ("the Word became flesh").
The phrase "θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος" (literally "God was the Word") affirms the divine nature of the Logos without the definite article before "θεὸς" in the final clause—a grammatical construction that emphasizes quality or essence (the Logos is fully divine) while distinguishing Him from "the God" (τὸν θεόν) mentioned earlier.
This is the standard rendering in nearly all major Bible translations (e.g., ESV, NIV, NASB, KJV). Alternative translations like "the Word was divine" or (controversially) "a god" exist in some versions, but the mainstream scholarly consensus supports "the Word was God" as accurately conveying the text's meaning.
So, John declares that it (the Logos) was God.
Yes, John specifically says in John 1:14 that the Logos itself became flesh.
I SO HOPE YOU HAVE YOUR GREEK DICTIONERY READY, OR AN INTERLINEAR AT MINIUMUM.
Here is the verse in the original Greek:Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός, πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας.
Literal word-for-word translation of the key phrase:"And the Logos flesh became..."
Standard English translations reflect this precisely:
ESV: "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us..."
NIV: "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us..."
NASB: "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us..."
even
KJV: "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us..."
NWT " So the Word became flesh and resided among us,
The subject of the verb ἐγένετο ("became") is explicitly ὁ λόγος ("the Logos" / "the Word"), carried forward from the prologue's opening verses (John 1:1–13). There is no ambiguity in the Greek text: it is the same Logos introduced in verse 1 that is declared to have become flesh in verse 14.
So, therefore John uses the actual term ὁ λόγος (the Logos) as the subject of "became flesh" in John 1:14.
Be sure to remove John from your bible....For it makes the rest of yours also a lie in your eyes.
synergy
Active Member
You just flat out contradicted John 1:1c that states "the Word was God".
While it is true that the word logos has a broad semantic range, its meaning is determined by context, not by word counts. In John 1:1–3, 14, ho Logos is personal, pre-existent, distinct from the Father, yet fully God, and then is said to have “become flesh and dwelt among us,” which no impersonal expression can do; John further identifies this incarnate Logos as the one whose glory was seen, “the glory of the only-begotten from the Father,” and later names Him explicitly as Jesus Christ (John 1:17). The same personal usage appears in 1 John 1:1, where “the Word of life” is heard, seen, touched, and manifested—physical predicates that only apply to a person—and in Revelation 19:13, where the returning Christ is explicitly called “The Word of God” (ho Logos tou Theou). Arguing that logos “never refers to Jesus” because it is translated differently elsewhere is a basic lexical fallacy: the fact that a word has multiple meanings does not negate its specific, personal reference in particular contexts. Scripture itself interprets Scripture, and the New Testament unambiguously teaches that the Logos is not an expression or abstract utterance but the tabernacled Word, who was God. And since God can never cease to be God then Jesus is God.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
If you agree that He created through his word. Then now you know why God said "Let US'. The Word was there.
God plus Word = US.
So now that we understand that....
If God is commonly called the Father, and Jesus is commonly called the Son... for what reason do you think the Word (Logos) was called that and not something like Like or even Cup?
God is a Father. Jesus is a Son Why do you suppose the one with God the Father in the beginning of creation would be called the Word when HE WAS NOT the one saying anything according to you.
Well lets look at Ai. My Question ....Is there anyway to know why the logos/word was called that back during creation?
1. Gemini
To understand why "the Word" ($Logos$) is used to describe the Creator in the context of Genesis, we have to look at how ancient Jewish and Greek thought merged before the New Testament was written.
While Genesis 1 simply says, "God said," later thinkers used the term Logos to explain how a transcendent God interacts with a physical world.
1. The Power of the "Spoken Word" (Jewish Context)
In Hebrew thought, a word ($Dabar$) was not just a sound; it was a concrete force.- Genesis 1: Creation happens through speech.1 By calling the Creator "the Word," the text identifies Jesus as the very "speech" or "breath" of God that brought matter into existence.
- Psalm 33:6: This verse explicitly links the two: "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made."2
- The Memra: In the Aramaic Targums (ancient Jewish translations/paraphrases of the Bible), the term Memra ("Word") was often used as a buffer to describe God acting on earth, helping readers understand how an invisible God could be "seen" or "heard."
2. The "Logic" of the Universe (Greek Context)
In the Greek-speaking world of the New Testament, Logos meant more than "speech"; it meant reason, logic, or the underlying blueprint of the universe.- Heraclitus and the Stoics: They used Logos to describe the "universal mind" that keeps the stars in their courses and the seasons changing.
- Philo of Alexandria: A Jewish philosopher living around the time of Jesus, Philo combined these ideas. He taught that the Logos was God's instrument in creation—the "bridge" between the perfect mind of God and the material world.
3. The Theological Synthesis
When the Gospel of John was written, using the term "Word" was a genius "bridge" for both audiences:- To the Jew, it signaled that Jesus is the creative command of Genesis 1.
- To the Greek, it signaled that Jesus is the "Logic" or "Reason" behind why the universe works the way it does.
Summary Table
| Concept | Origin | Meaning in Creation |
| Dabar | Hebrew | The active, powerful command that causes things to happen. |
| Logos | Greek | The rational structure and blueprint of the cosmos. |
| Memra | Aramaic | The manifestation of God’s presence and agency in the world. |
I was asked... Would you like to see how the Church Fathers like Justin Martyr or Irenaeus expanded on this "Logos" theology in the second century?
Reply
In the second century, the Church Fathers bridged the gap between the biblical "Word" and Greek philosophy, explaining how the Logos was both eternal with God and active in the physical world.
1. Justin Martyr: The "Seeds" of Truth
Justin Martyr, a philosopher turned Christian, developed the concept of the Logos Spermatikos (the "Sowing Word").- Universal Reason: He argued that every human possesses a "seed" of the Logos, which is why even non-Christian philosophers like Socrates could stumble upon truths.
- The Full Manifestation: While others had seeds of truth, Justin taught that in Jesus Christ, the entire Logos became flesh to provide the full and definitive truth for humanity.
- The Agent of Revelation: For Justin, any time God appeared in the Old Testament (like the burning bush), it was actually a pre-incarnate appearance of the Logos.
2. Irenaeus of Lyons: The "Hands" of God
Irenaeus focused on the Logos specifically in the context of creation and "recapitulation."- The Two Hands: He famously described the Word (Son) and Wisdom (Holy Spirit) as the "two hands of God". This helped explain that God did not need external help or angels to create; He used His own Word.
- Recapitulation: Irenaeus taught that the Logos, who originally created humanity, became human to "sum up" or redo human history. By living a perfect life, the Word "re-created" what had been broken in Adam.
Comparison of Early Logos Theology
These early thinkers ensured that the term "Logos" wasn't just a philosophical idea, but a person who linked the act of creation to the act of salvation.
Would you like to explore how these ideas eventually led to the specific language used in the Nicene Creed?
#2. GROK
Yes, the term "Logos" (translated as "Word" in English Bibles) in the prologue of the Gospel of John (John 1:1–14) has a rich background, and scholars have extensively studied why the author chose this specific Greek word to describe the pre-existent divine figure who becomes incarnate in Jesus.
The Greek Word "Logos"
The Greek word logos (λόγος) has a broad range of meanings, including "word," "speech," "reason," "account," "principle," or "rational order." It was not coined by John but had been used philosophically for centuries before the Gospel was written (likely around 90–100 CE).
Philosophical Background
- Heraclitus (c. 535–475 BCE): One of the earliest philosophers to elevate logos. For him, it referred to the rational principle or underlying order governing the universe—the hidden structure behind constant change and opposites (e.g., day/night, war/peace). It was an impersonal, divine rationality that humans often fail to comprehend.
- Stoics (from c. 300 BCE): Developed logos further as the active, rational force animating the cosmos—an immanent divine reason permeating all things.
- Plato and later thinkers: Logos often meant human reason or discourse, but in Hellenistic philosophy, it bridged the gap between the transcendent divine and the material world.
Jewish-Hellenistic Influence: Philo of Alexandria
Philo (c. 20 BCE–50 CE), a Jewish philosopher from Alexandria, heavily influenced by Greek thought (especially Platonism and Stoicism), fused logos with Jewish ideas:
- He described the Logos as God's intermediary: the "image" of God, the firstborn "Son" of God, the agent of creation, and the mediator between the transcendent God and the world.
- It was semi-personified—not fully a separate person, but more than a mere abstraction. Philo drew from Old Testament concepts like personified Wisdom (Proverbs 8:22–31, where Wisdom is with God at creation) and God's creative word ("God said...").
- Philo's Logos was never incarnate (it couldn't become human flesh, as that would violate God's transcendence).
John's audience, in the Greco-Roman world (possibly Ephesus or Asia Minor), would have been familiar with these ideas through Hellenistic Judaism.
Old Testament and Jewish Roots
John's primary foundation is Jewish Scripture (in Greek translation, the Septuagint):
- God's creative "word" in Genesis 1 ("And God said, 'Let there be light'") brings the universe into existence.
- Phrases like "the word of the Lord" in prophets (e.g., Jeremiah, Isaiah) convey God's revelation, power, and will.
- Personified Wisdom in Proverbs 8 and Wisdom of Solomon (a Jewish text from ~1st century BCE) is pre-existent, involved in creation, and a divine agent—parallels that early Christians applied to Jesus.
- In Aramaic Targums (Jewish interpretive translations), "Memra" (Word) sometimes substitutes for God in anthropomorphic passages, emphasizing God's active presence.
John echoes Genesis 1:1 exactly ("In the beginning...") to link the Logos to God's creative act.
Why Did John Choose "Logos"?
Scholars generally agree John deliberately selected this loaded term for strategic reasons:
- Bridge to audiences: It spoke to both Jews (evoking God's word/Wisdom in creation and revelation) and Greeks/Gentiles (recalling philosophical logos as cosmic reason/order). John "redeems" or transforms the concept: the impersonal philosophical logos becomes fully personal, divine, and incarnate in Jesus ("the Word became flesh," John 1:14)—a shocking claim no philosopher or Philo would make.
- Theological emphasis: It highlights Jesus as:
- Eternal and divine ("was with God... was God").
- Creator ("All things were made through him").
- Revealer of God (light, life, truth).
- The ultimate expression of God's self-communication.
- Polemic or correction: Some see John countering ideas like Philo's (where Logos is subordinate and non-incarnate) or emerging Gnostic views, by insisting the Logos is fully God and truly human.
While direct dependence on Philo is debated (no explicit quotes), the parallels are striking, and John's prologue likely engages this intellectual milieu to proclaim Jesus as the fulfillment.
In summary, John didn't invent the term but repurposed it from its philosophical and Jewish roots to declare that the divine reason/order/word—active "back during creation"—is not an abstract force but a person: Jesus Christ, God incarnate. This choice made the Gospel profoundly accessible and provocative in its 1st-century context. Biblical scholarship (e.g., from sources like the Bible Researcher site, Britannica, and commentaries by scholars like C.H. Dodd) confirms this layered intent.
3. ChatGPT
there are solid historical, linguistic, and theological reasons we can point to for why John chose “Logos” (Word) to describe the one who was with God at creation. We can’t know John’s private thoughts, but we can know the conceptual world he was speaking into, and that gives us real insight.
I’ll walk through this in a structured way so you can use it in discussion or debate if you wish.
1. The Jewish background: God creates by His Word
For a Jewish reader, “Word” was already a creation category.
- Genesis 1: Creation happens by speech
- Psalm 33:6
- Isaiah 55:11
God’s word goes out, acts, and accomplishes His will - Aramaic Targums (paraphrases used in synagogues) often say:
So within Judaism, God’s Word was:
- from God
- distinct in action
- yet fully God’s own self-expression
John is not inventing a new idea—he is identifying it.
2. Logos in Greek thought (but redefined by John)
In Greek philosophy, logos meant:
- rational principle
- ordering reason of the cosmos
- the intelligible structure behind reality
Philo of Alexandria (a Jewish philosopher, 1st century) already used Logos to describe:
- God’s agent in creation
- God’s self-expression
- the mediator between God and the world
But John does something radical:
Greeks did not believe the logos could be personal, nor could it become flesh.
John uses a familiar term—but fills it with Hebrew monotheism and then goes further.
3. Why not just say “Wisdom” or “Spirit”?
Good question—and the fact John doesn’t use those terms is important.
- Wisdom (Sophia) in Proverbs 8 is poetic and personified, but not fully personal
- Spirit in Genesis 1:2 is active, but not portrayed as a speaking agent
“Word” uniquely bridges:
- God speaking
- God acting
- God revealing Himself
Words reveal the speaker without being separate beings.
That is likely precisely why John chose it.
4. John’s theological purpose: identifying Jesus with the Creator
John tells us his goal later:
So when John writes:
He is deliberately:
- anchoring Jesus in Genesis 1
- identifying Him as the agent of creation
- while maintaining Jewish monotheism
Calling Jesus “Logos” allows John to say:
- Jesus is not a second god
- yet Jesus is not a creature
- He is God’s own self-expression acting in creation and redemption
5. Why “Word” matters for incarnation
A word:
- comes from the speaker
- reveals the speaker
- shares the speaker’s nature
- yet is distinguishable
That sets up John 1:14 perfectly:
John is saying:
No other term does this as cleanly.
6. What we can and cannot say with certainty
We can say with confidence:
- John chose “Logos” deliberately
- it draws from Genesis, Psalms, Targums, and Jewish wisdom theology
- it engages Greek thought without surrendering monotheism
- it serves John’s aim of identifying Jesus with creation and revelation
We cannot say:
- that John was writing systematic Trinitarian formulas (those came later)
- that Logos automatically equals later Nicene language in John’s mind
But we can say John is laying the raw material that later theology formalized.
3 different Ais.... we know they are separate. God (the Father ) and the Logos/Word.
Peterlag
Active Member
The word "logos" (Word) denotes (I) "the expression of thought" as embodying a conception or idea. λόγος "logos" is something said (including the thought). So the word "logos" means an expression of thought. It makes perfect sense if we use this understanding everywhere the word "logos" is used. So in John 1:1 the Word is not Jesus, but rather it became flesh, which is God's expression of thought or plan that became flesh with the coming of Jesus Christ.
Peterlag
Active Member
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.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
We at least have 3.... you rewrite the whole bible by faulty translations....,
civic
Active Member
you are opposing God, Christ and His inspired word the scriptures. John 1:1 says the Word is God. The Word was God, the Word was with God. The Word is not the Father. The Word is the Son.
As the Son declared in a parallel verse He shared the same exact Glory together with the Father before the universe existed.
hope this helps !!!
FreeInChrist
Active Member
civic
Active Member
thats what happens when anyone has a bias, personal opinion when they read the bible. they have a false presupposition which states : Jesus in not God but a creature. Therefor any passage declaring Hid Deity in any way, shape or form is immediately rejected and then come all the excuses why He cannot be God and they strip Him of all His Glory.
And we see this daily by the way simple words like One/Only are used and they reject them when applied to the Son but affirm them when applied to the Father. Its a double standard. The same holds true with all things in the creation account of this world. They deny all the passages with the Son.
John 17:5 Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
Peterlag
Active Member
It does not say Jesus is the logos in Revelation 19:13. It says his name is called logos, which makes sense since "it" the logos became flesh.
synergy
Active Member
You continue to commit the classic Lexical Fallacy—reducing λόγος to one abstract meaning (“expression of thought”) and then forcing that meaning into every context. While λόγος can denote speech, reason, or message in certain settings, its meaning is always governed by context, not by your myopic definition desire. In John 1, the Logos is not treated as an impersonal idea or utterance but as a personal agent who was with God, was God, created all things, gives life, and is rejected by His own—actions that cannot coherently apply to an abstract “expression of thought.” Moreover, John’s usage is shaped by both Jewish wisdom theology (Prov 8; Ps 33:6) and Second Temple personal agency concepts, not by your myopic philosophical definition. To insist that λόγος must mean “expression of thought” everywhere is linguistically indefensible and ignores how words function in real language.
This claim directly contradicts the grammar and flow of John 1 itself: the subject of ἐγένετο σὰρξ (“became flesh,” John 1:14) is the same Word described in 1:1–3, who already was (ἦν) in the beginning, was with God, was God, and made all things. An impersonal plan or thought cannot be “with God,” cannot create the universe, cannot enter history, cannot be rejected, and cannot be identified as the only-begotten Son from the Father (1:14, 18). John does not say God’s plan became flesh; he says the Word became flesh, and then explicitly identifies that Word with Jesus Christ (1:17). Thus your attempt to deny that Jesus is the tabernacled Word who was God is just a pure denial of scripture hallucination.
