Your Views on The Trinity

[Daniel]

John 8:58-59 is about Jesus proclaiming his divine nature to the Jews by stating, “Before Abraham was born, I am,” revealing his eternal existence and leading the Jews to attempt to stone him for blasphemy.

I love this pivotal moment in the Gospel of John that echoes the divine revelation given to Moses in Exodus 3:14, where God identifies Himself as “I AM WHO I AM.”

By useing this divine title, Jesus unequivocally declares His eternal existence and unity with the Father, establishing His divine nature beyond any doubt and posision in the Trinity. The parallel with John 1:1-3 further solidifies Jesus’ identity as the Word who was with God from the beginning, emphasizing His role in creation and His eternal presence alongside the Father.

To understand the position in the Trinity, consider these key points:

The Trinity consists of three distinct persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Each person is fully God, sharing the same divine essence and attributes.
The Father is the creator and sustainer of all things.
The Son, Jesus Christ, is the incarnate Word who redeems humanity.
The Holy Spirit empowers and sanctifies believers, guiding them in truth.
The three persons are co-equal and co-eternal, with no hierarchy among them.

 

[Runningman]

How about being a "person?" As 1John 1:1-3 speaks about the Father and Jesus, are they not person to you?
The "Word" bears Strong#G3056, in Greek "λόγος logos" the same "logos" who became flesh in John 1:14.
That is Jesus as the Word and the "Word was God," in John 1:1c.
Or in Greek "and God was the Word." See below;


1Jn 1:1 What G3739  was  R1 from the beginning G746 , what G3739  we have  R2 heard G191 , what G3739  we have  R3 seen G3708  with our eyes G3788 , what G3739  we  R4 have looked G2300  at and  R5 touched G5584  with our hands G5495 , concerning G4012  the  R6 Word G3056  of Life G2222 —

Jhn 1:14 And  R1 the Word G3056 R2 became G1096  flesh G4561 , and  R3 dwelt G4637  among G1722  us; and  R4 we saw G2300  His glory G1391 , glory G1391  as of the only G3439  Son from the Father G3962 , full G4134  of  R5 grace G5485  and  R6 truth G225 .

---

G3056​

λόγος logos

Jhn 1:1 In G1722  the beginning G746  was G1510.7.3  the G3588  word, G3056  and G2532  the G3588  word G3056  was G1510.7.3  with G4314 G3588  God, G2316  and G2532  God G2316  was G1510.7.3  the G3588 word  G3056 

Jhn 1:1 εν G1722  αρχη G746  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056  και G2532  ο G3588  λογος G3056  ην G1510.7.3  προς G4314  τον G3588  θεον G2316  και G2532  θεος G2316  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056 

Doesn't work as a person and no translators have translated 1John 1:1-3 that way. Doesn't make sense with the context either. The Word is a eternal life, eternal life is a thing, not a person. Playing with the Greek to try to find a whole new version is a tell-tale sign this passage makes you uncomfortable.

 

[Runningman]

Anyone can have opinion but no evidence presented, cannot hold water.

And so with John 1:18, which was described as from the "original wordings" as the "only begotten God,"supported by the oldest manuscripts, the papyri 66 and 75, will again will be met by the Arians opinion not by evidence.

You having not did your due diligence to look up the evidence is not related to there being no evidence. This discussion has already been had before many times for decades. There being those who haven't learned about 1 Tim 3:16 doesn't change anything.

Ellicott: “God was manifest in the flesh. - Here, in the most ancient authorities, the word “God” does not occur. We must, then, literally translate the Greek of the most famous and trustworthy MSS. as follows: He who was manifested in the flesh.”

Cambridge (Bible for Schools and Colleges): “God was manifest in the flesh] The controversy is well known which has so long prevailed as to the original reading; whether the passage should begin ‘God’ or ‘who’: … Since the minute inspection of the Alexandrine ms. by Bps Lightfoot, Ellicott, and others, there is no doubt of its original reading being ‘who,’ as is also the reading of א, and all the Versions older than the 7th century, of Origen, Epiphanius, Jerome, Theodore, and Cyril.”

Barnes: “The question which has excited so much controversy is, whether the original Greek word was Θεὸς Theos, “God,” or whether it was ὅς hos, “who,” or ὁ ho, “which.” … The Vulgate and the Syriac read it: ‘who,’ or ‘which.’”

 

[Runningman]

Can you present the verse where the word "Bible" is written?

Matthew 1
1This is the record (Βίβλος (Biblos)) of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham:

 

[Runningman]

No it does not

First you ignore John 1

John 1:1–18 (NASB95) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. 6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John testified about Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’ ” 16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

He is defined personally with the masculine pronoun he. He is defined as the source of all things . He made the world

And as the source of all things. He therefore is not a thing

Confirmed by God

Heb 1:10And, “You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of Your hands;

And He claims personal existence

John 8:58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”

Glory with God before the world was

John 17:5Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

Loved of the father before the world was

John 17:24Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

Where he was in the form of God

Philippians 2:5–7 (NASB 95) — 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.

The radiance of God and the exact representation of his nature

Heb 1:1–3God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

Regarding 1John

1 John 1:1–3 (NASB95) — 1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life— 2 and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.

It concerns the person Jesus who was heard and seen and touched

Are you going to claim they did not see and hear a person?

That they had fellowship with a thing that was not personal?

The person spoken of throughout the New Testament really did not personally exist?

Your claim is absurd - totally

Yes, the Word is explicitly identified as a thing. Rather than try to find ways to reject it, why don't you agree with it? You can't change it, that's for sure, so what are you talking about?

1 John 1
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our own eyes, which we have gazed upon and touched with our own hands—this is the Word of life. 2And this is the life that was revealed; we have seen it and testified to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us.
3We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And this fellowship of ours is with the Father and with His Son, Jesus Christ.

So now you know that the Word is a thing. I have already showed you this many times. The Word in John 1:1 is a thing as well, not God, since it is not The God in the Greek of John 1:1:

In [the] beginning was the word, and the word was with the God and god was the word.

Above is a literal word for word possible translation of John 1:1., but it doesn't match the context of the Bible. In the Bible, the "Word" isn't God. The Father is the only true God (John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:6, etc) so aside from the trinity being debunked with just three verses, there isn't a working example of the Word being God in Scripture. No examples in the Old or New Testament of that.

I would also add, the very word for god, theos, in John 1:1 can be translated as godly elsewhere in Scripture. It depends on whether or not theos is being used in the qualitative sense, which it is in John 1:1. God isn't a quality, but godliness is a quality.

John 1:1 is better translated by making the Word lowercase and not god, but rather godly, but it lacks a definite article. This is completely in line with the word being a thing as apostle John stated in 1 John 1:1-3.

 

[TomL]

Yes, the Word is explicitly identified as a thing. Rather than try to find ways to reject it, why don't you agree with it? You can't change it, that's for sure, so what are you talking about?

1 John 1
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our own eyes, which we have gazed upon and touched with our own hands—this is the Word of life. 2And this is the life that was revealed; we have seen it and testified to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us.
3We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And this fellowship of ours is with the Father and with His Son, Jesus Christ.

So now you know that the Word is a thing. I have already showed you this many times.

Sorry but you are repeating an absurdity for which you failed to address the rebuttal below


1 John 1:1–3 (NASB95) — 1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life— 2 and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.

It concerns the person Jesus who was heard and seen and touched

Are you going to claim they did not see and hear a person?

That they had fellowship with a thing that was not personal?

The person spoken of throughout the New Testament really did not personally exist?

As I stated previously and you have not addressed Your claim is absurd - totally

 

[TomL]

Yes, the Word is explicitly identified as a thing. Rather than try to find ways to reject it, why don't you agree with it? You can't change it, that's for sure, so what are you talking about?

The Word in John 1:1 is a thing as well, not God, since it is not The God in the Greek of John 1:1:

In [the] beginning was the word, and the word was with the God and god was the word.

Above is a literal word for word possible translation of John 1:1., but it doesn't match the context of the Bible. In the Bible, the "Word" isn't God. The Father is the only true God (John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:6, etc) so aside from the trinity being debunked with just three verses, there isn't a working example of the Word being God in Scripture. No examples in the Old or New Testament of that.

I would also add, the very word for god, theos, in John 1:1 can be translated as godly elsewhere in Scripture. It depends on whether or not theos is being used in the qualitative sense, which it is in John 1:1. God isn't a quality, but godliness is a quality.

John 1:1 is better translated by making the Word lowercase and not god, but rather godly, but it lacks a definite article. This is completely in line with the word being a thing as apostle John stated in 1 John 1:1-3.

As previously noted First you ignore John 1

John 1:1–18 (NASB95) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. 6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John testified about Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’ ” 16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

He is defined personally with the masculine pronoun he. He is defined as the source of all things. He made the world

And as the source of all things. He therefore is not a thing as he cannot be the source making himself

Confirmed by God as creator

Heb 1:10And, “You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of Your hands;

And He claims personal existence

John 8:58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”

Glory with God before the world was

John 17:5Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

Loved of the father before the world was

John 17:24Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

Where he was in the form of God

Philippians 2:5–7 (NASB 95) — 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.

The radiance of God and the exact representation of his nature

Heb 1:1–3God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

You addressed basically nothing.

And were you to interpret all uses of the Greek word theos without an article as godly you would be making quite a mess of scripture for many examples exist

And for the record Theos (God) is a noun in John 1:1 not an adjective (godly)

The actual greek is

καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος

And God was the word

And btw your interpretation of 1 John was totally refuted

 

[mikesw]

As previously noted First you ignore John 1

John 1:1–18 (NASB95) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. 6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John testified about Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’ ” 16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

He is defined personally with the masculine pronoun he. He is defined as the source of all things. He made the world

And as the source of all things. He therefore is not a thing as he cannot be the source making himself

Confirmed by God as creator

Heb 1:10And, “You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of Your hands;

And He claims personal existence

John 8:58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”

Glory with God before the world was

John 17:5Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

Loved of the father before the world was

John 17:24Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

Where he was in the form of God

Philippians 2:5–7 (NASB 95) — 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.

The radiance of God and the exact representation of his nature

Heb 1:1–3God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

You addressed basically nothing.

And were you to interpret all uses of the Greek word theos without an article as godly you would be making quite a mess of scripture for many examples exist

And for the record Theos (God) is a noun in John 1:1 not an adjective (godly)

The actual greek is

καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος

And God was the word

And btw your interpretation of 1 John was totally refuted

The Christian Trinitarians refute the unitarian interpretations of proof texts much more than unitarians reasonably address the texts showing their errors. If we give the the benefit of doubt, they are hyperliteralists who cannot get beyond certain verses that they think makes their case. All other scriptures have to conform to those minority texts. I start to wonder if there is something more than just improper focus going on here. One thing they do seem to be is an apologist dedicated to that unitarian doctrine rather than someone wishing to consider whether their view stands scrutiny.

 

[TomL]

The Christian Trinitarians refute the unitarian interpretations of proof texts much more than unitarians reasonably address the texts showing their errors. If we give the the benefit of doubt, they are hyperliteralists who cannot get beyond certain verses that they think makes their case. All other scriptures have to conform to those minority texts. I start to wonder if there is something more than just improper focus going on here. One thing they do seem to be is an apologist dedicated to that unitarian doctrine rather than someone wishing to consider whether their view stands scrutiny.

It's kind of strange that they could hold on to a belief that it is necessary to believe in some created creature rather than God for justification, salvation, and to be a born again child of God.

 

[Peterlag]

I've presented the Greek of "God was manifest in flesh" but I've not seen evidence of your Greek manuscript as rebuttal.

Like I already posted. And again, Some Greek manuscripts have passed into some English versions, and the King James Version is one of them.

 

[Peterlag]

yes, true, Trinitarians do confess 1 Tim 3:16 was deliberately altered and it is a common position for well-known commentators and theologians of standing to affirm. Several of them will even kinda admit how disappointed they are that 1 Tim 3:16 turned out to be a corrupted verse in some manuscripts. It's just the trinitarians don't really have any homerun verses so they tried to make some.

However, it really backfired because the other part of 1 Tim 3:16 says he "was vindicated by the Spirit." Trinitarians accidentally created a verse that says God was rendered just or innocent. In other words, they are saying God was judged and found innocent. How crazy is that. However, since 1 Tim 3:16 is talking about a human, it is no problem that Jesus was judged and found innocent on all counts. We can accept a human be judged, but God being judged is not a Scriptural idea.

I told (EDIT By Admin) there are Greek Manuscripts that have 1 Timothy 3:16 reading “God appeared in the flesh.” And that Trinitarian scholars admit that these Greek texts were altered by scribes in favor of the Trinitarian position. And he (EDIT By Admin} continues to tell me it's in the Greek.

 

[Runningman]

Sorry but you are repeating an absurdity for which you failed to address the rebuttal below


1 John 1:1–3 (NASB95) — 1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life— 2 and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.

It concerns the person Jesus who was heard and seen and touched

Are you going to claim they did not see and hear a person?

That they had fellowship with a thing that was not personal?

The person spoken of throughout the New Testament really did not personally exist?

As I stated previously and you have not addressed Your claim is absurd - totally

1 John 1:1-3 calls the Word of life eternal life. So it's a thing. Also, the Word is called a that, which, this, what and an it, not a he, him, who, etc. John spoke of the word as an immaterial thing. That isn't going anywhere so cease your arguments trying to change what the Bible says. The buck stops here, you can't gaslight me into changing my mind about it.

So since we know that the Word is a thing, we know that the Word in John 1:1 is not God. John was a Jew and familiar with the holy writ Scriptures. John was speaking of the word in line with Hebrew poetry.

The Logos-idea developed out of the Old Testament (especially the creation via divine word in Genesis) and then is influenced by Hellenistic philosophy. Many trinitarians agree with this.

Meyer's NT Commentary agree that the Word (Logos) is a thing and not God:
The investigation of the Logos idea can only lead to a true result when pursued by the path of history. But here, above all, history points us to the O. T.,[64] and most directly to Genesis 1, where the act of creation is effected by God speaking. The reality contained in this representation, anthropomorphic as to its form, of the revelation of Himself made in creation by God, who is in His own nature hidden, became the root of the Logos idea. The Word as creative, and embodying generally the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry (Psalm 33:6; Psalm 107:20; Psalm 147:15; Isaiah 55:10-11); and consequent upon this concrete and independent representation, divine attributes are predicated of it (Psalm 34:4; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:105), so far as it was at the same time the continuous revelation of God in law and prophecy. A way was thus paved for the hypostatizing of the λόγος as a further step in the knowledge of the relations in the divine essence; but this advance took place gradually, and only after the captivity, so that probably the oriental doctrine of emanations, and subsequently the Pythagorean-platonic philosophy, were not without influence upon what was already given in germ in Genesis 1.
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/meyer/john/1.htm

“Logos is broadly defined as the Word of God, or principle of divine reason and creative order … In Greek philosophy, it related to a universal, divine reason or the mind of God.”
https://www.christianity.com/wiki/c...in-the-bible-definition-and-significance.html

“The idea of God, who is in his own nature hidden, revealing himself in creation, is the root of the Logos-idea …”

“This idea develops itself in the Old Testament on three lines: (1) The Word, as embodying the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry… (2) The personified wisdom … (3) …”
https://www.bible-researcher.com/logos.html

This academic study declares that the term “λόγος” has roots in OT prophecy, in Hellenistic Jewish literature (Philo) and in Greek philosophy"
https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/masters/76/

I did some homework for you. The Word is a thing, something that Jews have been putting into personification for thousands of years. It's hilarious you think you can come along and unseat that. Scripture and the Christian community refutes you completely.

 

[Runningman]

I told there are Greek Manuscripts that have 1 Timothy 3:16 reading “God appeared in the flesh.” And that Trinitarian scholars admit that these Greek texts were altered by scribes in favor of the Trinitarian position. And he continues to tell me it's in the Greek.

I know. There are people here who's agenda is to push a narrative rather than accept the truth. You could literally show him the old Greek manuscript of 1 Timothy 3:16 where the word for god is absent from the verse and he'd plug his ears, stomp his feet, and say it's in the Greek. How do I know? Because I've shown people the actual manuscript before. Many will back off in the face of such overwhelming proof to the contrary, but some won't. At least you know what kind of people you're dealing with; sometimes ignorance can be invincible. I chuckle when they think that's a compliment.

 

[Peterlag]

Let's talk about the Catholics...

It should be a huge Red Flag to any Trinitarian who finds themselves believing the same doctrine the Catholics believe since the Catholics have never been right about anything. And yes there are many on this site that say well, the Catholics are wrong about a lot, but not everything because some things they have correct. Yeah, name one. I challenge you to name one thing the Catholics got right.

Much of the Roman Catholic doctrine was assimilated into Protestantism and is still being passed along as Christian groups continue to split off from one another. In a nutshell that is why even the independent church in your neighborhood today most probably believes that there is a trinity, dead people are alive, God is in control of everything that happens, the four gospels are written to Christians, and water baptism is relevant. And then there's everything that you know about our sin nature was taught to you by them.

 

[mikesw]

1 John 1:1-3 calls the Word of life eternal life. So it's a thing. Also, the Word is called a that, which, this, what and an it, not a he, him, who, etc. John spoke of the word as an immaterial thing. That isn't going anywhere so cease your arguments trying to change what the Bible says. The buck stops here, you can't gaslight me into changing my mind about it.

This is a case of prooftexting since this is not an exegetical analysis of the sense of logos being used in this passage. So the one arguing this unique position misses that the focus here appears to be on the message of life rather than anything related to John 1. That also demonstrates the failure to recognize how the context of a word gives it more narrow meaning than just a word found in something like the Unitarian Pocket Dictionary

So since we know that the Word is a thing, we know that the Word in John 1:1 is not God. John was a Jew and familiar with the holy writ Scriptures. John was speaking of the word in line with Hebrew poetry.

So this argument demonstrates the failure just mentioned. This also neglects the sense of logos being used in metonymy for an actual entity that has existed and interacted with the Father. A mere word is never God, but metonymy allows the expression to be pointing to God who also was in the bosom of God. This is unexplainable in the Unitarian's mind and thus they reject who God is.

The Logos-idea developed out of the Old Testament (especially the creation via divine word in Genesis) and then is influenced by Hellenistic philosophy. Many trinitarians agree with this.

Indeed the OT reflects Wisdom in the creation process. That is not grounds to reject what John 1 has shared. Actually John presents the fullness of meaning of Christ's identity.

Meyer's NT Commentary agree that the Word (Logos) is a thing and not God:
The investigation of the Logos idea can only lead to a true result when pursued by the path of history. But here, above all, history points us to the O. T.,[64] and most directly to Genesis 1, where the act of creation is effected by God speaking. The reality contained in this representation, anthropomorphic as to its form, of the revelation of Himself made in creation by God, who is in His own nature hidden, became the root of the Logos idea. The Word as creative, and embodying generally the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry (Psalm 33:6; Psalm 107:20; Psalm 147:15; Isaiah 55:10-11); and consequent upon this concrete and independent representation, divine attributes are predicated of it (Psalm 34:4; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:105), so far as it was at the same time the continuous revelation of God in law and prophecy. A way was thus paved for the hypostatizing of the λόγος as a further step in the knowledge of the relations in the divine essence; but this advance took place gradually, and only after the captivity, so that probably the oriental doctrine of emanations, and subsequently the Pythagorean-platonic philosophy, were not without influence upon what was already given in germ in Genesis 1.
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/meyer/john/1.htm

This further clarified by recognizing the use of metonymy to reveal Jesus as the one who was with God and was God in creation. God plans out the revelation of such details about himself.

“Logos is broadly defined as the Word of God, or principle of divine reason and creative order … In Greek philosophy, it related to a universal, divine reason or the mind of God.”
https://www.christianity.com/wiki/c...in-the-bible-definition-and-significance.html

Funny how you try to borrow ideas from a Christian orthodox view into unitarianism. It would have been better not to post anything if you want to pretend the unitarian view has significance.

“The idea of God, who is in his own nature hidden, revealing himself in creation, is the root of the Logos-idea …”

Hence God the Son comes in the flesh with both divinity and humanity.

“This idea develops itself in the Old Testament on three lines: (1) The Word, as embodying the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry… (2) The personified wisdom … (3) …”
https://www.bible-researcher.com/logos.html

Again metonymy is used here not only as divine will but as God which then becomes God in flesh. I can see how a hyperliteralist misses this.

This academic study declares that the term “λόγος” has roots in OT prophecy, in Hellenistic Jewish literature (Philo) and in Greek philosophy, showing the multi‐stage development your passage describes.
https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/masters/76/

Uh. Good job. You contradict what is shared earlier in what you quoted. Here is part of the conclusion of the thesis paper.

The third chapter, the exegesis of John 1:1-18, demonstrated that the λ ό γ ο ς
existed from the beginning of all things, created all things, and was God. The λ ό γ ο ς was
one with God in nature, even though they differed in person. The duality is explained in
verse 18: No one has ever seen God, the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he
has made him known (RSV).

https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1076&context=masters

I did some homework for you. The Word is a thing, something that Jews have been putting into personification for thousands of years. It's hilarious you think you can come along and unseat that. Scripture and the Christian community refutes you completely.

You should try studying at a decent seminary or bible school to learn some basic exegetical skills.

 

[mikesw]

Let's talk about the Catholics...

It should be a huge Red Flag to any Trinitarian who finds themselves believing the same doctrine the Catholics believe since the Catholics have never been right about anything. And yes there are many on this site that say well, the Catholics are wrong about a lot, but not everything because some things they have correct. Yeah, name one. I challenge you to name one thing the Catholics got right.

Much of the Roman Catholic doctrine was assimilated into Protestantism and is still being passed along as Christian groups continue to split off from one another. In a nutshell that is why even the independent church in your neighborhood today most probably believes that there is a trinity, dead people are alive, God is in control of everything that happens, the four gospels are written to Christians, and water baptism is relevant. And then there's everything that you know about our sin nature was taught to you by them.

Ewww. That is such an ignorant remark. First, "catholic" means the whole body of Christ. So you conflate Roman Catholicism with catholicism. This has been a confusing detail of the unitarian arguments. Either way, much of the continuity of message and doctrine had been passed through Roman Catholicsm and even in Greek Orthodoxy, as an alternative branch.
So there effectively is no argument except an ad hominem one.

 

[Runningman]

This is a case of prooftexting since this is not an exegetical analysis of the sense of logos being used in this passage. So the one arguing this unique position misses that the focus here appears to be on the message of life rather than anything related to John 1. That also demonstrates the failure to recognize how the context of a word gives it more narrow meaning than just a word found in something like the Unitarian Pocket Dictionary

Scripture teaches the Word is a thing in 1 John 1:1-3. Yet you all say the word is God. God isn't a thing, therefore the word is not God. Pretty easy to understand that God's words aren't Himself. They can have attributes of God, but something with God's attributes aren't God. This is what is called godly.

So this argument demonstrates the failure just mentioned. This also neglects the sense of logos being used in metonymy for an actual entity that has existed and interacted with the Father. A mere word is never God, but metonymy allows the expression to be pointing to God who also was in the bosom of God. This is unexplainable in the Unitarian's mind and thus they reject who God is.

You have come no where close to wiping 1 John 1:1-3 out of the Bible. It's still there. More accurately, your argument is that you disagree with Scripture. You're in full blown damage control at this point.

Indeed the OT reflects Wisdom in the creation process. That is not grounds to reject what John 1 has shared. Actually John presents the fullness of meaning of Christ's identity.

Understand John 1 in light of the Old Testament and 1 John 1:1-3. The Word is never referred to as God in the Old Testament. It's spoken of as a thing that comes out of God's mouth.

Isaiah 55
11So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth;
It will not return to Me empty,
Without accomplishing what I desire,
And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

This further clarified by recognizing the use of metonymy to reveal Jesus as the one who was with God and was God in creation. God plans out the revelation of such details about himself.

Funny how you try to borrow ideas from a Christian orthodox view into unitarianism. It would have been better not to post anything if you want to pretend the unitarian view has significance.

Some of the trinitarians have rightly identified the word as a thing. Study more and you'll understand what they are talking about.

Hence God the Son comes in the flesh with both divinity and humanity.

Not what the Bible says.

Again metonymy is used here not only as divine will but as God which then becomes God in flesh. I can see how a hyperliteralist misses this.

Scripture makes a better argument than you and edit do. You all seem to think you can quote John 1:1 and call it a day, but the testimony of Scripture from cover to cover contradicts your opinions.

Uh. Good job. You contradict what is shared earlier in what you quoted. Here is part of the conclusion of the thesis paper.

The third chapter, the exegesis of John 1:1-18, demonstrated that the λ ό γ ο ς
existed from the beginning of all things, created all things, and was God. The λ ό γ ο ς was
one with God in nature, even though they differed in person. The duality is explained in
verse 18: No one has ever seen God, the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he
has made him known (RSV).

https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1076&context=masters

You should try studying at a decent seminary or bible school to learn some basic exegetical skills.

In other words, Logos theology was developed over time. You are what I would consider a logos theologian which is an extremely weak philosophy to uphold since it is directly contradicted by the entire OT and 1 John 1:1-3.

 

[Runningman]

Ewww. That is such an ignorant remark. First, "catholic" means the whole body of Christ. So you conflate Roman Catholicism with catholicism. This has been a confusing detail of the unitarian arguments. Either way, much of the continuity of message and doctrine had been passed through Roman Catholicsm and even in Greek Orthodoxy, as an alternative branch.
So there effectively is no argument except an ad hominem one.

Protestants got all of their doctrines from the Catholics. It's funny, the very same things they argue are sola scriptura are the very things you all argue with them about as being unscriptural. The trinity is one of those things that is also unscriptural. From the outside looking in, you all look quite silly.

 

[TomL]

Scripture makes a better argument than you and edit do. You all seem to think you can quote John 1:1 and call it a day, but the testimony of Scripture from cover to cover contradicts your opinions.

Lol this was scripture and you ignored it

As previously noted First you ignore John 1

John 1:1–18 (NASB95) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. 6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John testified about Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’ ” 16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

He is defined personally with the masculine pronoun he. He is defined as the source of all things. He made the world

And as the source of all things. He therefore is not a thing as he cannot be the source making himself

Confirmed by God as creator

Heb 1:10And, “You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of Your hands;

And He claims personal existence

John 8:58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”

Glory with God before the world was

John 17:5Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

Loved of the father before the world was

John 17:24Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

Where he was in the form of God

Philippians 2:5–7 (NASB 95) — 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.

The radiance of God and the exact representation of his nature

Heb 1:1–3God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

You addressed basically nothing.

And were you to interpret all uses of the Greek word theos without an article as godly you would be making quite a mess of scripture for many examples exist

And for the record Theos (God) is a noun in John 1:1 not an adjective (godly)

The actual greek is

καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος

And God was the word

And btw your interpretation of 1 John was totally refuted

Sorry but you are repeating an absurdity for which you failed to address the rebuttal below


1 John 1:1–3 (NASB95) — 1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life— 2 and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.

It concerns the person Jesus who was heard and seen and touched

Are you going to claim they did not see and hear a person?

That they had fellowship with a thing that was not personal?

The person spoken of throughout the New Testament really did not personally exist?

As I stated previously and you have not addressed Your claim is absurd - totally

 

[mikesw]

Protestants got all of their doctrines from the Catholics. It's funny, the very same things they argue are sola scriptura are the very things you all argue with them about as being unscriptural. The trinity is one of those things that is also unscriptural. From the outside looking in, you all look quite silly.

You take a gnostic approach by claiming to have secret knowledge revealed to you. Indeed Christ is foolishness to the world but is wisdom to those who are of Christ. We would hope to invite you back to the inside status with Christ.