Your Views on The Trinity

[FreeInChrist]

John 1:3 “Everything came to be through it.” The logos is an “it” not a “him.”

Translators have deliberately chosen to use “him” because they wanted to emphasize that the Word was the male person we know as Jesus. This was a theological choice, not a linguistic one.

So it became flesh. .... Wonder if Ai can do that because they all are called it also.

I do wish they had called the Word her because I am sure Wisdom gets lonely.

But the men of the time would think that an awful idea. So would many of the men on here. I know one.

It became flesh and dwelled among us.

Anyone here remember the movie IT?

Sound silly and ridiculous.... No more so then you do

"Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you; love her, and she will watch over you” (Proverbs 4:6).

Is the Wisdom in Proverbs 4:6 a distinct divine person?

The "Word" is not literally a person for the same reason that "Wisdom" is not literally a person. Both are to be taken metaphorically.

Jesus is the personification of the Word because He speaks the words of God. To listen to Jesus equals listening to the Word of God.

People often say I'm wrong when I post this because they say I looked it up in an Interlinear or Concordance and it shows the word is a "him" and not an "it." Those reference books show how the Bible translates a word and not what the Greek actually means. The pronoun is an "it" when it refers to an inanimate noun like the "Word" because Greek has grammatical gender and the "Word" in John 1 is a thing so the Greek says it's an "it."

Here's a partial list of how "logos" is translated in the New Testament...

cause, communication, sayings, saying, word, words, account, talk, question, treatise, intent, tidings, speaker, matter, mouth, work, utterance, preaching, speech, concerning, show, do, doctrine, reason, with, and thing.

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.

 

[Peterlag]

But God is Jesus. John 1 makes that perfectly clear. The difference is perhaps a bit subtle, but important.

I would admit that Matthew 24:36 is a bit of a curved ball thrown at us, but I think it is tied to the fact that Jeus was a man, a human being, and as such He was saddled with some aspects conflicting with his divinity, i.e., with God being Jesus. We know that it says that God as Jesus increased in wisdom and stature. He learned and matured. His divinity was demonstrated by His perfect righteousness.

John 1:1 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. It seems difficult for people to understand that John 1:1 is introducing the Gospel of John, and not the Book of Genesis. The topic of John is God (the Father, the only God) at work in the ministry of the man Jesus of Nazareth, not the creation of rocks, trees and stars.

Jesus Christ is not a lexical definition of logos. The verse does not say "In the beginning was Jesus." The "Word" is not synonymous with Jesus, or even the "Messiah." The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God's creative self-expression... His reason, purpose and plans, especially as they are brought into action. It refers to God's self-expression or communication of Himself. This has come to pass through His creation and especially the heavens. It has come through the spoken word of the prophets and through Scripture. Most notably it has come into being through His Son. The logos is the expression of God and is His communication of Himself just as a "word" is an outward expression of a person's thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son and thus it's perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the "Word." Jesus is an outward expression of God's reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason we call revelation "a word from God" and the Bible "the Word of God."

If we understand that the logos is God's expression... His plan, purpose, reason and wisdom. Then it's clear they were with Him "in the beginning." Scripture says God's wisdom was "from the beginning" and it was common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. The fact that the logos "became" flesh shows it did not exist that way before. There is no pre-existence for Jesus in this verse other than his figurative "existence" as the plan, purpose or wisdom of God for the salvation of man. The same is true with the "word" in writing. It had no literal pre-existence as a "spirit-book" somehow in eternity past, but came into being as God gave the revelation to people and they wrote it down.

A friend of mine put it this way... "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."

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.

 

[101G]

Your understanding is like a child. There is one God who is often called the Lord in the Old Testament. That does not mean God is the only one who is referred to as a Lord.

GINOLJC, to all.
LOL, LOL, yes it does, if what you say is true, then who is this..... Psalms 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool."

is this ONE PERSON, if so, how?...... your reply.

101G.

 

[101G]

John 1:1 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. It seems difficult for people to understand that John 1:1 is introducing the Gospel of John, and not the Book of Genesis. The topic of John is God (the Father, the only God) at work in the ministry of the man Jesus of Nazareth, not the creation of rocks, trees and stars.

Another ERROR on your part. Jesus the Lord is Father. supportive scripture, 2 Corinthians 6:17 "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you," 2 Corinthians 6:18 "And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty."

now last time..... is the person who Laid the foundation of the Earth, Hebrew 1:10 and Zechariah 12:1 is this the same one PERSON, yes or no.... Last chance.

101G.

 

[synergy]

Jesus is not God.

Are you seriously saying that the Word, who was God, stopped being God when he tabernacled as Jesus on Earth? Seriously?

 

[Peterlag]

Are you seriously saying that the Word, who was God, stopped being God when he tabernacled as Jesus on Earth? Seriously?

Words are not living creatures. 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.

 

[synergy]

Words are not living creatures. 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.

Your reply is completely inept because it ignores the actual grammar and context of John 1:1–14 and replaces it with a dodge full of mythology. John does not say “God’s plan was with God,” nor “God’s idea became flesh”. He uses personal language throughout: the Word was with God (πρὸς τὸν θεόν), which always denotes personal, face-to-face relationship, never an abstract idea; the Word was God (θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος), identifying the Word with God’s own nature; He (not “it”) was in the beginning with God (οὗτος—this one, masculine personal pronoun); He created all things; He came to His own; and the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. John’s entire prologue uses masculine personal pronouns for the Logos—never neuter, never impersonal, never conceptual. The Unitarian reduction of the Logos to an “idea” collapses under the text itself, which consistently presents the Word as a divine Person who existed eternally with God, acted as Creator, entered the world, and tabernacled as Jesus Christ.

 

[Peterlag]

Your reply is completely inept because it ignores the actual grammar and context of John 1:1–14 and replaces it with a dodge full of mythology. John does not say “God’s plan was with God,” nor “God’s idea became flesh”. He uses personal language throughout: the Word was with God (πρὸς τὸν θεόν), which always denotes personal, face-to-face relationship, never an abstract idea; the Word was God (θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος), identifying the Word with God’s own nature; He (not “it”) was in the beginning with God (οὗτος—this one, masculine personal pronoun); He created all things; He came to His own; and the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. John’s entire prologue uses masculine personal pronouns for the Logos—never neuter, never impersonal, never conceptual. The Unitarian reduction of the Logos to an “idea” collapses under the text itself, which consistently presents the Word as a divine Person who existed eternally with God, acted as Creator, entered the world, and tabernacled as Jesus Christ.

Here's a partial list of how "logos" is translated in the New Testament...

cause, communication, sayings, saying, word, words, account, talk, question, treatise, intent, tidings, speaker, matter, mouth, work, utterance, preaching, speech, concerning, show, do, doctrine, reason, with, and thing.

 

[synergy]

Here's a partial list of how "logos" is translated in the New Testament...

cause, communication, sayings, saying, word, words, account, talk, question, treatise, intent, tidings, speaker, matter, mouth, work, utterance, preaching, speech, concerning, show, do, doctrine, reason, with, and thing.

So you do believe that the Word, who was God, did cease being being God when he tabernacled as Jesus on Earth. Tell us more unitarian fairy tales like that..

 

[Peterlag]

So you do believe that the Word, who was God, did cease being being God when he tabernacled as Jesus on Earth. Tell us more unitarian fairy tales like that..

Again, words are not living creatures. This should have been taught in first grade.

 

[Capbook]

View attachment 2614

As Jesus emptied Himself the form of God and take the form of a servant in the likeness of men and obedient to the Father even death on the cross, a demonstration of Jesus's voluntary submission to the Father's will and a reflection of His human limitations during His earthly ministry. While Jesus is fully God, He was in the human form, and this human aspect did not include the omniscience of the Father regarding the timing of His return.
And as Jesus said in Acts 1:7 that there are certain things that it is not for the followers to know times and season that the Father had fixed by His own authority.

Act 1:7 He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority;

 

[Capbook]

John 1:1 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. It seems difficult for people to understand that John 1:1 is introducing the Gospel of John, and not the Book of Genesis. The topic of John is God (the Father, the only God) at work in the ministry of the man Jesus of Nazareth, not the creation of rocks, trees and stars.

Jesus Christ is not a lexical definition of logos. The verse does not say "In the beginning was Jesus." The "Word" is not synonymous with Jesus, or even the "Messiah." The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God's creative self-expression... His reason, purpose and plans, especially as they are brought into action. It refers to God's self-expression or communication of Himself. This has come to pass through His creation and especially the heavens. It has come through the spoken word of the prophets and through Scripture. Most notably it has come into being through His Son. The logos is the expression of God and is His communication of Himself just as a "word" is an outward expression of a person's thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son and thus it's perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the "Word." Jesus is an outward expression of God's reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason we call revelation "a word from God" and the Bible "the Word of God."

Then whose God's voice do you believe that said, "let there be light?"
Was Jesus was wrong on what He said in John 5:37?

Gen 1:3 Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.

If we understand that the logos is God's expression... His plan, purpose, reason and wisdom. Then it's clear they were with Him "in the beginning." Scripture says God's wisdom was "from the beginning" and it was common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. The fact that the logos "became" flesh shows it did not exist that way before. There is no pre-existence for Jesus in this verse other than his figurative "existence" as the plan, purpose or wisdom of God for the salvation of man. The same is true with the "word" in writing. It had no literal pre-existence as a "spirit-book" somehow in eternity past, but came into being as God gave the revelation to people and they wrote it down.

Ok, may I know what is your take to what Daniel saw.
Who do you interpret the "Ancient of Days" refer to Peterlag?
And who do you understand the One like the "Son of Man" refer to also?
Are they two separate persons or just one person.

Dan 7:9 "I kept looking Until thrones were set up, And the Ancient of Days took His seat; His vesture was like white snow And the hair of His head like pure wool. His throne was ablaze with flames, Its wheels were a burning fire.
Dan 7:13 "I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him.
Dan 7:14 "And to Him was given dominion, Glory and a kingdom, That all the peoples, nations and men of every language Might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion Which will not pass away; And His kingdom is one Which will not be destroyed.

A friend of mine put it this way... "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."

If the word is God's expression of thought or plan that became flesh with the coming of Jesus Christ.
In short, the one that become flesh is Jesus.
But Bible lexicons defined the "Word/Logos" as - a title for Jesus, word, speech, account, sermon, Word became a human being and lived among us.'

Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain proves that Jesus is the Word. As to John 1:1c said "was God."
If you find lexicon that state the "Word" is not a title for Jesus, just post it here Peterlag.

G3056 (EDNT)
λόγος logos
logos word, speech, account, sermon, logos
(from Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament © 1990 by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. All rights reserved.)

G3056 (Louw and Nida Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament)
λόγος logos
a title for Jesus in the Gospel of John as a reference to the content of God's revelation and as a verbal echo of the use of the verbs meaning 'to speak' in Gen 1 and in many utterances of the prophets - 'Word, Message.'
the Word became a human being and lived among us' John 1:14.
(from Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain. Copyright © 1988 United Bible Societies, New York. Used by permission.)

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.

Literal word for word Bible translations and Bible Lexicons are available, as resource references, why come to paraphrase translations and own interpretations?

 

[Jim]

John 1:1 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. It seems difficult for people to understand that John 1:1 is introducing the Gospel of John, and not the Book of Genesis.

John 1:1 is identifying the real subject of his gospel, i.e., who Jesus is.

The topic of John is God (the Father, the only God) at work in the ministry of the man Jesus of Nazareth, not the creation of rocks, trees and stars.

The topic of John is Jesus, lord and savior of the world.

Jesus Christ is not a lexical definition of logos. The verse does not say "In the beginning was Jesus." The "Word" is not synonymous with Jesus, or even the "Messiah." The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God's creative self-expression...

The "Word" is synonymous with God. He became flesh, i.e., the Word took on the flesh and blood of the human being (Heb 2:14) and took on the person of Jesus, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:14,29).

 

[Capbook]

Again, words are not living creatures. This should have been taught in first grade.

If you interpret the "Word" as God's expression of thought that became flesh and John saw His glory as of the only begotten of the Father.
Who do think is the only begotten of the Father, not a living person Peterlag?
Who was called by the Father, God in Heb1:8.

John 1:14 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.

 

[synergy]

Again, words are not living creatures. This should have been taught in first grade.

By you changing “the Word was God” (John 1:1c) into your own parody—“words was God”—you’ve created a theology so incoherent that you now must explain how you worship words. Do you adore sentence fragments? Do you sing praises to paragraphs? Is your congregation called The Church of words? John is not describing vocabulary; he is describing the eternal divine Logos who was with God and was God, who created all things, and who tabernacled as Jesus on Earth. Replacing all this with “words" is not exegesis, it is a complete demolition of the text that leaves you with a religion where grammar is God and verbs are your savior.

 

[Peterlag]

By you changing “the Word was God” (John 1:1c) into your own parody—“words was God”—you’ve created a theology so incoherent that you now must explain how you worship words. Do you adore sentence fragments? Do you sing praises to paragraphs? Is your congregation called The Church of words? John is not describing vocabulary; he is describing the eternal divine Logos who was with God and was God, who created all things, and who tabernacled as Jesus on Earth. Replacing all this with “words" is not exegesis, it is a complete demolition of the text that leaves you with a religion where grammar is God and verbs are your savior.

This is like me saying something simple like my thoughts were with me from the beginning. And then have some idiot say my thoughts are a separate person. And then a whole congregation is taught this and billions of people all over the globe believe it. I don't know if the Lord looks at this and laughs or cries.

 

[mikesw]

This is like me saying something simple like my thoughts were with me from the beginning. And then have some idiot say my thoughts are a separate person. And then a whole congregation is taught this and billions of people all over the globe believe it. I don't know if the Lord looks at this and laughs or cries.

 

[Peterlag]

If you interpret the "Word" as God's expression of thought that became flesh and John saw His glory as of the only begotten of the Father.
Who do think is the only begotten of the Father, not a living person Peterlag?
Who was called by the Father, God in Heb1:8.

John 1:14 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.

That's like me saying my orders were carried out by my management and therefore my thoughts became the thoughts of Mike my manager. And then some idiot comes along and says that I am Mike. And then some stupid preacher starts teaching this to his church. Nobody can be this stupid. This must be the work of the devil.

 

[Peterlag]

John 1:1 is identifying the real subject of his gospel, i.e., who Jesus is.

The topic of John is Jesus, lord and savior of the world.

The "Word" is synonymous with God. He became flesh, i.e., the Word took on the flesh and blood of the human being (Heb 2:14) and took on the person of Jesus, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:14,29).

I'm sad that you believe this trinity stuff. The Trinity does not come from Scripture. It comes from the doctrine of devils that the churches teach (and in most cases it's the first thing they teach) and then they begin to look for Scripture that supports such a concept. They do this by taking the verses out of context, or not understanding how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation.

There's reasons why the Bible does not teach the Trinity in one whole paragraph in a few different places or a whole chapter or two on it. There's reasons why there's no teaching on why God would come to the earth as a man. There's reasons why there was never a debate about the Trinity in Scripture like we see with justification by works or who should be circumcised. Such an important subject matter like the Trinity and the Bible is silent on all of it.

And there's the spinning and twisting from the trinitarians who can't come up with one verse in the Bible that says we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. Trinitarians who can't come up with one verse that says why God would come to the earth as a man. Trinitarians who have to make up their own words that are not in the Bible. Words like Trinity, Deity, and Incarnated.

If any of this nonsense was true and since it's so important and a huge subject to Christianity and is necessary for salvation like many teach. Then it would have been taught by someone somewhere. And it is not.

 

[Peterlag]

Then whose God's voice do you believe that said, "let there be light?"
Was Jesus was wrong on what He said in John 5:37?

Gen 1:3 Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.


Ok, may I know what is your take to what Daniel saw.
Who do you interpret the "Ancient of Days" refer to Peterlag?
And who do you understand the One like the "Son of Man" refer to also?
Are they two separate persons or just one person.

Dan 7:9 "I kept looking Until thrones were set up, And the Ancient of Days took His seat; His vesture was like white snow And the hair of His head like pure wool. His throne was ablaze with flames, Its wheels were a burning fire.
Dan 7:13 "I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him.
Dan 7:14 "And to Him was given dominion, Glory and a kingdom, That all the peoples, nations and men of every language Might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion Which will not pass away; And His kingdom is one Which will not be destroyed.

If the word is God's expression of thought or plan that became flesh with the coming of Jesus Christ.
In short, the one that become flesh is Jesus.
But Bible lexicons defined the "Word/Logos" as - a title for Jesus, word, speech, account, sermon, Word became a human being and lived among us.'

Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain proves that Jesus is the Word. As to John 1:1c said "was God."
If you find lexicon that state the "Word" is not a title for Jesus, just post it here Peterlag.

G3056 (EDNT)
λόγος logos
logos word, speech, account, sermon, logos
(from Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament © 1990 by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. All rights reserved.)

G3056 (Louw and Nida Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament)
λόγος logos
a title for Jesus in the Gospel of John as a reference to the content of God's revelation and as a verbal echo of the use of the verbs meaning 'to speak' in Gen 1 and in many utterances of the prophets - 'Word, Message.'
the Word became a human being and lived among us' John 1:14.
(from Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain. Copyright © 1988 United Bible Societies, New York. Used by permission.)

Literal word for word Bible translations and Bible Lexicons are available, as resource references, why come to paraphrase translations and own interpretations?

Too much to respond to. What I see from you is a rhetorical tactic being deployed here known as the Gish Gallop. It's a debate strategy where one side fires off a massive amount of arguments, points, and claims all in one post with the clear intent to overwhelm and exhaust anyone trying to respond. The purpose of the Gish Gallop is to flood the conversation with so many points that nobody can reasonably address them all, creating the false impression that their arguments are insurmountable or that the other side has no answers.