Quote:
| Originally Posted by sassyT Yor1 i think you are missing the Point of John 1
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 were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend[a] it.
It talks about the Word being with God, the Word was GOD and was there in the Beginning with God. Clearly the Word here is personified and if you read further to verse 14 it clarifies why John personifies the Word and it turnes out the Word is Jesus. The Word became Flesh.
So the Word was God, and Jesus WAS God and has always been there with God the father from the Begining. Nothing was made with out HIM.
The Prophet Isaiah also prophesied that Christ is God.
Isaiah 9vs 6
6 For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of His government and peace
There will be no end,
Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,
To order it and establish it with judgment and justice
From that time forward, even forever.
The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.
This Verse from the Old testament clearly establishes Christ as God.
"His Kingdom" denotes Kingship
"Judgement" Shows Jesus will be Judge and only God can Judge. Jesus IS God. |
Sorry Sassy but these are interpretive renditions of the text you use..
John 1 and its point is not as much a rendition of deity but what Christ was to us..
The Isaiah
text is just one rendition which in the Hebrew does not read so king James as most like it read..
" wonderful in council is the mighty one the father of eternity and ruler of peace"
You will find that no New testament scholar uses this text to convey a sense of deity when directed at Christ..
Likewise the Matt text of " he shall be called immanuel" does not actually use the word that we use in English when defining the name." which means the mighty one is with us"
Not unlike Hebrew the Greek uses god differently from us.. Elohim meaning mighty one used of angels and kings and judges as well as of The Almighty..
In Greek god is used of others besides The Almighty and most times when referring to the Almighty uses the definite article' THE" sometimes the use of the greek word "Theos" is actually being used as an adjective..
The Jehova witness stance on John 1
The Word was God
they render
the word was a God
But Sharps rule as orthodox christian scholar says that the line should be read in structure different from the way it actually is..
The actual Greek reads
a god is the logos
The use most make of the text today is from Greek philosophic form.The Logos being the rational being and thereby translate the word Logos as a personal being..
But in fact the word logos is a masculine greek word and carries with it like in French masculine words a masculine ending..But its supporting text reverts to standard language and can be rendered like most neuter words
"IT"
So what is the point???
that Our present reading of John 1 is to infer that the writer is making a person out of the term LOGOS" 'the expressed thought" And that this is Johns point. but I do not believe that he is in fact doing this as the use of the names from the oT are not identifying the individual who carries them but are identifying the God the represent.
Immanuel was the name of an individual of the OT carried over to Jesus by Matthew..
The word becoming flesh and dwelling among us is exactly what Jesus did ..He became Gods word in Human form...but to claim this means that he himself was God is beyond the text..God in these last days has spoken to us by way of his son "according to Hebrews"
But it is still God who speaks who's word we are hearing through the image of the invisible..
And human theology that determines anything beyond the scriptures as the church of antiquity has done, takes us outside of the revealed truth and into human meandering..
Jesus is the son of God born of Mary..Who lived and died..No true od that I have ever come to understand could possibly die..God is eternal and is as the Scriptures say.The one true God..Any inheritance that Jesus gains or we gain as descending from God is not a declaration of his deity but of his worth..
Hence we are born of God not because of the deity of Jesus but because of the promise of God accepted by faith..The religious wherefores of theology do not change the simplicity of the Good news..
We are reconciled to God by the one Man Jesus The anoited of God..
To change the Gospel and require that any or all believe him to be God himself is to change the Gospel..No one was ever asked to believe this when any sermon was preached by the apostles..ever..
This being the case it makes very suspect any rendering that is made that The John text is declaring the deity of Christ and not just his calling as Gods perfect representative upon the earth.. the Mediator of a New covenant the mediator between God and man.
If indeed Jesus is God then the Catholics are correct we need a mediator between us and him before we can have a mediation between us the Father..
But as the scriptures say
it is the man Jesus that reconciles us to God..
The text " God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself...
Is not speaking of Jesus as himself but God as himself..
Jesus reconciles us to God not himself..He is the means of reconciliation the the one we are reconciled to..
So when reading any text one must be guided by the realities of the gospel not the theological pretexts..
Jesus is the expressed thought of god manifest..why? because he is subject in totality to the Almighty and thereby as he himself says..These are not my words but the words of him that sent me..
To then conclude that he is both the one being sent and the one sending kind of undermines the whole framework of the Gospel..As God he would be included as the sender and not as some suppose the other members of the godhead send him as if he is not a part of that sending also undermines the idea of this trinity concept that is presented that is beyond the understanding of man..