So John 1:1 doesn't say, "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God." Instead it says, "In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God."
In your opinion; you have been led astray. Yes, I know you say the same of me.
Are you sure about that? Why?
Yes, because the language he uses is very much like that of Genesis 1.
Perhaps John was talking about the new creation, the church Jesus started and of which he is head?
Nope.
Research the word "through." It's the Greek word "dia."
No need; I agree, but you don't see it for what it is. Regardless of that, it should be quite impossible to misinterpret or discount in any way that, as John clearly says, "without Him" (Christ Jesus) "was not any thing made that was made."
Yes it says that quite clearly. What it doesn't say is that Jesus is God.
Ohhhh... yes, it does. Not in those exact words, but it does.
Jesus was the perfect image of God.
Yes, well, Jesus
"is the image of the invisible God." And that must be contrasted with what is true of the rest of us, who are "
made in (their) image, after (their) likeness" (Genesis 1:26).
Look up the word "image" in any dictionary. You will see that an image of something is decidedly NOT the thing itself.
The English dictionary, yes, but the Bible ~ was written in Hebrew (Old Testament) and Koine Greek (New Testament). So we must understand the Greek '
eikōn', to then properly apply the English 'image.' But first, a like example; there are others, but this one will suffice:
The word 'faith,' which is the closest English rendering possible to the Greek 'pistis,' is in the present-day vernacular actually not capturing of the full meaning of the Greek 'pistis,' so we have to understand what the original language really says. Today, when people hear someone talk about faith, the thought is, "Oh, that just means hoping, maybe wishing, that some unknown thing may be true," similar to, "Man, I really hope the weather is nice this weekend." But the Greek 'pistis' actually conveys ideas of assurance, fidelity, and even proof, like a title deed.
Likewise, the first thought regarding
'image' is of a mere reflection, as in a mirror or echo and not the thing (God) itself. But the Greek '
eikōn' is something quite different, a literal personification of the thing itself (God).
Just like Joseph being preeminent over Egypt. The only thing Pharaoh reserved for himself was the throne. Joseph was yet another type/shadow of Christ. Joseph was no more Pharaoh than Jesus is God. They both were granted power over a kingdom. Neither granted themselves that power!
Nope. Here again you're comparing God to His creation ~ in this specific case making Pharoah and God out to be parallel to each other somehow. You're pulling God into His creation (which is a form of blasphemy, really) rather than acknowledging that He is over and above His creation. And in the person of Jesus, He entered into His own creation ~ because of course God can do anything ~ for our sake.
Absolutely amazing that you of all people would say that. Since it's my pattern, you shouldn't have any problem coming up with at least one concrete example.
Ah yes, as if I haven't... :) I can't help that you've apparently ignored my concrete examples, Rich. But, like I have said, so be it.
Grace and peace to you.
