John 1:1 and Jesus’ Sonship in Adoptionist thought

[Hiddenthings]

The Word in John 1:1 was another spirit person next to God, not an abstract thing.
We know that because before writing John 1, John already knew that the Word is a name of Jesus in heaven:

Rev. 19:11 I saw heaven opened, and look! a white horse. And the one seated on it is called Faithful and True, and he judges and carries on war in righteousness. 12 His eyes are a fiery flame, and on his head are many diadems. He has a name written that no one knows but he himself, 13 and he is clothed with an outer garment stained with blood, and he is called by the name The Word of God. 14 Also, the armies in heaven were following him on white horses, and they were clothed in white, clean, fine linen. 15 And out of his mouth protrudes a sharp, long sword with which to strike the nations, and he will shepherd them with a rod of iron. Moreover, he treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. 16 On his outer garment, yes, on his thigh, he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.

The Word was a spirit person, and later a person of flesh and blood, until he died.

Could God no longer speak?... suddenly become mute and unable to express any further words when the Word became flesh?

Matt. 3:17 Look! Also, a voice from the heavens said: “This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved.”

Jesus became the expression of God's character (Logos) which is why he now has the title of "Word of God".

The Lord was, is, and will be the complete manifestation of the Law and the Prophets, in whom they find their full and absolute fulfillment. It is noteworthy that, while the Gospel presents the title of The Word or The Logos in an absolute sense (John 1:1), here it is qualified as “of God.” In this sense, it can be said that “the Word was God”—not in the Trinitarian sense of ontological identity, but because it was “of God.” The title is fitting for the Lord, for he fulfilled and confirmed the promises made to the fathers (Romans 15:8).

 

[ElieG12]

No one should accept someone else's whim that isn't even directly justified by Scripture.

It's more accurate to consider Jesus the Word of God because he is His spokesperson, not because he is His power, as you say. What does "the Word" have to do with power? Of course, anyone can invent erratic doctrines by manipulating words.

There's no need to speculate: Jesus said many times that he came down from heaven.

John 3:13 Moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but the one who descended from heaven, the Son of man. (...) 31 The one who comes from above is over all others. The one who is from the earth is from the earth and speaks of things of the earth. The one who comes from heaven is over all others. (...)
... 6:33 For the bread of God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” (...) 38 for I have come down from heaven to do, not my own will, but the will of him who sent me. (...) 62 What, therefore, if you should see the Son of man ascending to where he was before?
... 8:23 He went on to say to them: “You are from the realms below; I am from the realms above. You are from this world; I am not from this world. 24 That is why I said to you: You will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I am the one, you will die in your sins.” (...) 57 Then the Jews said to him: “You are not yet 50 years old, and still you have seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” 59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid and went out of the temple.
... 17:1 Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you, (...) 5 So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.

I know; you don't accept those words of Jesus and to justify that you come to play with words ... as always do people when they don't like what they read. Forgive my frankness.

 

[Wick Stick]

Happy for you @dak to post your insights and belief here.
Thanks
HT

I'm not an Adoptionist, but if I wanted to make that argument, I think I'd start in Psalms 2, with David's "To day I have begotten you."

For David, the declaration of his adoption was apotheotic. By virtue of becoming a divine son of God, he also ascended to the throne of Israel. That gives the Adoptionist precedent.

But more troubling is the way the New Testament writers co-opt those same verses repeatedly and attribute their fulfillment to Jesus.

 

[Wick Stick]

What does "the Word" have to do with power?

Quite a lot, I think. If one were an Emanationist, then the two most important emanations of God are logos and exousia - Word and Power.

It isn't for no reason that Simon Magus claimed to be the incarnation of the Power of God.

 

[ElieG12]

The Bible says that God sent his Son. Jesus was born the Son of God, because he had no biological father. So an interesting question is: when did God send his Son: when he was born, or when he was baptized?

 

[ElieG12]

Quite a lot, I think. If one were an Emanationist, then the two most important emanations of God are logos and exousia - Word and Power.

It isn't for no reason that Simon Magus claimed to be the incarnation of the Power of God.

Not an Emanationist nor an Adoptionist.

The Word was another Son of God in heaven, the principal among millions of others sons of God in spirit form, who came to exist before the physical world in which we live.

 

[Hiddenthings]

The Bible says that God sent his Son.

In other words, He sent His HS to which produce the conception that would eventuate in a Son.

 

[ElieG12]

In other words, He sent His HS to which produce the conception that would eventuate in a Son.

That's your doctrine, but you are not presenting any Scripture to prove...

These things Jesus said:

John 3:13 Moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but the one who descended from heaven, the Son of man. (...) 31 The one who comes from above is over all others. The one who is from the earth is from the earth and speaks of things of the earth. The one who comes from heaven is over all others. (...)
... 6:33 For the bread of God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” (...) 38 for I have come down from heaven to do, not my own will, but the will of him who sent me. (...) 62 What, therefore, if you should see the Son of man ascending to where he was before?
... 8:23 He went on to say to them: “You are from the realms below; I am from the realms above. You are from this world; I am not from this world. 24 That is why I said to you: You will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I am the one, you will die in your sins.” (...) 57 Then the Jews said to him: “You are not yet 50 years old, and still you have seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” 59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid and went out of the temple.
... 17:1 Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you, (...) 5 So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.

Just accept his words, don't resist.

 

[Wick Stick]

In other words, He sent His HS to which produce the conception that would eventuate in a Son.

That's one interpretation. The mainstream interpretation.

Not the only interpretation.

 

[Hiddenthings]

That's your doctrine, but you are not presenting any Scripture to prove...

These things Jesus said:

John 3:13 Moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but the one who descended from heaven, the Son of man. (...) 31 The one who comes from above is over all others. The one who is from the earth is from the earth and speaks of things of the earth. The one who comes from heaven is over all others. (...)
... 6:33 For the bread of God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” (...) 38 for I have come down from heaven to do, not my own will, but the will of him who sent me. (...) 62 What, therefore, if you should see the Son of man ascending to where he was before?
... 8:23 He went on to say to them: “You are from the realms below; I am from the realms above. You are from this world; I am not from this world. 24 That is why I said to you: You will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I am the one, you will die in your sins.” (...) 57 Then the Jews said to him: “You are not yet 50 years old, and still you have seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” 59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid and went out of the temple.
... 17:1 Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you, (...) 5 So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.

Just accept his words, don't resist.

I’m not resisting anything, Elie. I’m simply watching you impose your own notions onto the text, which has long been the common way of twisting Scripture. You’ve copied and pasted a block of text without demonstrating any understanding, should I assume you don’t grasp it and need that section interpreted?

In terms of evidence, you cannot go past Isaiah 55:11.

God did send it forth and it did achieve the very thing He intended!

A Son!

 

[Hiddenthings]

That's one interpretation. The mainstream interpretation.

Not the only interpretation.

It's consistent with the whole of Scripture.

 

[Wick Stick]

That's your doctrine, but you are not presenting any Scripture to prove...

These things Jesus said:

John 3:13 Moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but the one who descended from heaven, the Son of man. (...) 31 The one who comes from above is over all others. The one who is from the earth is from the earth and speaks of things of the earth. The one who comes from heaven is over all others. (...)
... 6:33 For the bread of God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” (...) 38 for I have come down from heaven to do, not my own will, but the will of him who sent me. (...) 62 What, therefore, if you should see the Son of man ascending to where he was before?
... 8:23 He went on to say to them: “You are from the realms below; I am from the realms above. You are from this world; I am not from this world. 24 That is why I said to you: You will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I am the one, you will die in your sins.” (...) 57 Then the Jews said to him: “You are not yet 50 years old, and still you have seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” 59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid and went out of the temple.
... 17:1 Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you, (...) 5 So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.

Just accept his words, don't resist.

Does it matter that the synoptic gospels don't completely agree with John in this regard?

 

[ElieG12]

The Word existed in heaven, had the form of God, and was at God's side. He was sent from there, and that is why there was no biological father at his conception: he already existed, and it was only a matter of being miraculously born in a new form, a human one.

Phil. 2:6 who, although he was existing in God’s form, did not even consider the idea of trying to be equal to God. 7 No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and became human.

Heb 10:5
Διὸ εἰσερχόμενος εἰς τὸν κόσμον λέγει· θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν οὐκ ἠθέλησας, σῶμα δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι·
__So when he comes into the world, he says: “‘Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but you prepared a body for me."

 

[ElieG12]

I’m not resisting anything, Elie. I’m simply watching you impose your own notions onto the text, which has long been the common way of twisting Scripture. You’ve copied and pasted a block of text without demonstrating any understanding, should I assume you don’t grasp it and need that section interpreted? ...

That's funny. It is you who seems not to accept what they clearly state.

I am not "imposing" anything into the text. You need to accept what you read. Com'on, really?

Give me your best shot at explaining to yourself what each of those quotes means. Just do it, and let's see who is imposing something into the text and twisting what Jesus said.

 

[Wick Stick]

It's consistent with the whole of Scripture.

Nothing is consistent with the whole of Scripture... not even Scripture itself.

This teaching is consistent with the most mainstream system of theological thought. That's a meaningful endorsement.

 

[ElieG12]

Nothing is consistent with the whole of Scripture... not even Scripture itself.

This teaching is consistent with the most mainstream system of theological thought. That's a meaningful endorsement.

Are you seriously trying to question that it was the power of the spirit of God that made the miracle of Jesus' human conception possible?

 

[Wick Stick]

Are you seriously trying to question that it was the power of the spirit of God that made the miracle of Jesus' human conception possible?

The early parts of the gospel of Luke definitely say that's what happened.

As for me? I'm questioning absolutely everything. What's right and true has nothing to fear from a little skeptical inquiry.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@dak it’s noteworthy that the discussion rarely centers on the actual evidence, but instead on imported notions handed down from the councils of men.

 

[Hiddenthings]

The early parts of the gospel of Luke definitely say that's what happened.

As for me? I'm questioning absolutely everything. What's right and true has nothing to fear from a little skeptical inquiry.

The very notion that a Christian would question God’s power to bring about the conception in Mary is astounding. It only reveals how far some are willing to go in order to introduce foreign ideas.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Nothing is consistent with the whole of Scripture... not even Scripture itself.

This teaching is consistent with the most mainstream system of theological thought. That's a meaningful endorsement.

I don't agree - there are plenty of divine truths that are consistent with the whole of Scripture.