Does John 1:1 say Jesus is God

[Peterlag]

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 is 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.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

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 is 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.

Yes it does. It does not say He is His Father who is God, but that He is the Word who is also God.

 

[ScottA]

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 is 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.

You make a moot point.

Certain everything is manifest by God, and everything that was and is manifest comes from God. But there are two issues with what you have posted:

1. There is no actual "came into being" in the way that you describe, just as there is actually no "yesterday, today, and forever" in "I am"...for it is all "the same" "forever" with God. The only context for Time per se, is therefore within the creation as a form of incremental revelation, and nothing more.
2. The other issue is that of examining and expecting to explain language that God has purposely confused. Now, it is true that there comes a time when we are to come out of that confusion--and this is that time. However, you have not come forward to this time with your explanation, but gone back to the time of that confusion, in that you specify the "Hebrew" as being the context. In which case, you would have done better to say, "God told me" and then make your case on the basis that what was formerly written was not formerly understood. Which, then of course, there are guidelines and parameters that must be met...without contradicting what was formerly written.

In which case, it is as if God has forwarded us a picture of Himself and you seem to be saying "...Well...that's not really God, just a picture." And, that is correct.

But what was your point? Was it just a literary ("lexical") exercise, or was there something more?

 

[Matthias]

No, John 1:1 does not say that Jesus is God.

 

[BeyondET]

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 is 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.

Genesis 1:26 doesn't say God made angels in his likeness and image but Let Us and Our, God was speaking of someone or more.

 

[Peterlag]

Genesis 1:26 doesn't say God made angels in his likeness and image but Let Us and Our, God was speaking of someone or more.

Oh I can answer that. He was speaking to me because I was there at the time. See Scripture where it says God knew me before I was born.

 

[Peterlag]

John 1:14

The "Word" is the wisdom, plan or purpose of God and the Word became flesh as Jesus Christ. Thus, Jesus Christ was the Word in the flesh, which is shortened to the Word for ease of speaking. Scripture is also the Word in writing. Everyone agrees that the Word in writing had a beginning. So did the Word in the flesh. In fact, the Greek text of Matthew 1:18 says that very clearly: "Now the beginning of Jesus Christ was in this manner..." The modern Greek texts all read "beginning" in Matthew 1:18. Birth is considered an acceptable translation since the beginning of some things is birth, and so most translations read birth. Nevertheless, the proper understanding of Matthew 1:18 is the beginning of Jesus Christ. In the beginning God had a plan, a purpose, which became flesh when Jesus was conceived.

 

[marks]

Oh I can answer that. He was speaking to me because I was there at the time. See Scripture where it says God knew me before I was born.

Are you being serious?

Much love!

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

John set up his account of Jesus' ministry by proclaiming in Jhn 1:14 that the Word became flesh and walked among us as a human being. Who else can the Word in Jhn 1:1 be but Jesus when John consistently referred to Him as being "the Word" in his epistles and Revelation?

 

[Wrangler]

Genesis 1:26 doesn't say God made angels in his likeness and image but Let Us and Our, God was speaking of someone or more.

And that offsets the thousands of times God is referred to by a singular pronoun? LOL

 

[Enoch111]

The "Word" is not synonymous with Jesus, or even the "Messiah."

Another DELUSIONAL post from Peterlag. When someone flatly contradicts what is actually in Scripture, there is no hope for that person. If you would flatly contradict your boss at work (when he is actually correct) you would be out on the street. So here is the truth: THE WORD = JESUS = MESSIAH = THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD = GOD THE SON

 

[Peterlag]

John set up his account of Jesus' ministry by proclaiming in Jhn 1:14 that the Word became flesh and walked among us as a human being. Who else can the Word in Jhn 1:1 be but Jesus when John consistently referred to Him as being "the Word" in his epistles and Revelation?

John 1:14

The "Word" is the wisdom, plan or purpose of God and the Word became flesh as Jesus Christ. Thus, Jesus Christ was the Word in the flesh, which is shortened to the Word for ease of speaking. Scripture is also the Word in writing. Everyone agrees that the Word in writing had a beginning. So did the Word in the flesh. In fact, the Greek text of Matthew 1:18 says that very clearly: "Now the beginning of Jesus Christ was in this manner..." The modern Greek texts all read "beginning" in Matthew 1:18. Birth is considered an acceptable translation since the beginning of some things is birth, and so most translations read birth. Nevertheless, the proper understanding of Matthew 1:18 is the beginning of Jesus Christ. In the beginning God had a plan, a purpose, which became flesh when Jesus was conceived.

 

[Peterlag]

More data on John 8:58 "I AM"

At the last super, the disciples were trying to find out who would deny the Christ. They said literally, "Not I am, Lord" Matthew 26:22, 25. No one would say the disciples were trying to deny they were God because they were using the phrase "Not I am." "I am" was a common way of designating oneself and it did not mean you were claiming to be God. The argument is made that because Jesus was "before" Abraham, Jesus must be God. Jesus figuratively existed in Abraham's time. He did not actually physically exist as a person, but rather he existed in the mind of God as God's plan for the redemption of man. In order for the Trinitarian argument that Jesus' "I am" statement in John 8:58 makes him God, his statement must be equivalent with God's "I am" statement in Exodus 3:14. The two statements are very different. The Greek phrase in John does mean "I am." The Hebrew phrase in Exodus means "to be" or "to become." God was saying "I will be what I will be."

 

[BeyondET]

And that offsets the thousands of times God is referred to by a singular pronoun? LOL

I don't need much, sometimes a thousand times isn't enough for some.

 

[Charlie24]

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 is 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.

This is very difficult to explain concerning the 1st chapter of John, for me anyway. I'm not a scholar but I will try to relay what I understand from Scripture.

God is a spirit, and the Holy Spirit is a spirit, they have no form of flesh and are not visible to man.

We know that Christ said He was in the beginning with God the Father and shared His glory. So we assume Christ was also in spirit form as the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Christ being called the "Word" is referring to "Logos" which is the spoken word. The Scripture tells us that God created the Heavens and the earth. John and Paul tell us that through Christ (the Word) all things were created.

So it can be said that Christ is the Creator through being God's spoken Word, like a representative of the Godhead. Christ is the "spoken Word" that created all things. He is also the representative of the Godhead in bodily form. Col. 2:9, "For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;"

What is impossible for man to explain is how these independent persons, if you will, can be One God. Of course they are one in essence, but we have three distinct beings here who are called One God, that cannot be processed by the human mind.

This may not help much or may make it more confusing, but it's the best I can do.

 

[Peterlag]

Let's look at John 10:30...

There is no reason to take this verse to mean that Christ was saying that he and the Father make up "one God." The phrase was a common one, and even today if someone used it, people would know exactly what they meant... he and his Father are very much alike. When Paul wrote to the Corinthians about his ministry there, he said that he had planted the seed and Apollos had watered it. Then he said, "... he who plants and he who waters are one..." (1 Corinthians 3:8 NKJV). In the Greek texts, the wording of Paul is the same as that in John 10:30, yet no one claims that Paul and Apollos make up "one being." Christ uses the concept of "being one" in other places, and from them one can see that "one purpose" is what is meant. John 11:52 says Jesus was to die to make all God's children "one." In John 17:11, 21 and 22, Jesus prayed to God that his followers would be "one" as he and God were "one." I think it's obvious that Jesus was not praying that all his followers would become one being in "substance" just as he and his Father were one being or "substance." I believe the meaning is clear: Jesus was praying that all his followers be one in purpose just as he and God were one in purpose.

 

[Enoch111]

Jesus was praying that all his followers be one in purpose just as he and God were one in purpose.

All true, but that does not cancel the fact that Jesus and the Father are one in essence, one in deity, and one in glory and honor. At the same time the "Head" or authority over Christ is God the Father (1 Cor 11:3). However, since "all the fulness of the Godhead" is in Christ, you have no choice except to believe that JESUS IS GOD. And if you refuse to believe that, then you cannot call yourself "Christian". The apostle John says that you can definitely call yourself an "antichrist". See his epistles.

 

[Wrangler]

All true, but that does not cancel the fact that Jesus and the Father are one in essence

This is factually incorrect. God is the creator. His children are the created.

Jesus’ essence includes a resurrected body. God’s essence includes a spirit.

 

[Enoch111]

God is the creator.

So let's take this to its logical conclusion.

GOD IS THE CREATOR. CHRIST IS THE CREATOR. THEREFORE CHRIST IS GOD.

 

[Wrangler]

So let's take this to its logical conclusion.

GOD IS THE CREATOR. CHRIST IS THE CREATOR. THEREFORE CHRIST IS GOD.

Premise 2 is untrue. Therefore, your conclusion is untrue.

Jesus' title is Anointed. He is Anointed by God. He is not the Anointer, not the Creator but a created Being. This is what it means to be a son, to be a created being. This is why Scripture explicitly says Jesus is the firstborn of all Creation.