John 1:1 - Jesus is the Father or he's not the one true God?

[dev553344]

John 17:1-3,

1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.​

Jesus was talking to his Father and called Him the only true God. This is in complete agreement with Corinthians.

1 Cor 8:6,

But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him.
​

Again, the Father is called the one God.

John calls Jesus the son more than 50 times and never calls him the Father.

John 1:1,

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
​

If we say Jesus is God then that means he is either the Father (which is totally counter to the Creeds) or he is not the true God (John 17:3) nor the one God (1 Cor 8:6).

Many solve the problem by finding out exactly what the "word" (logos) is in John 1:1. Hint: it's not Jesus.

Please confine the discussion to these verses in John. All the other so-called proof verses don't change what John clearly said. All verses have to fit.

The Father is not the same person as the Son. No.

 

[Truth7t7]

Trinitarian Greek expert, W. E. Vine, (although, for obvious reasons, he chooses not to accept it as the proper interpretation) admits that the literal translation of John 1:1c is: “a god was the Word”. - p. 490, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1983 printing.

Professor C. H. Dodd, director of the New English Bible project, also admits this is a proper literal translation:

“A possible translation [for John 1:1c] ... would be, ‘The Word was a god.’ As a word-for-word translation it cannot be faulted.” - Technical Papers for the Bible Translator, vol. 28, Jan. 1977.

The reason Prof. Dodd rejected “a god” as the actual meaning intended by John is simply because it upset his trinitarian interpretation of John’s Gospel!

Rev. J. W. Wenham wrote in his The Elements of New Testament Greek: “Therefore as far as grammar alone is concerned, such a sentence could be printed: θεὸς ἐστιν ὁ λόγος, which would mean either, ‘The Word is a god’, or, ‘The Word is the god’.” - p. 35, Cambridge University Press, 1965.

(Of course if you carefully, properly examine this study, you will find that the grammar really shows that ‘The Word was in John 1:1c a god’ is what John intended.)

Trinitarian NT scholar Prof. Murray J. Harris also admits that grammatically John 1:1c may be properly translated, ‘the Word was a god,’ but his trinitarian bias makes him claim that “John’s monotheism” will not allow such an interpretation. - p. 60, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992. However, his acknowledgment of the use of “god” for men at John 10:34-36 and the use of “god/gods” for angels, judges, and other men in the Hebrew OT Scriptures contradicts his above excuse for not accepting the literal translation. - p. 202, Jesus as God.

And Dr. J. D. BeDuhn in his Truth in Translation states about John 1:1c:

“‘And the Word was a god.’ The preponderance of evidence from Greek grammar… supports this translation.” - p. 132, University Press of America, Inc., 2003.

Trinitarian Dr. Robert Young admits that a more literal translation of John 1:1c is “and a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word” - p. 54, (‘New Covenant’ section), Young’s Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, 1977 printing.

And popular Bible scholar, author, and Bible translator, trinitarian Dr. William Barclay wrote: “You could translate [John 1:1c], so far as the Greek goes: ‘the Word was a God’; but it seems obvious that this is so much against the whole of the rest of the New Testament that it is wrong.” - p. 205, Ever yours, edited by C. L. Rawlins, Labarum Publ., 1985.

You see, in ancient times many of God’s servants had no qualms about using the word “god” or “gods” for godly men, kings, judges, and even angels.

New Testament Greek expert Joseph H. Thayer defines theos:

““θεός is used of whatever can in any respect be likened to God or resembles him in any way: Hebraistically, i.q. God’s representative or vicegerent, of magistrates and judges.” - p. 288, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.


To see the proof of John’s intended meaning of “a god” at John 1:1c, see my personal studies:

Examining the Trinity or Examining the Trinity: John 1:1c Primer - For Grammatical Rules That Supposedly "Prove" the Trinity

a god?

Sounds like Jehovah's Witness garb, that deny's Jesus is "GOD"

 

[stunnedbygrace]

A peanut butter and jelly sandwich has to be ONLY a peanut butter sandwich or ONLY a jelly sandwich. It is impossible that it be both. Now tell me which it is.

You may not bring in any proof. You may only consider the first sentence I gave to arrive at your answer.

 

[amigo de christo]

The Father is not the same person as the Son. No.

The problem with folks is they are hungry to attack the diety of Christ . Folks lack understanding .
As did i about this . BUT you know what , I ALWAYS BELIEVED even when i did not understand ,
WHEN JOHN said the WORD was with GOD and the word was GOD and it became flesh . I ALWAYS BELEIVED THAT .
THOUGH i could not understand it . My point , FOLKS better watch out how they accuse Christ . I say lets stick to
what the bible said . AND notice in revelation , the angel told john not to kneel to worship him but rather to worship who , GOD
Same book has folks kneeling down to worship Christ and casting crowns at HIS FEET . NOW my advice remains the same
ALSO notice something . When the men tried to kneel before peter or john , or paul they always stopped that
and said HEY we are but mere men like you . BUT DID JESUS STOP THOMAS when he kneeled before him and
said MY LORD and MY GOD . NOPE . I say even if folks dont fully understand it , JUST BELIEVE IT .
As i am sure you agree .

 

[amigo de christo]

A peanut butter and jelly sandwich has to be ONLY a peanut butter sandwich or ONLY a jelly sandwich. It is impossible that it be both. Now tell me which it is.

Very good .
Now for the parable of the teacher who taught his students .
One day the teacher brings in this bucket of water and says , HEY my fellow students
i have brought you the ocean . And they laughed him to scorn .
HE then gets the class up and walks them to the beach and pours the water back into the ocean
and says At what part what this water not the ocean .................
JUST cause the water of the ocean came in a body of a bucket dont mean it was not of the ocean .
WELL just cause the WORD of GOD who was with GOD and GOD IS THE WORD
came in the flesh dont mean .................exactly .

 

[Enoch111]

Are you serious man?

How can a troll be serious?

 

[ScottA]

ALL of Scripture is easily discerned based on the rest of Scripture as a whole. Those who refuse to accept the weight of Scripture on a topic do just that - REFUSE, quite stubbornly, to accept the Bible's position upon that matter.

There is AMPLE evidence all throughout the Bible of the Truth of this concept. It's not just a "Welp, we can't figure out the answer on this one. There's two differing groups of verses. Guess it's just a mystery."

Nope. The Bible doesn't leave anything, this important for a Christian to understand, as a mystery.

It literally comes down to a decision. Is somebody going to embrace the Truth of Scripture or are they going to believe what they WANT to believe DESPITE Scripture's plain position upon the matter?

The Bible is CRYSTAL clear that God is a single, solitary individual.

Here's a whole chapter from the OT that repeatedly refers to God Almighty as an individual. If there was any possibility whatsoever that God was a trinity, or a binaty or whatever else, it would have been mentioned, or strongly implied, somewhere in this chapter.

1 Chronicles 16:8-36

This chapter refers to God with pronouns over and over and over, indicating beyond any shadow of a doubt that He is an individual. There is not the slightest possibility that 2 or 3 would be referred to with a pronoun like is used herein.

It's just a question of whether somebody is going to believe the Bible or something more convenient.

That is the rock-bottom line.

That is just the Old Testament take on it--not that I disagree. But playing the opposing advocate...it could easily be argued that in the fullness of time the Son came also to be revealed and known. And the same could be said of the Holy Spirit. All of which simply continues the problem of not reconciling all of what is written. Which by the way, is what I have rationally laid out for you...which is to say that God is One, but revelations show Him in different roles according to the times, which then are One again in the end as Jesus began to repack, saying, "I and the Father are One"...which in the fullness of time we too are to be among.

 

[LearningToLetGo]

Owner, CEO, and Treasurer: God, Incorporated. ;-P

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

lol. Confine yourself only to the verses I give, (but all verses have to fit…)
Don’t bring ANY of the rest of Gods words into the discussion because they don’t fit my indoctrination.
Are you serious man?

Yes, Non-Trinitarians are serious to the point of not only ignoring particular sriptures, or misinterpreting them, but when they got too annoying and conflicting, changing them, adding to and taking away from them. (NWT)

 

[stunnedbygrace]

John 17:1-3,

1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.​

Jesus was talking to his Father and called Him the only true God. This is in complete agreement with Corinthians.

1 Cor 8:6,

But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him.
​

Again, the Father is called the one God.

John calls Jesus the son more than 50 times and never calls him the Father.

John 1:1,

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
​

If we say Jesus is God then that means he is either the Father (which is totally counter to the Creeds) or he is not the true God (John 17:3) nor the one God (1 Cor 8:6).

Many solve the problem by finding out exactly what the "word" (logos) is in John 1:1. Hint: it's not Jesus.

Please confine the discussion to these verses in John. All the other so-called proof verses don't change what John clearly said. All verses have to fit.

The entire beginning of John is telling about Jesus. He calls Him the word, then calls Him the light, then says John the Baptist was sent to testify concerning Him. I rather think even an unbeliever who understands English could see that upon reading it. It’s reading comprehension. Even if you don’t understand WHY John calls Him the word and the light, an English reader can at least comprehend that John is talking about Jesus.

You want to keep having this argument, over and over again, that Jesus is not being spoken of there. Your entire “ministry” is that too much honor is shown to Jesus and that all the world has been tricked into going after Him. The entire book is about Him. All the law of Moses speaks of Him. All the prophets speak of Him. The entire New Testament is about Him. You hold in your hands a book that, from start to finish, is about Him. And when you read it, your conclusion and your “ministry” is that too much emphasis is put on Him. It would be completely puzzling but for the fact that He said, beware the teaching of men, the leaven of men.

 

[Nancy]

The entire beginning of John is telling about Jesus. He calls Him the word, then calls Him the light, then says John the Baptist was sent to testify concerning Him. I rather think even an unbeliever who understands English could see that upon reading it. It’s reading comprehension. Even if you don’t understand WHY John calls Him the word and the light, an English reader can at least comprehend that John is talking about Jesus.

You want to keep having this argument, over and over again, that Jesus is not being spoken of there. Your entire “ministry” is that too much honor is shown to Jesus and that all the world has been tricked into going after Him. The entire book is about Him. All the law of Moses speaks of Him. All the prophets speak of Him. The entire New Testament is about Him. You hold in your hands a book that, from start to finish, is about Him. And when you read it, your conclusion and your “ministry” is that too much emphasis is put on Him. It would be completely puzzling but for the fact that He said, beware the teaching of men, the leaven of men.

WORD!

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

"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." Isaiah 9:6
Wrestle with that one. That's a big one, profound and deep. Difficult to discern without divine assistance. What you have there is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit wrapped up in ONE.

 

[ChristisGod]

John 17:1-3,

1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.​

Jesus was talking to his Father and called Him the only true God. This is in complete agreement with Corinthians.

1 Cor 8:6,

But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him.
​

Again, the Father is called the one God.

John calls Jesus the son more than 50 times and never calls him the Father.

John 1:1,

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
​

If we say Jesus is God then that means he is either the Father (which is totally counter to the Creeds) or he is not the true God (John 17:3) nor the one God (1 Cor 8:6).

Many solve the problem by finding out exactly what the "word" (logos) is in John 1:1. Hint: it's not Jesus.

Please confine the discussion to these verses in John. All the other so-called proof verses don't change what John clearly said. All verses have to fit.

The Word was WITH God.

So we see two being described here.

1- The Word
2-God

The Word was with God, so there is a distinction between the Word and God in John 1:1 b

John 1:1a- in the beginning was the Word
John 1:1b- and the Word was with God
John 1:1c- and the Word was God.

So your OP has already failed and you have read into the passage ( EISEGESIS ) your own personal views.


NT:4314

89.112 NT:4314† ‎pros: a marker of association, often with the implication of interrelationships - 'with, before.' ‎ei)rh/nhn e&xomen pro\$ to\n qeo/n ‎'we have peace with God' Rom 5:1; ‎kai\ o( lo/go$ h@n pro\$ to\n qeo/n ‎'the Word was with God' John 1:1; ‎parrhsi/an e&xomen pro\$ to\n qeo/n ‎'we have confidence before God' 1 John 3:21.

Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain. Copyright © 1988 United Bible Societies- Louw and Nida Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament

The Word is also seen has having eternally coexisted with a specific person called God (Greek, ton theon- the God, with the definite article implying that John has a specific person in mind). The term pros implies that not only is there a distinction between the Word and God, but that the Word is also personal. The Word is not just an impersonal attribute existing in the mind of God, but is a distinct person who has coexisted with God from eternity:

"The Word was with God." The personal distinction between God and the Word is clearly expressed. The words "Word" and "God" in the Greek are both preceded by the article, specifying a personal reference. This phrase presents significant difficulties to Modalists. The word "with" denotes an intimate, personal relationship.

And we read in John 17:5 - the Son was WITH the Father before creation, before the world existed. The word with means the Son was alongside the Father, in the presence together with the Father.

And as Scripture says there is only ONE Lord in 1 Corinthians 8:6- So according to your very own " flawed " logic and reasoning that ELIMINATES the Father as being Lord in both the OT and NT. If you were being consistent you would know this is true but since you are inconsistent you will say the Father is also Lord.

As they say: you cannot have you cake and eat it too.

conclusion: just as Scripture says there is One Lord/ One God this does not eliminate the Father from being Lord or the Son from being God. They are both Lord and God and are both called Lord and God in Scripture- Thomas calls Jesus his Lord and his God in John 20:28.

hope this helps !!!

 

[GEN2REV]

That is just the Old Testament take on it--not that I disagree. But playing the opposing advocate...it could easily be argued that in the fullness of time the Son came also to be revealed and known. And the same could be said of the Holy Spirit. All of which simply continues the problem of not reconciling all of what is written. Which by the way, is what I have rationally laid out for you...which is to say that God is One, but revelations show Him in different roles according to the times, which then are One again in the end as Jesus began to repack, saying, "I and the Father are One"...which in the fullness of time we too are to be among.

That just doesn't explain away John 14:21-23, which is the New Testament take on it - by the way.

So, all of the OT makes clear that God is One, you have agreed.

Then, Jesus tells us in John 14:21 that He will manifest Himself to those who believe and obey as the Holy Spirit.

When asked to elaborate/clarify, Jesus states that He AND THE FATHER will come and make their home with that person - as the Holy Spirit (how else can they come to live with us but as the Spirit?) - while never mentioning, nor even slightly implying, any 3rd individual.

Nobody, that is even taking the time to address this verse in any way, is explaining away the teaching that Jesus is giving here that He IS the Father, and that they - together - are the Holy Spirit.

NOT two, nor three, different people.

 

[GEN2REV]

The entire beginning of John is telling about Jesus. He calls Him the word, then calls Him the light, then says John the Baptist was sent to testify concerning Him.

Verse 14 there clarifies that it is Jesus being spoken of in John 1:1-4.

John 1:14

 

[GEN2REV]

"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." Isaiah 9:6
Wrestle with that one. That's a big one, profound and deep. Difficult to discern without divine assistance. What you have there is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit wrapped up in ONE.

Wow. Fascinating how some relate what the Bible is saying.

Every single title and description given to the Father is also given to the Son within the Bible somewhere. Some are also given to the Spirit.

Trinitarians claim that these are 3 separate people, who are the same, when it explains a verse in question.

Trinitarians claim that these are 3 different people, but all god, when it explains a verse in question.

Trinitarians claim that these are 3 equal people when it explains a verse, while claiming that these are 3 people within a hierarchy of differing power when it explains another verse.

They claim the Father has greater power than Jesus and is higher in the hierarchy, while sticking with the traditional explanation that the 3 are equally god.

The Trinity concept is all over the place so as to explain away any objection to its completely confusing nature and it is MUCH more confusing than the concept, made clear by the Bible, that Jesus, quite simply, is God Almighty.

The Father and the Son are one - just as Jesus said they are - and that is not making the case for any trio of gods whatsoever.

John 10:30

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

What is life? We see it all around. And a deeper question still, what is spiritual life? We would ponder also the source of life, physical and spiritual. God is THE CREATOR, the source of all life. Col. 1:16-17 identifies Jesus as the Creator
Jesus is the LIFE. If He is not God, He cannot be LIFE.
What is truth? Truth means reality.
Again, what is the source of truth/reality? We would also say God.
Jesus is the TRUTH.
When we believe, a born again, become new creatures, we are "in Christ." We have eternal life, and truth in Christ. Jesus says I and the Father are one and we do have the Holy Spirit of God living in us which is no different than the Father in us or the Spirit of Christ in us.

 

[ChristisGod]

.............................................

Hebrews 1:8

The 'original copies' of Heb. 1:8 (P46 is the earliest - first to middle part of second century) says Ὁ θρόνος σου ὁ θεὸς εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος. (θεὸς is in its abbreviated form). Yes, literally the oldest NT Greek manuscripts read (like all others): “Toward but the son the throne of you the god into the age of the age.”

There was no punctuation, so it is honestly translated as either: "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever" OR “God is thy throne for ever and ever” - Dr. James Moffatt's translation (also AT and others).

Even the great NT grammarian A.T. Robertson wrote in his Robertson's Word Pictures of the NT discussing Heb. 1:8:

“It is not certain whether ho theos here is the vocative [‘Thy throne, O God’] .… or ho theos is nominative….(‘God is thy throne’)”

Heb. 1:8 translated from Ps. 45:6

Psalm 45 is celebrating an Israelite king’s marriage, and the psalmist applies the words of Ps. 45:6, 7 literally to an ancient Israelite king. In fact, the trinitarian New American Standard Bible (NASB), Reference Edition, explains in a footnote for Ps. 45:1, “Probably refers to Solomon as a type of Christ.”

So, according to this trinitarian Bible, the words of Ps. 45:6, although figuratively referring to Jesus, were literally applied to an ancient Israelite king (probably King Solomon, it says).

So if Ps. 45:6 is properly translated, “your throne, O God ...” then that ancient Israelite King (Solomon?) was also literally called “O God” (or “O god”?). In fact, the highly trinitarian New American Bible, St. Joseph Edition, 1970, explains in a footnote for this verse:

“The Hebrew king was called ... ‘God,’ not in the polytheistic sense common among the ancient pagans, but as meaning ‘godlike’ or ‘taking the place of God’.”

The trinitarian Easy-to-read-Version also says in a footnote for this passage:

“God .... here the writer might be using the word ‘God’ as a title for the king.” (Cf. NIV Study Bible f.n. for Pss. 45:6 and 82:1, 6.)

If we can find a few trinitarian-translated Bibles which translate Ps. 45:6 in a non-trinitarian way, we really shouldn't accept it (also Heb. 1:8 - see post above) as actual trinity evidence.

The RSV renders it as “Your Divine throne” and a footnote provides this alternate

reading: “Or ‘your throne is a throne of God.’”

The NEB says: “Your throne is like God’s throne.”

The Holy Scriptures (JPS version) says: “Thy throne given of God.”

The Bible in Living English (Byington) says: “God is your throne.”

The Good News Bible (GNB), a very trinitarian paraphrase Bible, renders it: “The kingdom that God has given you will last forever and ever.”

The REB has: “God has enthroned you for all eternity.”

And the NJB gives us: “your throne is from God.”

We also see the following statement by respected trinitarian scholars in a footnote for this passage:

“45:6 O God. Possibly the king’s throne is called God’s throne because he is God’s appointed regent. But it is also possible that the king himself is addressed as ‘god.’” - Ps. 45:6 f.n. in the NIV Study Bible.

In addition to the above renderings by many respected translators (most of whom are trinitarian), we have the statement by perhaps the greatest scholar of Biblical Hebrew of all time, H. F. W. Gesenius. In his famous and highly respected Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Gesenius renders Ps. 45:6, “thy throne shall be a divine throne.”

Why is Heb. 1:8 so often presented as proof of Jesus being God? Have so many trinitarians really not seen the numerous alternative translations and interpretations of this scripture? At the very least these alternatives should be admitted by them (but seldom are).

It shows a desperation to find evidence for their conclusion.

The old fallacy known as the "appeal to authority "

 

[GEN2REV]

What is life? We see it all around. And a deeper question still, what is spiritual life? We would ponder also the source of life, physical and spiritual. God is creator, the source of all life.
Jesus is the Life.
What is truth? Truth means reality.
Again, what is the source of truth/reality? We would also say God.
Jesus is the TRUTH.
When we believe, a born again, become new creatures, we are "in Christ." We have eternal life, and truth in Christ. Jesus says I and the Father are one and we do have the Holy Spirit of God living in us which is no different than the Father in us or the Spirit of Christ in us.

No offense, but this is exactly what I'm talking about.

You are describing the trinity here, but you are actually describing it as 3 "characteristics" of God.

That is not the official definition of the trinity. The official definition says they must be 3, distinct (different/separate) individual persons.

That's just not what you are describing.

Oh well. It is what it is.

 

[Rich R]

This is all totally contradicted, cleanly and plainly, by Jesus Himself in John 14:21-23.

After saying, in verse 21, He (Jesus ALONE) will manifest HIMSELF to him that obeys and loves Him, Jesus is asked, in verse 22 by Judas, to elaborate, to clarify, what He is saying.

To which Jesus replies in verse 23 that He AND THE FATHER will come unto that person and make THEIR home with that person.

They are one and the same.

Case closed.

Thread closed.

I think you are saying there is a contradiction between the verses I quoted and the ones I quoted. At least that's what I got out of hour first statement, "This is all totally contradicted..." Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I also think you just want to let the contradiction stand and close the thread?

Also, you correctly mentioned the Jesus AND the Father, used the pronoun "their" and then stated, "they are one and the same." You don't see any problem with that? I guess it's fine so long as we ignore the normal meaning of words, grammar, and concepts. But wouldn't you think there would be a better solution?