Bible Talk > Sound doctrine
The doctrine of the Trinity
Zant Law:
--- Quote from: Alexander Winslow on September 15, 2014, 05:10:11 pm ---Just a brief confirmation that the Word which became flesh (John 1:14) is a god and not the Almighty God.
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν,
In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God,
καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
and a god was the Word (Wilson's Emphatic Diaglott - V20b Vat Ms 1209 – one of the oldest in existence)
Alexander
--- End quote ---
Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
1722 [e] En Ἐν In [the] Prep
746 [e] archē ἀρχῇ beginning N-DFS
1510 [e] ēn ἦν was V-IIA-3S
3588 [e] ho ὁ the Art-NMS
3056 [e] Logos Λόγος, Word, N-NMS
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
3588 [e] ho ὁ the Art-NMS
3056 [e] Logos Λόγος Word N-NMS
1510 [e] ēn ἦν was V-IIA-3S
4314 [e] pros πρὸς with Prep
3588 [e] ton τὸν - Art-AMS
2316 [e] Theon Θεόν, God, N-AMS
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
2316 [e] Theos Θεὸς God N-NMS
1510 [e] ēn ἦν was V-IIA-3S
3588 [e] ho ὁ the Art-NMS
3056 [e] Logos Λόγος. Word. N-NMS
En archí̱ í̱n o lógos kaí o lógos í̱n prós tón theón kaí theós í̱n o lógos
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550)
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and God was the Word
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. (Scrivener's Textus Receptus 1894)
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and God was the Word
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος. (Greek Orthodox Church 1904)
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and God was the Word
Fat:
--- Quote from: Alexander Winslow on September 15, 2014, 05:10:11 pm ---Just a brief confirmation that the Word which became flesh (John 1:14) is a god and not the Almighty God.
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν,
In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God,
καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
and a god was the Word (Wilson's Emphatic Diaglott - V20b Vat Ms 1209 – one of the oldest in existence)
Alexander
--- End quote ---
From Roberts word pictures
In the beginning (en arch). Arch is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew be reshith in Genesis 1:1 . But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing. Was (hn). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of eimi to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (egeneto, became) appears in verse John 1:14 for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in Genesis 8:58 "before Abraham came (genesqai) I am" (eimi, timeless existence). The Word (o logo). Logo is from legw, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. Logo is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (anima mundi) and Marcus Aurelius used spermatiko logo for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew memra was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in Proverbs 8:23 . Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (The Origin of the Prologue to St. John, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John's standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term Logo, but not John's conception of personal pre-existence. The term Logo is applied to Christ only in John 1:1 John 1:14 ; Revelation 19:13 ; 1 John 1:1 "concerning the Word of life" (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of "the Word of God" in Hebrews 4:12 . But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul ( 2 Corinthians 8:9 ; Philippians 2:6 ; Colossians 1:17 ) and in Hebrews 1:2 and in John 17:5 . This term suits John's purpose better than sopia (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the aeon Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos "became flesh" (sarx egeneto, verse John 14 ) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once. With God (pro ton qeon). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Pro with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1 John 2:1 we have a like use of pro: "We have a Paraclete with the Father" (paraklhton ecomen pro ton patera). See proswpon pro proswpon (face to face, 1 Corinthians 13:12 ), a triple use of pro. There is a papyrus example of pro in this sense to gnwston th pro allhlou sunhqeia, "the knowledge of our intimacy with one another" (M.&M., Vocabulary) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, Origin of Prologue, p. 8) that the use of pro here and in Mark 6:3 is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is Koin, not old Attic. In John 17:5 John has para soi the more common idiom. And the Word was God (kai qeo hn o logo). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying o qeo hn o logo. That would mean that all of God was expressed in o logo and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (o logo) and the predicate without it (qeo) just as in John 4:24 pneuma o qeo can only mean "God is spirit," not "spirit is God." So in 1 John 4:16 o qeo agaph estin can only mean "God is love," not "love is God" as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, Grammar_, pp. 767f. So in John 1:14 o Logo sarx egeneto, "the Word became flesh," not "the flesh became Word." Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.
Alexander Winslow:
Hello Fat,
I cannot believe that you have stated this. All things in creation are founded on balance, not equality. If anything at all was equal to God, he would immediately cease to be Almighty God which in itself means without 'equal'. So the title of Almighty God informs us that even the conception of such a thing as a Trinity is nul and void!
When the question came up as to whom Jesus was while on earth, he asked his apostles: "Who do you say I am?" To which Simon Peter replied: "You are the Christ the Son of God." [Not God the Son] Whereby Jesus replied: "Well done Simon, because not man but my Father who is still in heaven who has revealed this to you." (Matthew 16:16, 17)
Well there we are, his Father who was still in heaven; so Jesus was not God incarnate after all.
All we have to do is read the scriptures and understand the sense in which they are written and all is revealed!
Alexander
Fat:
Hello Alex
--- Quote from: Alexander Winslow on September 29, 2014, 05:21:43 pm --- "Who do you say I am?" To which Simon Peter replied: "You are the Christ the Son of God." [Not God the Son] Whereby Jesus replied: "Well done Simon, because not man but my Father who is still in heaven who has revealed this to you." (Matthew 16:16, 17)
--- End quote ---
Can't believe you added to the scriptures to try and make a point.
I'll tell you the same thing I told Kimberley,
You have put limitations on our Lord, as if He is incapable of being in two places at one or that He can not take up a human form and and experience humility. You don't believe that He can be in two or three forms at one time. My God has no limitations. The only thing my God can not do is violate His own nature, for instance He can not lie.
I bet you have no problem with God being a burning bush or even asked yourself in what form was God when He came to Abraham (Gen 18) and eat and even bargained with him over the fate of Sodom.
Hebrews 2:9 But we do see Jesus- made lower than the angels for a short time so that by God's grace He might taste death for everyone-crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death.
--- Quote from: Alex ---Well there we are, his Father who was still in heaven; so Jesus was not God incarnate after all.
--- End quote ---
I see, your Almighty God can not be in two places at once, now I understand.
JesusIsTheChrist:
There are 3 Persons in the Godhead.
God the Father is not the Son.
They are 1 minded, 1 of spirit. - John 17.
Gen 19:24 Then the LORD (Jesus) rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD (the Father) out of heaven.
The greatest of God’s revelation to man is the Father – Son relationship, that there are 3 Persons in the Godhead and how They function as a unity. They who know God not in truth, show that they do not have the Spirit of God. For the Holy Spirit has come to lead us in all truth – John16:13.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version