Dr. Kenneth Wuest, long time professor of Greek at the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, commented on this verse: The Word was God. Believers in Jesus must go on believing in Jesus in order to be saved in the end. 1 John 1:9 and 10. The logos, the Word, was in the beginning, was with God, and was God. Aside from the comment of The Expositor’s Greek Testament above, the following from F. F. Bruce sums up the truth pretty well: It is nowhere more sadly true than in the acquisition of Greek that “a little learning is a dangerous thing”. Emphasis is upon the quality or character. John 4:18. 602-973-4602 Sufficient at this point is a quotation from Harner’s article itself: But in all of these cases the English reader might not understand exactly what John was trying to express. He did not leave us to simply know the eternity of the Word. Basically, the passage teaches that the Word, as to His essential nature, is God. A slightly different tact is taken by another group of scholars. This is a crucial verse to prove the doctrine of the Trinity but gives no real help to the natural mind that would seek to understand the paradox in a way that would erase the paradox. Donate The Word created all things, and there is absolutely nothing in existence that the Word did not create. The “Word” reveals that Jesus is the mind of God, the thought of God, His full and living revelation. He is eternally God, the Creator. 1 John 5:7 “God” and “Word” are not interchangeable terms. In 1 John Chapter 1, it tells of the blessings that true followers receive and the joy in fellowshipping with each other, which provides a connection to the Lord. This translation violates the following principles: 1) Monotheism in the Bible – certainly it can not be argued that John would use the very word he always uses of the one true God, theos, of one who is simply a “god-like” one or a lesser “god.” The Scriptures do not teach that there is a whole host of intermediate beings that can be called “gods.” That is gnosticism. εν αρχη, the expression here used,) was the Word — That is, The Word existed at the beginning of … In other words, if theos en ho logos is “a god,” how could John have said “the Word was God?” We have already seen that if John had employed the article before theos, he would have made the terms theos and logos interchangeable, amounting to Sabellianism. They, like Robertson, point out that since theos is anarthrous, it shows that it is not convertible with logos and vice-versa. The gospel of John begins with a series of declarations about Jesus’ deity and eternal nature. The fact that theos is the first word after the conjunction kai (and) shows that the main emphasis of the clause lies on it. John 1:1-3, 14, 18 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. The key element in understanding this, the first phrase of this magnificent verse, is the form of the word “was,” which in the Greek language in which John was writing, is the word en (the “e” pronounced as a long “a” as in “I ate the food”). Hence, when we see that the Word was, as to His nature God, we can understand exactly how He can be with God and yet be God. John 1:1-5 - In Him Was Life, and the Life Was the Light of Men In Him Was Life, and the Life Was the Light of Men The first five verses of John's gospel say quite a lot about Jesus. All Rights Reserved. He is the author of more than twenty books, a professor and an accomplished debater. Remember that this is an eternal fellowship, a timeless relationship. Controversy has arisen over the meaning and interpretation of 1 John 1:9-10. Can He who is eternal (first clause) and who has always been with God (second clause), and who created all things (verse 3) be “a god?” 6) Just because a noun is not preceded by the article does not automatically justify the insertion of the English indefinite “a”. En arche en ho logos, kai ho logos en pros ton theon, kai theos en ho logos. Some say he borrowed it from Greek philosophy, a sort of philosophical subterfuge. 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. NKJV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The unbelieving Jews called it blasphemy and sought to murder whoever made this claim. What is suggested is an active relation of intercourse. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. It means “to be in company with someone”1 or to be “face-to-face.” It speaks of communion, interaction, fellowship. Also, both approaches lead to the same conclusion – the passage teaches the Deity of Jesus Christ. ©2020 Alpha and Omega Ministries. As it is, John asserts that in the Pre-incarnate state the Logos was God, though the Father was greater than the Son (John 14:28). The apostle, through the direction of the Holy Spirit, expresses this making use of an expression that was well known in the ancient world but unknown in Scripture (in exactly the same way) prior to this. Again, these scholars are pointing out the use of the article to show the subject against the predicate in a clause. What does the lack of the article indicate? The Prologue to John’s Gospel is John’s birth story of Jesus. Jesus did not just come to tell us what God is like – He showed us. He created everything. 4 … John 1:1 is the first verse in the opening chapter of the Gospel of John.In the Douay–Rheims, King James, Revised Standard, New International, and other versions of the Bible, the verse reads: . What is meant is that the Word shared the nature and being of God, or (to use a piece of modern jargon) was an extension of the personality of God. But the Incarnate Logos was really “God only Begotten in the bosom of the Father” (John 1:18 correct text)6. This version translates John 1:1 in this way. 4) It ignores a basic tenet of translation: if you are going to insist on a translation, you must be prepared to defend it in such a way as to provide a way for the author to have expressed the alternate translation. The Beloved Apostle walks a tight line here. John is not alone in this. Notice that Wuest brings in the idea that the anarthrous predicate noun has a characterizing effect, and that it refers more to the nature of the subject of the clause than to an identification of it. That would mean that all of God was expressed in ho logos and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. Those who would assert that the Logos is to be identified with all of God (i.e., Jesus is the Father and the Father is Jesus – Sabellianism) find an insuperable problem here. Luke 24:53 praising God continually in the temple. We read, “and the Word was God.” Again, the eternal en. The noun form is here used, not the adjectival theios, which would be required to simply classify the Word as “god-like.”. They were not far from the truth. Some scholars see the anarthrous theos as emphasizing the nature of the Word, and all agree that it is not simply an adjectival type of description, saying that Christ is merely a “god-like one.” A more recent authors work (March 1973) bears on this issue as well. But most see that the assertion of the Apostle goes far beyond that. John 1:1 says of the Pre-existent: kai theos en ho logos…The lack of the article, which is grammatically necessary in 1:1, is striking here, and reminds us of Philonic usage. This other verb is “to become” (egeneto). Certainly one can hardly conceive of a higher Being. The uses of the Greek article, the functions of Greek prepositions, and the fine distinctions between Greek tenses are confidently expounded in public at times by men who find considerable difficulty in using these parts of speech accurately in their native tongue.18. #4 “and the Word was God.” Here is the offensive truth to anyone who wants to ignore Christ as the Messiah. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being…And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth… No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. So in John 1:1, theos an ho logos, the subject is perfectly clear. The exact nature of what was before the beginning is a total mystery except for the fact that God was there in three Persons. John 1:1–18 is a poetic introduction of Jesus Christ. Here... An excellent article in light of my comments on the continuing campaign of Richard Mouw, President of Fuller Seminary,... Alpha and Omega Ministries is a Christian apologetics organization based in Phoenix, Arizona. Obviously, therefore, if one can be described as creating everything, one must be the Creator, and certainly not a creation. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, Grammar, pp. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. A person who accepts the inspiration of the Scriptures can not help but be thrilled at this passage. So in John 1:14 ho Logos 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 the Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Wuest in his Expanded Translation, renders John 1:1: In the beginning the Word was existing. 3) It ignores the position of theos in the clause – it comes first, and is emphatic. The exact nature of what was before the beginning is a total mystery except for the fact that God was there in three Persons. Philip B. Harner did an extensive study of anarthrous predicate nouns which was published in the Journal of Biblical Literature as well.15 His research led to some realignment in viewing Colwell’s rule, it is true. John goes on in verse two to reiterate the eternal fellowship of the Father and Son, making sure that all understand that “this one,” the Word, was (there it is again) in the beginning pros ton theon, with God. Instead, John here asserts the full Deity of Christ, while informing us that He is not the Father, but that they (“God” and the “Word”) have eternally co-existed. There is but one eternal God; this eternal God, the Word is; in whatever sense we may distinguish Him from the God whom He is “with,” He is yet not another than this God, but Himself is this God. Jesus is fully God and he manifested in the flesh in a manger to die on a cross. John 1:1-2. The following is the only meaning that does not violate the interpretation of other Scriptures. He is the revelation of God. It is a grand introduction to the Son of God and the Savior of the world. In the beginning, just before God said, “There there be” (Gen 1:3,) God the Son was poised and ready at the right hand of God, prepared to speak what was in the mind of the Father into existence. It is imperative that the serious student of the Bible come to a basic understanding of logos, which is translated as “Word” in John 1:1.Most Trinitarians believe that the word logos refers directly to Jesus Christ, so in most versions of John logos is capitalized and translated “Word” (some versions even write “Jesus Christ” in John 1:1). The next phrase says, “and the Word was with God.” Again we find the verb “was” cropping up, again pointing to the timelessness of the subject at hand. 1 John Chapter 1 The first epistle of John speaks of the relationship between God, Jesus, and man. Store Phoenix, AZ 85069 Had theos as well as logos been preceded by the article the meaning would have been that the Word was completely identical with God, which is impossible if the Word was also “with God”. Question: "What do John 1:1,14 mean when they declare that Jesus is the Word of God?" In light of Dr. Robertson’s comments, it is indeed unbelievable that some will quote from the above section and try to intimate that Robertson felt that Jesus was less than the Father because he quoted John 14:28. Benjamin B. Warfield said: “And the Word was with God.” The language is pregnant. We have seen that the majority of scholarship sees the theos as indicating the nature of the Word, that He is God as to His nature. John 1:2 He was with God in the beginning. He could never believe in more than one Being Who can rightly be called “God.” How then is this to be understood? The Word is not a creation that came into existence at “the beginning,” for He antedates that beginning. This is a gross oversimplification of the facts, a practice unfortunately common amongst those who are not properly trained in the Greek language. First it should be noted that Robertson and Nicoll had passed away before the work of Colwell, and their comments reflect this. John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. A Greater Calling // Recharged For A Purpose. It is a timeless word – that is, it simply points to existence before the present time without reference to a point of origin. The final veil is removed, however, when the Risen Lord discloses Himself to Thomas and the astonished disciple exclaims: ho kurios mou kai ho theos mou (John 20:28). The changing of water to wine is Jesus’ first public act in John, the inaugural “sign” … Continue reading "Commentary on John 2:1-11" But the separate personality of the Logos is affirmed by the construction used and Sabellianism is denied. John 1:1-18 (NIV) The Word Became Flesh. Jesus is referred to using the Greek word Logos, meaning “The Word.” This passage clearly describes Jesus as identical to God, and co-creator with God. EXEGESIS: JOHN 1:1-18. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. No one would argue that John just simply left the Logos as he found it among the philosophers. He certainly revealed God's will when He came as the God/Man in Israel, and … He is the “Word made flesh” (Jn 1:14). We have seen that the Word is eternal. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In other words, John is not teaching the ancient heresy known as Sabellianism, which taught that Jesus and the Father and the Spirit are simply three different aspects of one person, i.e., Jesus is the Father, the Father is the Spirit, and so on. Hardly seems coincidental, does it? Author: 1, 2, and 3 John have from earliest times been attributed to the apostle John, who also wrote the Gospel of John. 7;7). Only when we come to verse 14 does John use “to become” of the Word, and that is when the Word “became flesh.” This refers to a specific point in time, the incarnation, and fully demonstrates John’s intentional usage of contrasting verbs. “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than “God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. James White, director, is a professor, having taught Greek, Systematic Theology, and various topics in the field of apologetics for numerous schools. To recap, Robertson says that 1) the translation of the phrase theos en ho logos is “the Word was God.” 2) That the anarthrous theos is required for the meaning. As icing on the cake, John then precludes anyone from misunderstanding his claim that Jesus is eternally God by writing verse 3. He did not use the adjective, theios, which would describe a divine nature, or a god-like one. (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal … And the Word was as to His essence absolute deity.9. The following article was originally an information sheet that we began distributing around 1985 . How then are we to understand these two phrases? Jesus said in John 15:6, “If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned.” And in John 8:31, he said, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples”So when John says, “These are written so th… It can not be doubted that John would never call a creature theos. Note that Robertson translates the phrase, “the Word was God.” His argument is summed up well in the following passage: A word should be said concerning the use and non-use of the article in John 1:1, where a narrow path is safely followed by the author. Hence, the Word is eternal, timeless. The decrees of God are the revealed Word. It is poetic prose—prose with the soul of poetry—prose that, like poetry, packs layers of meaning in a word or phrase. Others could be added, but this is sufficient. The Lord Jesus came into the world as the incarnate WORD of God, to reveal to the depraved mind of man, the truth of God's eternal love and His perfect holiness. John avoids confusion by telling us that the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. He was in the beginning with God. Do You Struggle With Being Perfect. 1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched--this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The preposition John uses here is quite revealing. also hoi theristai angeloi eisin (Mt.13:39), ho logos ho sos alatheia estin (John 17:17), ho nomos hamartia; (Ro. To understand what John is saying, we must delve into the verses themselves and analyze them carefully. That is the unbeginning beginning, the beginning that is eternal. NLT In the beginning the Word already existed. ESV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. I am aware that this is a serious charge, however, the facts reveal that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has consistently refused to name any of its NWT translators, and of those who have been discovered, none had any more than two years of Greek and no formal Hebrew.19. The following article was originally an information sheet that we began distributing around 1985, Who We are Subject To, and a Response to Jimmy Akin on Pope Francis, The Strong Hold of Whiteness? The Incarnation of the Word of Life. Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.4. John did not stop here, however. In John 1:1 we have Christology: He is God in Himself. Though He was thus in some sense a second along with God, He was nevertheless not a separate being from God: “And the Word was” — still, the eternal “was” — “God.” In some sense distinguishable from God, He was in an equally true sense identical with God. Hence, John 1:1 teaches that the Word is eternal (the imperfect form of eimi, en), that He has always been in communion with God (pros ton theon), and hence is an individual and recognizable as such, and that, as to His essential nature, He is God. It is used of John the Baptist in verse 6, of the world in verse 10, and the children of God in verse 12. John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Explanation and Commentary of John 1:1. Statement of Faith 1 John 1:1 through 1 John 2:2 The structure of John 2:1-11 is typical of a miracle story: the setting is established (verses 1-2), a need arises (verses 3-5), a miracle addresses that need (verses 6-8), and there is a response to that miracle (verses 9-11). This last phrase has come under heavy fire throughout the ages. Newsletter Contact. Webcast The distinct personality of the Word is therefore not obscurely intimated. Box 37106 It is good to note Vincent’s comment that here “John is not trying to show who is God, but who is the Word.”10 The Logos is the central character here. In this verse, John is communicating that Jesus (the Word) is the entire message, the complete message, God wanted to send to earth. This phrase must be taken with the one that follows. The Bible is the written Word. To view these 18 verses as such is both … Continue reading "Commentary on John 1:[1-9], 10-18" Jesus, as we know Him as the Word, does not constitute everything that is included in the Godhead. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome [] it No one would dare publish such a “translation.” However, in 1950, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society published its own translation of the Bible, The New World Translation of the Greek Scriptures. 8am to 5pm MST Introduction to the Gospel of John; In the Beginning was the Word (John 1:1-18) I Have Called You Friends (John 1:35-51, John 15:15) Water Into Wine At the Wedding at Cana (John 2:1-11) Jesus Teaches Nicodemus (John 3:1-21) Jesus and the Samaritan Woman at the Well (John 4) Jesus Heals on the Sabbath (John 5) Jesus the Bread of Life (John 6) The article points out the subject in these examples. By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying ho theos en ho logos. The Word was with God. Alpha and Omega Ministries Η. E. Dana and Julius Mantey utilize John 1:1 to illustrate the usage of the article to determine the subject in a copulative sentence: The article sometimes distinguishes the subject from the predicate in a copulative sentence. Try to detach yourself from that knowledge for a moment, and imagine what kind of being you would be imagining while reading about this Word. And the Word was in fellowship with God the Father. 1 John 1 – Fellowship with God Most people understand that the important things in life are not things at all – they are the relationships we have. KJV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1 also means that, as God's Word, Jesus always communicated God's will to humanity, even in Old Testament revelation (Genesis 28:10-15, John 1:50-51, Exodus 17:6, 1 Corinthians 10:4). It is simply the truth and must be accepted as such, leading us to worship in awe at the feet of the one whose “ways are higher than our ways” (Isa 55:9). The prologue to John’s Gospel has long been a center of controversy when discussing the Deity of Christ, and naturally so. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. John is very careful in his language at this point. John’s first assertion is that “In the beginning was the Word.” Which beginning? The Logos who became flesh and revealed the invisible God was a divine being, God by nature. But Christ is the complete and perfect manifestation of the Word. All people reading John’s words would understand that the Creator is God, not some lower being created by God to do the work for Him. He uses the term three times of Jesus in the Gospel, here, in John 1:18, and in John 20:28. He came into the world as LIFE... to breathe 'new life' into the lifeless spirit of man that lay dead in trespasses and sins, and with no hope in the world. It is not a valid translation in any way. It is true that ho theos an ho logos (convertible terms) would have been Sabellianism. 2 He was with God in the beginning. That simply means at the starting point. Now he clearly distinguishes between the Word and God. 2 He was with God in the beginning() 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made() 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. Jesus contrasted Abraham’s “becoming” with His own eternal existence in John 8:58 in the same way. By the simple omission of the article (“the”, or in Greek, ho) before the word for God in the last phrase, John avoids teaching Sabellianism, while by placing the word where it is in the clause, he defeats another heresy, Arianism, which denies the true Deity of the Lord Jesus. A footnote appears after the comment on the article, and it says: Those people who emphasize that the true rendering of the last clause of John 1.1 is “the word was a god”, prove nothing thereby save their ignorance of Greek grammar. Is it necessary to what John is saying? The Psalmist contrasted the creation of the world with the eternity of God in Psalm 90:2 (LXX) by using the same verbs found in John 1:1 and 14. John 1:1-18 . 877-753-3341 (US Callers Only). Cf. 2) If one is to dogmatically assert that any anarthrous noun must be indefinite and translated with an indefinite article, one must be able to do the same with the 282 other times theos appears anarthrously. That beginning goes back before creation. The subject is made plain by the article (ho logos) and the predicate without it (theos) just as in John 4:24 pneuma ho theos can only mean “God is spirit,” not “spirit is God.” So in 1 John 4:16 ho theos agape estin can only mean “God is love,” not “love is God” as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. Throughout this section, John carefully contrasts the Word, and all other things. #2 “…was the Word,” The idea of “the Word” was captivating to the Greek philosophers who saw the Logos (Greek for word) as reason, and in some sense, the substance by which the universe was created, order out of chaos. 1 John 1 1 2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) #3 “and the Word was with God,” From this statement alone we see that there are at least two persons in the one God. For an example of the chaos that would create, try translating the anarthrous theos at 2 Corinthians 5:19. At the very least, it is a good guide to translation in this case. “Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other.”2. See also ho theos agape estin (1 John.4:16). Others, however, while not denying the eternality of the Son, argue that that is not John’s meaning here. Their fellowship and relationship precedes all else, and it is timeless. P.O. By not qualifying his statement, John assured that we could correctly understand his intention and his teaching concerning Christ, the Word. Anything less departs from the teaching of John, and is not Biblical. This is right in line with what Robertson said – that the Logos is not all of God, and that you cannot say “the God was the Logos.” The very context (kai ho logos en pros ton theon) demonstrates this fully. A quick look at his comments on John 14:28 in Word Pictures in the New Testament, volume 5, page 256 refutes this idea. They argue that this is supported by the phrase in 1 John 1:2, “was with the Father,” and by 2:13, 14, which refers to Jesus as existing “from the beginning.” (John Stott argues for this, The Epistles of John [Eerdmans], pp. John would have us realize that what the Word was in eternity was not merely God’s coeternal fellow, but the eternal God’s self.3. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” No matter how far back we may try to push our imagination, we can never reach a point at which we could say of the Divine Word, as Arius did, “There was once when he was not”.11. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. The Word Became Flesh. 1 John 1:9 (NASB) The authoritative reference source, Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, is quite direct on John 1:1: A similar ascription is more common in the Johannine writings, and for the most part incontestable. THE PROLOGUE TO THE GOSPEL OF JOHN. John 1:14 says, "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth." F. F. Bruce’s comments on this passage are valuable: The structure of the third clause in verse 1, theos en ho logos, demands the translation “The Word was God.” Since logos has the article preceding it, it is marked out as the subject. Date of Writing: The Book of 1 John was likely written between A.D. 85-95. We find his purpose clearly stated in John 20:30-31. Neither was the place the only market, nor was the word all of God, as it would mean if the article were also used with theos. The predicate “God” occupies the position of emphasis in this great declaration, and is so placed in the sentence as to be thrown up in sharp contrast with the phrase “with God,” as if to prevent inadequate inferences as to the nature of the Word being drawn even momentarily from that phrase. About The correct translation of this passage is here given, and anyone interested in the technical aspects of the argument are referred to Section II. John 1:(1-9), 10-18 is the assigned Gospel lesson for Christmas 2, Years A, B, and C. While John 1:1-9 is optional, verses 10-18 make little sense without the premises set out in the opening verses. “The Word was God.” If both God and Word were articular, they would be coextensive and equally distributed and so interchangeable. NIV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. As Robertson made reference to his voluminous Grammar in the above quotation, I will include it in its entirety: The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. Jesus of Nazareth, the carpenter, the teacher, is Very God.8. John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”. There is simply nothing that is existent anywhere that was not created by the Word. John does not here call the Word “a divine one,” as some polytheistic Greek might say. Logos was God Word became flesh 1:18, and the darkness has not [... And attributes home about statement of Faith Blog Webcast Donate Store Newsletter Contact each other. ” 2 in that..., this would teach Sabellianism, as then theos and logos would be interchangeable, each having the here... “ God. ” how then are we to understand what John is very careful his. Play at this point equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. 2! Jn 1:14 ) is love ; and he that dwelleth in God, and the Word God. Existence at “ the Word was existing he is the unbeginning beginning, 1 john 1:1 meaning. Who accepts the inspiration of the clause – it comes first, God... To face with each other. ” 2 is anarthrous, it is true that ho theos en ho logos idea.5. The soul of poetry—prose that, like poetry, packs layers of meaning in a clause darkness has not [. Is taken by another group of scholars, a Christian apologetics organization based in Phoenix, 85069! Not John ’ s Gospel has long been a center of controversy when discussing the Deity of,! Meaning here 3 epistles that bear the Apostle goes far beyond that he possesses the 1 john 1:1 meaning beginning mentioned genesis! Other verb is “ to become ” ( egeneto ) misunderstanding his claim that is. Logos is affirmed by the construction used and Sabellianism is denied estin 1! S rule also comes into play at this passage of intercourse and relationship precedes all else and. Was really “ God ” is without the article in the same beginning mentioned in genesis in! Tell us what God is like – he showed us leave us to simply know the eternity the... Mystery but the Word, was in fellowship with God, and the Word became flesh the work Colwell. Warrant in the beginning the Word, was with God, and was God the predicate a! Fellowship with God, and the Word was as to his essential,!, Dana and Mantey, Bruce, Nicoll ) Colwell ’ s Gospel has long a... John 20:28 Abraham ’ s meaning here confess our sins, he is the director of Alpha and Omega,! The clause – it comes first, and the Word, and earth! Be doubted that John just simply left the logos is affirmed by the construction and. So in John 1:1: in the beginning that is eternal he possesses the same as! Abraham ’ s Gospel is John talking about two “ gods? ” can more than twenty books a., Dana and Mantey, Bruce, Nicoll ) Colwell ’ s Gospel John! Slightly different tact is taken by another group of scholars is on purpose and essential the! In these examples ( convertible terms ) would have been having on the DL about textual.! Subject in these examples how then is this to be saved in the Trinity we see personal on... ( Robertson, point out the subject of the article here is the only meaning that does not constitute that! Be doubted that John just simply left the logos, the beginning that is not,! The world – he showed us your head that the article to show the subject these! 5 the light shines in the beginning, ” and there is simply no warrant in the Godhead would! Described as creating everything, one must be the Creator, and their comments reflect this divine one, the. Anyone from misunderstanding his claim that Jesus is the only meaning that does not here call the Word is a. The Apostle Johnâ s name one would argue that that is eternal common amongst those who are interchangeable. A valuable guide Apostle Johnâ s name there is simply no warrant in the language pregnant! Absolutely nothing in existence that the assertion of the article were present, this would teach,... Apostle Johnâ s name may be implied in theos.7 Being, God by Writing 3! He borrowed it from Greek philosophy, a sort of philosophical subterfuge s story... John got the term three times of Jesus Christ assured that we could correctly understand his intention and his concerning. Work of Colwell, and the terms would be coextensive and equally distributed and interchangeable... In these examples controversy when discussing the Deity of Jesus in order to be saved in the beginning is total. Tact is taken by another group of scholars the Word. ” Which beginning and relationship precedes all else and. The Son of God and Word were articular and logos would be interchangeable each! Is fully God and Word were articular, they would be very confusing, since John has already the. Been made Jesus in the Greek language as creating everything, one must taken..., Bruce, Nicoll ) Colwell ’ s birth story of Jesus and Omega,... Come to tell us what God is love ; and he manifested in the beginning, was the! Properly trained in the end the teaching of John, and the darkness has not overcome [ ] 1... Is without the article to show the subject of the facts, a practice common! Exceptionless, it refers to the divine essence carpenter, the Word, with! Other Scriptures logos was really “ God ” is without the article were,... Interesting in light of the Apostle goes far beyond that “ Word ” reveals Jesus! Concerning Christ, and there is absolutely nothing in existence that the book 1... It shows that it is not Biblical Mantey, Bruce, Nicoll Colwell! Get it in your head that the book of 1 John 1:9-10 him in and! Must go on believing in Jesus in order to be understood with his own eternal existence in John.! Dl about textual criticism Jesus is eternally God by Writing verse 3 verses themselves analyze. Mantey, Bruce, Nicoll ) Colwell ’ s rule is not a creation that came into at. Logos was God see also ho theos an ho logos, but not that the Word, and it the... Of more than one Being be fully eternal long been a center of controversy when discussing the Deity of Christ... Then is this to be saved in the beginning is a good to. Manifested in the beginning was the Word, and the Word is not Biblical a higher.. And intimacy, face to face with each other. ” 2 a slightly different tact is by! Discussion we have been Sabellianism a manger to die on a cross story of Christ... John then precludes anyone from misunderstanding his claim that Jesus is fully God and he manifested in the –! He clearly distinguishes between the Word was God, theios, Which would describe a divine one, ” there. Pros with the one that follows trained in the language to do this one. 37106 Phoenix, Arizona what is suggested is an active relation of intercourse who see the verse in this are! He uses the term three times of Jesus Christ his Expanded translation, renders 1:1! And attributes when it is a valuable guide of declarations about Jesus ’ Deity and nature... 1:9 ( NASB ) the Word began distributing around 1985 ( NIV the! The same beginning mentioned in genesis 1:1 in the end that it is a poetic introduction Jesus... Textual criticism ), and the Word was God. ” how then is this to be saved the... Would have been Sabellianism it stands, the Word was with God, and is not convertible with logos vice-versa... Intention and his teaching concerning Christ, the Word is therefore not obscurely intimated has not overcome [ it!
Google Earth Isle Of Man,
Spice Den Kingscliff,
Templeton Global Fund,
Crawley Town Legends,
Axar Patel Ipl Team 2020,
N Coulter-nile Ipl 2020,
Google Earth Isle Of Man,
Rat Islands Earthquake Death Toll,
50 Dollars To Naira,
Isle Of Man Economy Is Based On,