[jerzy]

We have to set our selves in the circumstances and time of John’s gospel.

1. The NT doesn’t exist.
2. The Catholic dirty dancing is far away.
3. None of the prophets mentioned that there were thee Gods or that God is a cluster of three Gods.
4. Man knows about God, His power and His acts from His word. There was nothing else besides of His word.
5. Man knows that a word proceeds from God’s mouth Isa 55:11 and does what He sends it to accomplish.
6. Man knows that God spoke/commanded/breathed and the heavens (and the earth) were made Ps 33:6-9.
7. In 2Sam 7:12 David is promised that after his death God will set up his seed which will (not Solomon because he was anointed a king during David’s life) proceed from his bowels, God will be his father (or the Father) and he will be his son (or the Son), he will build a house for God’s name and God will establish his kingdom for ever (not Solomon because Solomon died circa 1000 years ago).
8. God will give a sign Isa 7:14.
9. God will teach him to fear and obey Him Isa 11:1-3.
10. God will call him a servant and will put the world’s sins upon him Isa 53.
11. God will set His servant up as one shepherd, make him a prince over His people while He will be God over them all Eze 34:23-24.
12. His servant will come from Bethlehem Ephratah Mic 5:2

We can continue adding texts clearly pointing and clarifying who His servant will be and what he will accomplish.


Let’s summarise:

After David’s death God will raise a servant from David’s own seed, teach him to know, fear and obey Him, place world’s sins upon him and make him a prince over His people while He Himself will be their God.

After the servant accomplished all according to God’s foretold plan and His specific instructions John recalls:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word (John didn’t know any other word but the word of God of Isa 55:11), and the Word was with (pros - about, according to, because of, in, for intent, of, which pertain to, with {-in}) God, and the Word was God (since the word “God” comes from the word-root power/strength so the word or logos of Jn 1:1 was God because of Isa 55:11, Ps 34:6-9).

We further observe use of God’s word in De 9:5, 1Sam 9:27, 1Ki 8:20+26, 1Ki 13:1+5, 2Cr 6:10, 2Ch 10:15, 2Ch 6:10 and so on.

So we are told in verse 1 that the word which proceeds from God’s mouth was all about God and was God.

Now we come to the pro-noun “houtos” or “he” in verse 2:

Joh 1:2 The same (houtos) was in the beginning with God.

The pro-noun is, no doubt, for the noun or God of Verse 1.

However, nothing in this verse or anywhere else in the OT gives any indication that it is for the word “logos” which denotes Jesus.

But we note that the text of Jn 1:2 doesn’t seem to make sense; that “he” (God) was with God.

The problem lies in the Trinitarian favoured but unwarranted choice of the words “in”, “the beginning” and “with” out of the multiple meaning words “en, “arche” and “pros”.

In – en – instrumentality: about, altogether, (here-) by (+ all means), (here-) in, mightily, (because) of, one, that, through (-out), where (-with).

The beginning - archē - a commencement, or (concrete) chief (in various applications of order, time, place or rank): - power, principality.

With – pros - the destination of the relation, about, which pertain to, to ([you]) –ward.

God – theos - the supreme Divinity.

So verse 2 could read:

He was the power/principality which pertains to the supreme Divinity.


Let’s look at verse 3 now:

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him. Without him was not anything made that has been made.

Bravo.

He made all things. See Ps 33:6-9.

Nothing was made besides Him making it.


Le’s consider the NT now.

John, the one who wrote Jn 1:-3 continues stating in Jn 4:23, 6:44-45+65, 12:47-50, 14:6+10, 17:3, 20:17 and many more that the Father is the only true God. He never makes any contradicting indication.

Neither in the OT no in the NT are we told that God is Trinity or that there are three Gods. It would contradict hundreds of proof texts stating beyond reproach that the Father is the only one true God.

Therefore, inferring the Trinitarian theology into Jn 1:1-3 is an absolute madness, especially knowing that the “homoousios and homoiousios”, the original Catholic theology created in 325 suggesting that the Son and the Father are of the same matter; the theology which was declared by them unbiblical in 357 but had to be made politically correct in 381.

[tomlapalm]

Jerzy, Here is the core to your misunderstanding

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word (John didn’t know any other word but the word of God of Isa 55:11), and the Word was with (pros - about, according to, because of, in, for intent, of, which pertain to, with {-in}) God, and the Word was God (since the word “God” comes from the word-root power/strength so the word or logos of Jn 1:1 was God because of Isa 55:11, Ps 34:6-9).

John didn't write from his personal knowledge by as the Holy Spirit said.

Logos is Greek, it is not in the OT but all communication from a Holy God to the captive sinners is the WORD, Jesus, even in the OT

[This Charming Manc]

you forgot about john 1:14-15

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."

Logos = jesus deal with it.

[jerzy]

Originally Posted by tomlapalm

Jerzy, Here is the core to your misunderstanding.

Logos is Greek, it is not in the OT...

You might be unaware that the Hebrew word dabar is an equivalent of the Greek word logos.

John didn't write from his personal knowledge by as the Holy Spirit said.

And the Holy Spirit couldn't contradict what he said through the prophets and through Jesus.

You should know that neither Jesus no the apostles knew or ever mentioned that logos denotes Jesus.

As a matter of fact texts like Ac 10:36 or Re 20:4 clearly make it impossible.

Besides, hundreds of the NT proof texts state beyond reproach that the Father is the only one true God. The terms three Gods, Trinity God, God Jesus or God the Holy Spirit never come up in the scriptures.

...all communication from a Holy God to the captive sinners is the WORD, Jesus, even in the OT

Neither the Hebrew word dabar no the Greek word logos ever denote Jesus in the scriptures.

[jerzy]

Originally Posted by This Charming Manc

you forgot about john 1:14-15

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."

Logos = jesus deal with it.

You forgot Isa 55:11 and God's prophecies pertaining to His anointed man.

Another word, what God foretold He fulfilled. He raised a servant from David's seed and did His works through him.

It is not logos of Jn 1:1 = Jesus but it is the word of God of Isa 55:11 which He fulfilled as He foretold.

There is nothing in the entire scriptures to warrant such conclusion.

In addition, Jn 1:1-3 is not a Trinitarian proof text and as such has to be rendered on the base of the overall scriptural context.

The Trinitarians have nothing in the entire scriptures to put their foot on concerning Jn 1:1-3.

Deal with the scriptural facts and let the Catholic baloney go.

[This Charming Manc]

I'm dealing with the fact that in the same passage, the same author draws a direct connection between the logos of John 1:1-3 and Jesus.

14 The Word(Logos) became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”) 16 Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

There is that link that 'doesn't exist' in the clear light of day, not much more 10 verses away from where you started looking.

I guess you didn't really want to find it did you ?

Originally Posted by jerzy

You forgot Isa 55:11 and God's prophecies pertaining to His anointed man.

Another word, what God foretold He fulfilled. He raised a servant from David's seed and did His works through him.

It is not logos of Jn 1:1 = Jesus but it is the word of God of Isa 55:11 which He fulfilled as He foretold.

There is nothing in the entire scriptures to warrant such conclusion.

In addition, Jn 1:1-3 is not a Trinitarian proof text and as such has to be rendered on the base of the overall scriptural context.

The Trinitarians have nothing in the entire scriptures to put their foot on concerning Jn 1:1-3.

Deal with the scriptural facts and let the Catholic baloney go.

[jerzy]

Originally Posted by This Charming Manc

I'm dealing with the fact that in the same passage, the same author draws a direct connection between the logos of John 1:1-3 and Jesus.

Because the word of God was fulfilled.

There is that link that 'doesn't exist' in the clear light of day, not much more 10 verses away from where you started looking.

I guess you didn't really want to find it did you ?

I guess you didn't read the OT, did you?

[tomlapalm]

The Book of John was written about 90 AD well into the NT era,

If one cannot see the connection of the WORD to be JESUS it is willfull ignorance.

Jhn 1:1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word,(LOGOS) and the Word (LOGOS)was with God, and the Word (LOGOS)was God.
Jhn 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Jhn 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Jhn 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
and
Rev 19:11 ¶ And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
Rev 19:12 His eyes [were] as a flame of fire, and on his head [were] many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
Rev 19:13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word (LOGOS)of God.

Rev 19:16 And he hath on [his] vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

[jerzy]

Originally Posted by tomlapalm

The Book of John was written about 90 AD well into the NT era,

There wasn't the NT as it is known today. There were letters here and there.

If one cannot see the connection of the WORD to be JESUS it is willfull ignorance.

You wouldn't see it either if you were not subjected to the Catholic brain washing and to the Catholic/Trinitarian text meddling.

Jhn 1:1

Nobody has ever proven from the scriptures that the logos of Jn 1:1 denotes Jesus. If anyone managed to do it he has proven that the Father the only one true God lied in hundreds of proof texts.

Nobody would come up with such silly idea today if the Catholics didn't create a "one substance" lie which they clearly acknowledged later to be unbiblical.

Rev 19:12...he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

Strangely the Trinitarians know.

Rev 19:13... his name is called The Word (LOGOS)of God.

Firstly, "his name is called" instead of "he is called" or "his name is" as we would say today.

Secondly, His name is called "The word of God" not "Word the God" or "God the Word".

Pity the Trinitarians fail to read what they post but merely pick up a key word in a text.

Rev 19:16 And he hath on [his] vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

Once again, the Trinitarians fail to note the utterly Trinitarian flavoured rendition.

Firstly, if Jesus' name was LORD of LORDS it would imply that he is a LORD of his Father the only one true God, the LORD of heaven and earth.

Secondly, they fail to note that Jesus was made Lord (not LORD) by the LORD Ac 2:36.

But we can not expect them to "see" because "God...send them strong delusion, that they...believe a lie"; because they are accursed fo preaching other gospel then Jesus and the apostles preached.

They preach a man made blasphemous gospel.

[ttruscott]

Originally Posted by jerzy

We have to set our selves in the circumstances and time of John’s gospel.

4. Man knows about God, His power and His acts from His word. There was nothing else besides of His word.

Your premis is missing the point that John had his years at the feet of Christ by which he may have learned somethings unkown to the word you want to restrict to the OT.

Jesus told them the secrets of the parables and after His resurrection He told them all the things about His death and resurrection in the precious word of scripture that were glossed over by so many for so long.
Luke 24: 36 While they were telling these things, He Himself stood in their midst and * said to them, “Peace be to you.”

37 But they were startled and frightened and thought that they were seeing a spirit.

38 And He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts?
...

44 Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and cthe Psalms must be fulfilled.”

45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures,

46 and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day,

which means to me that the scholars of the OT, the commentators, the best thinkers of the scripture were all wrong about His death and now John is telling us another thing they missed by loving religion more than they loved GOD, a failry common malady in history.

Peace, Ted

[tomlapalm]

Originally Posted by jerzy

There wasn't the NT as it is known today. There were letters here and there.



You wouldn't see it either if you were not subjected to the Catholic brain washing and to the Catholic/Trinitarian text meddling.



Nobody has ever proven from the scriptures that the logos of Jn 1:1 denotes Jesus. If anyone managed to do it he has proven that the Father the only one true God lied in hundreds of proof texts.

Nobody would come up with such silly idea today if the Catholics didn't create a "one substance" lie which they clearly acknowledged later to be unbiblical.



Strangely the Trinitarians know.



Firstly, "his name is called" instead of "he is called" or "his name is" as we would say today.

Secondly, His name is called "The word of God" not "Word the God" or "God the Word".

Pity the Trinitarians fail to read what they post but merely pick up a key word in a text.



Once again, the Trinitarians fail to note the utterly Trinitarian flavoured rendition.

Firstly, if Jesus' name was LORD of LORDS it would imply that he is a LORD of his Father the only one true God, the LORD of heaven and earth.

Secondly, they fail to note that Jesus was made Lord (not LORD) by the LORD Ac 2:36.

But we can not expect them to "see" because "God...send them strong delusion, that they...believe a lie"; because they are accursed fo preaching other gospel then Jesus and the apostles preached.

They preach a man made blasphemous gospel.

it is inconceivable to believe that John wrote both the Book of John and Revelation and chose to use LOGOS in different ways as yu suggest

Jesus is Lord and Christ and LORD and GOD
Rev 19:13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

Rev 19:14 And the armies [which were] in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
Rev 19:16 And he hath on [his] vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

as much as one wants the blood cannot be ignored. Jesus shed blood. Jesus Is LORD of LORDS

[jerzy]

Originally Posted by ttruscott

Your premis is missing the point that John had his years at the feet of Christ by which he may have learned somethings unkown to the word you want to restrict to the OT.

Than he as wellas other gospel/epistle writers would have said so.

45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures

Scriptures or the OT where there is no mention about three Gods, the scriptures or the OT where the prophets spoke about his death and resurrection not about three Gods.

...they missed by loving religion more than they loved GOD, a failry common malady in history.

Joh 17:17...thy word is truth.

Show me the truth not the Catholic theology of the Father and Son being of same matter which they declared unbiblical.

[jerzy]

Originally Posted by tomlapalm

it is inconceivable to believe that John wrote both the Book of John and Revelation and chose to use LOGOS in different ways as yu suggest

You didn't read post 9, did you?

[tomlapalm]

so many posts so many words.

Actually, the "of" doesn't exist it literally says" called Word GOD" kaleo logos theos"

[jerzy]

Originally Posted by tomlapalm

so many posts so many words.

Actually, the "of" doesn't exist it literally says" called Word GOD" kaleo logos theos"

You are actually correct.

"name is called The Word God".

It correlates perfectly with Jn 1:1-3. See the OP.