Yet this is not offered to us in the Bible. This is what you imagine to exist.
All that is offered is that 'in the beginning'. Certainly you are not implying that God has a 'beginning'?
So we 'know' that 'things' existed before 'in the beginning'. That means that 'in the beginning' is a reference to those things that pertain to 'use': who the Bible was written to. In essence, the words could be offered thus: "In the beginning of the things that pertain to man". For God has 'no beginning'. And we know that there were many 'things' before those 'things' that pertain to us. God wasn't floating in a void twiddling His fingers for eternity. Surely you offer no such concept.
So what you have offered is pretty much 'false understanding' so far as 'in the beginning' or 'things' that were created in that 'beginning'.
Christ refers to Himself as: "The beginning of the creation of God". Now how do you recommend we accept or deny these words? If we accept them, then show us how Christ 'as God' was the 'beginning of the creation of God'. If you can't, then it's obvious that you don't really understand what you so often 'act' like you do.
I believe that the words couldn't have been offered more simply. They are so simple a child can understand them. "The beginning of the creation of God" simply implies that Christ was created FIRST in the beginning of the 'creation of God'.
And we have other scripture that backs up His claim: The 'firstborn' of every creature'. A plain and simple piece of understanding offering that before any other 'creature' was formed, Christ was formed first.
And then there is the word 'made'. As in:
Acts 2:36
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath
made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Hmmm................. "God hath MADE Jesus both 'Lord' and "Christ". Wow. Pretty profound ain't it? God made Jesus both 'Lord' and "Christ". This plainly shows that Jesus Christ didn't 'make Himself' anything. It was accomplished by His Father: God.
Just like the place that He now sits: "At the right hand of God".
What your 'churches' have erred in teaching you is obvious to any that have actually read the Bible without such 'preconceived notions'.
If there is a 'Jesus' that is God, it is not the same God that the Hebrews/Jews followed and worshiped. For 'that God' is singular, uncompounded, without equal.
And God revealed Himself in such a manner to distinguish Himself from all the other 'multi part' Gods that the rest of the world was worshiping. Including the Greeks and Romans previous to their introduction to Christ.
The apostles never taught Jesus to be God. And Jesus never revealed Himself to the apostles as God. Jesus referred to God as His Father. To His Father as God. And He stated without confusion that the Father is greater than the Son. Even discussed that all He did was for the glory of His Father: God.
Once when called 'Good Master', he rebuked the man in offering that 'there is only one that is good and that is God'. So He wouldn't even allow men to call Him 'good' while dwelling in the flesh.
And when He offered 'how are we to pray', "Our Father who art in heaven.......................... thy will be done on Earth as it is in heaven.
And then there are the words that utterly destroy any possibility of 'trinity': "My God, my God, why hath thou forsaken me?" He is not praying to a 'third person of the trinity: the Father', He states clearly who He is praying to: God, who is His Father as well as ours.
And then Paul makes it perfectly clear in almost every letter he wrote:
Ephesians 1King James Version (KJV)
1 Paul,
an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
2 Grace be to you, and peace,
from God our Father,
and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
3
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
How much clearer could it be offered?
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ
It's kind of hard to understand how these words are so difficult for some to accept.
But I understand this: If one is insistent upon worshiping Christ 'as God', then it is imperative that one 'make' Christ God.
I do not worship Christ 'as God'. I worship 'only God as God'. But I am sure that the Son is worthy of our worship as well. But not as the Father, but as the Son. The Son is certainly worthy of our worship.
But what if? What if Christ is 'not God'? Then that would mean that the 'Christ' that is being worshiped 'as God' is a 'false Christ'. For we are to worship nothing as God but God Himself. And the only way that we are capable of worshiping the Son is 'as The Son'. If we worship anything as God that is not God, then we are worshiping a 'false God'.
Not my words. These are about as clearly outlined in the Bible as they could be. Yet so many find the means to ignore all that doesn't 'fit' what they 'want' to believe.
There is no indication that the Word referred to in John was anything but the Word of God until the Word became flesh. It was only then that the Word could be considered to be Christ. And even then He plainly states that the words He offered were 'not His own' but given Him by the Father. So in essence, calling Christ the Word is figurative. He is not nor has He ever been the "literal" Word of God. If so, show it. You can't. But I 'can' show that while Christ was living in the flesh on this world a voice from Heaven was heard. By numerous different people. And that voice 'was' the Word of God. Not figurative or symbolic, but the 'literal Word of God'.
Blessings,
MEC
