- Aug 3, 2007
- 8,828
- 3,184
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How do you read John 1:1?It's not translated correct. "I am" is egō eimi and it is typically translated as "I am he." Here are a few examples:
Mark 13:6
John 13:9
John 18:5-8
Matthew 14:27
Mark 6:50
John 6:20
and more... but you get the point.
So I think you're just reading that particular verse with a Trinitarian bias and to be fair most Bible translators are Trinitarian. They literally write their ideas into the Bible.
"Became flesh" (sarx egeneto) of Jn 1:14 is not "begotten" (gennao).John 1:14 says Yeshua was begotten by God.
John 1:14 says Yeshua was begotten of the Father. It refers to begotten in the sense of being offspring, God's Son was produced. The New Testament narrative is absolute on this point."Became flesh" (sarx egeneto) of Jn 1:14 is not "begotten" (gennao).
Fortunately, that is not a rule here nor anywhere. The Bible is for everyone. A lot of good people lost their life wresting control of the Bible away from the Trinitarian church to make it available to the masses. Please show a little respect.Non-believers and non-Christians (post #15) are in no position to quote the word of God.
John 1:1 is referring to to God being the Word in the sense that through His Spirit He spoke and created using words. This is affirmed through Scripture that God is described as creating using words. Thus the Word is in regards to God expressing Himself through His Spirit in creation. In that way, the Word is God.How do you read John 1:1?
As previously demonstrated, you are in disagreement with the Greek.John 1:14 says Yeshua was begotten of the Father.
The human body of the divine Son of God was produced. The eternal divine Son of God was not produced, he proceeds from the Father, he always was just as the Father always was.It refers to begotten in the sense of being offspring, God's Son was produced.
The origin of the human body of the divine Son of God is not in dispute.The New Testament narrative is absolute on this point.
The wresting is in vain if the masses don't believe its chief assertion in Jn 1:1, Jn 1:14 that the Word who is God became flesh in Jesus of Nazareth to be the perfect atoning sacrifice for the sin of those who believe in and trust on him and his atonement for the remission of their sin.Fortunately, that is not a rule here nor anywhere. The Bible is for everyone. A lot of good people lost their life wresting control of the Bible away from the Trinitarian church to make it available to the masses.
I agree with the Greek in John 1:14. It's in reference to offspring.As previously demonstrated, you are in disagreement with the Greek.
Not according to Scripture. It says the Son was begotten and therefore had a starting point.The human body of the divine Son of God was produced. The eternal divine Son of God was not produced, he proceeds from the Father, he always was just as the Father always was.
I believe what the Bible says.The origin of the human body of the divine Son of God is not in dispute.
John 1:1 and John 1:14 say the Word is God and that the Son was begotten from the Father. It means God's words created the Son. The fact that it says the Son was begotten is crystal clear.The wresting is in vain if the masses don't believe its chief assertion in Jn 1:1, Jn 1:14 that the Word who is God
Yes, as long as they are believing who he said he is. He said that he is the Son of God, the Christ, the Messiah, but you seem to be saying he's someone the Bible doesn't say he is.became flesh in Jesus of Nazareth to be the perfect atoning sacrifice for the sin of those who believe in and trust on him and his atonement for the remission of their sin.
Seems we were talking about two different phrases, where I was referring to "became flesh" and you were not.I agree with the Greek in John 1:14. It's in reference to offspring.
14And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
It says the flesh (human Jesus) of the (Spirit) One who was with (Spirit) God (Jn 4:24) in the beginning was begotten (Jn 1:14), not the divinity of the One who was God (Jn 1:1).Not according to Scripture. It says the Son was begotten and therefore had a starting point.
Nope. . .John 1:1 and John 1:14 say the Word is God and that the Son was begotten from the Father. It means God's words created the Son.
The Bible doesn't say "God is sovereign," but it presents his sovereignty throughout.said that he is the Son of God, the Christ, the Messiah, but you seem to be saying he's someone the Bible doesn't say he is.
It's true God spoke through his begotten Son in the last days to bring about salvation to his people like he did of old with the prophets. But this does not necessarily mean Jesus was made at some point in time as part of God's creation. He was with the Father from the beginning. They share the same glory.I am just pointing out that the word for worlds in Hebrews 1:2 just objectively doesn't mean what they say it does, not even close.
Since the one and only God didn't speak through His Son until the last days, then it wouldn't make sense to say God spoke through His Son to make the worlds in these last days because they used the wrong word. It's actually supposed to be be ages. When that is understood, it's clear what Christ was a participant in God's creation. In the last days God created the church through His Son. The rest of the New Testament confirms this, but we can look at those later if you prefer.
For example, here's the Young's Literal Translation the verse:
Hebrews 1:2
in these last days did speak to us in a Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He did make the ages;
Monogenes has two primary definitions, "pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship" and "pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind. Its Greek meaning is often applied to mean "one of a kind, one and only"I agree with the Greek in John 1:14. It's in reference to offspring.
14And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
G3439. monogenés
Strong's Concordance
monogenés: only begotten
Original Word: μονογενής, ές
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: monogenés
Phonetic Spelling: (mon-og-en-ace')
Definition: only begotten
Usage: only, only-begotten; unique.
Not according to Scripture. It says the Son was begotten and therefore had a starting point.
I believe what the Bible says.
John 1:1 and John 1:14 say the Word is God and that the Son was begotten from the Father. It means God's words created the Son. The fact that it says the Son was begotten is crystal clear.
Monogenes has two primary definitions, "pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship" and "pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind. Its Greek meaning is often applied to mean "one of a kind, one and only"
other cults, have taken this to mean that Jesus was literally begotten. If Jesus was begotten, then he is a created being. Therefore, he cannot be God.
Ancient writers often used this adjective to describe a child’s unique relationship with their parent.
Genesis 22:2
2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
We know that Isaac wasn’t literally Abraham’s only begotten son. Isaac was the second son. Ishmael was Abraham’s first-born son. If you understand monogenes as a literal begetting, then God clearly got His facts wrong. However, if you understand monogenes as a unique, one-of-a-kind relationship, then God can accurately describe Isaac his “only” or “only begotten” son.
Likewise, Jesus is God’s unique, one-of-a-kind Son. You can call him the “only begotten” Son if you like, but remember, this word isn’t about procreation. It’s about a unique relationship between the Father and Son.
John 10:30
30 I and my Father are one.
When Jesus says he and the Father are one, he is saying they are of the same essence and attributes.
It's true God spoke through his begotten Son in the last days to bring about salvation to his people like he did of old with the prophets. But this does not necessarily mean Jesus was made at some point in time as part of God's creation. He was with the Father from the beginning. They share the same glory.
St. Ignatius wrote to the church in Ephesus about 40-50 years after St. Paul:
God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible, even Jesus Christ our Lord.
That is from chapter 7 in his letter warning about false teachings being given regarding the Lord Jesus Chris.
Ignatius of Antioch to the Ephesians (Roberts-Donaldson translation)
Ignatius of Antioch to the Ephesians (Roberts-Donaldson translation). On Early Christian Writings.www.earlychristianwritings.com
St. Ignatius wrote to the church in Rome about 40-50 years after St. Paul in his introduction:
IGNATIUS to the Romans
CHAPTER 0
0:0 Ignatius, who is also Theophorus, unto her that
hath found mercy in the bountifulness of the Father
Most High and of Jesus Christ His only Son; to the
church that is beloved and enlightened through the
will of Him who willed all things that are, by faith
and love towards Jesus Christ our God…
St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Romans (Lightfoot translation)
Ignatius of Antioch to the Romans (Lightfoot translation). On Early Christian Writings.www.earlychristianwritings.com
Beginning is a divine title. If you insist that "Beginning" must mean Jesus is procreated then you are also alluding that Jesus would cease to exist at some point in the future. since he is also the "Ending"The Bible needs to be precise on this point. If there is not a literal begotten Son, a literal Father, then they aren't Father and Son and the Son isn't begotten at all, but actually was never begotten in any sense of the word because that would mean he has always existed. The New Testament refers to the Father and the begotten Son exhaustively and it's a cornerstone of the faith. The gospel states we should believe Yeshua is the Son of God.
I believe in order to give the Bible any coherency we should accept what it says as a matter of faith on this point. If not, it gives people the ability to come up with their own interpretations. If people could accept what it says then there probably wouldn't be thousands of Trinitarian denominations. Unitarians don't suffer from that problem.
My point is that monogenes refers to begotten in the purest sense of the word because the rest of the Bible confirms this is an accurate translation.
The introduction to Hebrews 1:1-8 clearly states that God reveals Himself at various times. What He did not previously reveal in verse 5 re the Son to the angels is later commanded to them that the Son is to be worshipped in verse 6.The church has always been a mixed bag of perspectives. The earliest form of Unitarianism in the earliest church was known as Adoptionism. It basically asserts that Christ wasn't the Son of God until God made him the Son of God. There are a number of spots where Yeshua isn't identified as the Son until a particular moment.
Trinitarianism wasn't considered official by the church until the council of Nicea which was a state-sanctioned convention, by Constantine, in 325 AD. The state basically decided what Christianity is then the church began killing everyone who got in their way, running the true church underground.
Here's one example of why one may believe the Son didn't become the Son until a particular day he was begotten.
Hebrews 1:5
5For to which of the angels did He ever say:
“You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You”?
Rev 1:8 isn't a quote by Yeshua.Beginning is a divine title. If you insist that "Beginning" must mean Jesus is procreated then you are also alluding that Jesus would cease to exist at some point in the future. since he is also the "Ending"
Rev 1:8
8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
Rev 22:13
13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
The introduction to Hebrews 1:1-8 clearly states that God reveals Himself at various times. What He did not previously reveal in verse 5 re the Son to the angels is later commanded to them that the Son is to be worshipped in verse 6.
Hebrews 1
King James Version
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Isaiah 41:13Rev 1:8 isn't a quote by Yeshua.
Just requires a bit of biblical study to parse out the truth.
Some of the titles that apply to God also apply to Christ and then the also apply to men without making them God.
For example, Jesus is Lord in Romans 10:9, God is the savior in Luke 1:47, Artaxerxes is a king of kings in Ezra 7:12, but then God is a King of kings in 1 Timothy 6:15.
That being said, first and last refers to uniqueness, beginning and end, refers to uniqueness. I never asserted otherwise. It's in reference to Christ being the one and only Messiah.
In addition to the clear declaration of the word of God in Jn 1:1, Jn 1:14 that Jesus is God,Yeshua wasn't really one to run around condemning people if they did something. He didn't even defend himself when they were crucifying him, but rather prayed to his God and Father to forgive them. On that note, no comment from Yeshua isn't a confirmation of approval, especially when he explicitly taught on the matter of worship to be directed toward his Father.
That being said, the standing command for worship is to worship only God the Father because He is God.
So what you don't have are any clear declarations of Yeshua being God. What you've presented here is all circumstantial based on your interpretation. You seem to make connections between labels and titles while lacking anything that explicitly identifies Yeshua as God.In addition to the clear declaration of the word of God in Jn 1:1, Jn 1:14 that Jesus is God,
the NT likewise identifies Jesus as the YHWH of the OT.
1) Mt 3:3 (Isa 40:3) - Isa prophecies a voice of one calling in the desert, "Prepare the way for YHWH," which was John the Baptist (Mk, Lk).
John prepared the way for Jesus (Mk 1:-8, Lk 3:16, Jn 1:29-34). . .making Jesus the YHWH of Isa 40:3.
2) Ro 10:9, 13 (Joel 2:32) - Joel prophesies that "everyone who calls on the name of YHWH will be saved," which Paul quotes and applies to Jesus. . .making Jesus the YHWH of Joel 2:32.
3) Heb 1:6 (Dt 32:43) - Moses said, "Rejoice, O nations, with his people, and let all the angels worship him (YHWH), for he will avenge the blood of his servants (Septuagint translation), which Hebrews quotes and applies to Jesus. . .making Jesus the YWHH of Dt 32:43.
4) Eph 4:8-9 (Ps 68:18) - The psalmist states, "When you ascended on high. . .that you, O YHWH, might dwell there," which Paul applies to the ascended Christ. . .making Christ the YHWH of Ps 68:18
5) Jn 19:37 (Zec 12:10) - Zechariah prophesies that they will look on YHWH (12:1-2), the one they have pierced, which John applies to Jesus. . . making Jesus the YHWH of Zec 12:1-2, 10.
6) Lk 4:18-21 (Isa 61:1, 8) - Isaiah's prophecy identifies YHWH of vv. 7-8 with the Messiah of v. 1, which Jesus applies to himself. . .
making Jesus the YHWH of Isa 61:1,7-8.
7) Rev 1:12-18 (Isa 44:6, 48:12) - In Rev 1:12-18, Jesus (1:18, 2:8) identifies himself as the First and the Last, which is YHWH of Isa 44:6, 48:12. . .making Jesus the YHWH of Isa 44:6, 48:12.
8) In Rev 21:6, 22:12-13, Jesus (1:18, 2:8) is the Alpha and Omega who is the Lord God of Rev 1:8.
9) In Rev 20:11-13 w/ Jn 5:22, 27, 9:39, the one on the throne is Jesus, who in Rev 21:7 is God. . .making Jesus the God of of Rev 21:7.
10) Jn 1:3, Col 1:16-17, Heb 1:2b, 10 (Ge 1:1, Isa 44;24, Jer 10:16) - Isa 44:24 says YHWH created alone, while Jn 1:3, Col 1:16-17, Heb 1:2b, 10 say Jesus brought all things into being, created all things including angels and by his power holds them in existence, and made the universe. . .so according to John, Paul and Hebrews, Jesus is the Elohim Creator YHWH of Ge, Isa and Jer.
The NT presents Jesus as the YHWH of the OT.
There is no need for Jesus to command worship of himself as God, worship of God goes without saying.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?