Does the TRINITY doctrine CONCUR with John 17:3?

Why is it that in all places where logos is used it means:

"a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea"

"the sayings of God"

Yet in John it suddenly takes on this "new meaning" of physically being Jesus.

This logos, or (plan, promise, idea) that God had is for the salvation of the world. It just so happens that Jesus is the ends and means by which this plan/promise was put into action.

Is Jesus literally this logos? No, the logos is a figurative description of Jesus.

When Mary concieved and Jesus was born, the plan that God had became real. Up to then it was a plan, not a physical thing. When someone thinks about something, whether it is a pencil, calling someone on the telephone, or getting up from a chair. It is only a thought until action is taken. Once that action is taken, the thought becomes real. Prior to that point, the thought can be changed many times but only the end result is real.

Jesus became a part of the physical plan of God when he was born. Prior to that, God knew there would be a son and that the son would have to die. But was the son physically there, no.

 

The problem with that D, is that if you look at "the Word" in John 1:1 as nothing more than a "plan" or "idea", then "the Word was with God" makes no sense. This implies that what / whoever the Word is, is a thing or entity that can exist in the presence of God.

 

Ed, also, if Jesus was begotten of God, that would mean He is of the Father - meaning he would share the same qualities and characteristics of his Father. He would in a sense have the "God" stuff in his entire makeup - but since there is only one God, then Jesus must be that only one God.

 

"John 1:1 doesn't say Jesus is the only true God. That's only your imagination or personal interpretation of wht John 1":1 means. John 1:1 is not even referring to Jesus but to the WORD (spoken or expressed idea, plan or promise) of God.
"

Wrong ed, it is speaking about Jesus. Just do the math. Let me help you out. First it says the word became flesh and dwelt among us, then it says John testifies about the word saying this, "He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me." Then in verses 17 and 18 it clearly calls Jesus God, but lets just go on...In verse 29 John sees Jesus and look what he says in verse 30..Surprise!! It is the EXACT SAME THING that he said about the word..why? Because Jesus is the logos. Don't be blinded to the truth Ed.

"I know what you mean by "three in one" Louis. But that is not the question. Why do you evade the question? Because you don't have any answer for it. Right?"

No ed, I answered your question. It was just an answer you don't like..sometimes we dont' always "like" the truth ed, but its still truth.


"Please show me how the Trinity doctrine concurs scripturally with what Joihn 17:3 is telling us. The Father is the ONLY (not three persons) true God. Now show me how your Trinity doctrine concurs with this."

I have many times Ed. You take a verse and look at it indepentantly, but that is NOT THE WAY IT IS MENT TO BE READ. The bible is a whole book and ment to be read that way. If you read it you clearly see that Jesus is God, God the father is God and The Holy Spirit is God hence..3 in one

 

ed, the bible I use when delving in this subject is the Hebrew Old Testament, and Greek New Testatment. Anything else is just a translation.

 

"God testified that Jesus is His son in whom He is well pleased. Jesus, the son, testified that the Father is the only true God (John 17:3). The Bible gives us no room for speculation. Either we believe the Bible or we don't."

Ahh..you're getting it ed!! This coupled with other statements such as the father and I are one and everything the father has is mine should tell you that Jesus is saying he is seperate from God but yet idential in diety..ie I am God...you're halfway there ed take the last step to the truth.

"Who else would the "word", "plan" or "idea" be with except the one whose "word", "plan" or "idea" it is?"

So the plan is God also..the plan was Christ..he was with God in the beginning and is God..ya got that right ed

 

"Again you are speculating Louis. "I and the Father are one" doesn't say Jesus and the Father are one God. "

:lol: yes it does ed, what to you think "one" means :lol: You're just ignoring the plain words now.

"This is pure speculation or conclusion based on distorted interpretation to make the verse fit your false belief that Jesus is God."

Ed, then you just don't get the assurtion made by Christ. he says EVERYTHING that God has (power, omni-whatever..everything) is his..that makes him God, ed. Just think about it.


"The plan is NOT a "HE" Louis. The plan is NOT Christ. "

Yes it is Ed. Should we go through John chapter one and I can show you SEVERAL places where John clearly says Jesus is God. Its up to you ed, do you really want to know the truth?


"That plan was with you since the time the plan was conceived in your mind, but "Louis" was not yet in existence. "

:lol: but the plan is NOT me. It clearly says the word WAS God.

"And let's say you plan to name that house "Louis"

:lol: so Jesus is named God then huh? Thanks for proving my point for me ed. :lol:

"The only time "louis" appears is after the house has been built."

Wrong ed, it says he is WITH God in the beginning. Not on God's mind, not waiting to be with God, BUT WITH GOD. I think you're just ignoring the plain words here ed.

 

ed, the bible I use when delving in this subject is the Hebrew Old Testament, and Greek New Testatment. Anything else is just a translation.

 

*sigh*
ed, aren't you bothering to read my posts?

This is the bible I use: Notice that it is not a translation of any kind. It IS the original Hebrew. And while you're at it, please notice the "look on Me" and "mourn for Him" and notice the pronouns are totally different. Find me another Hebrew text with it different, and I will believe that this copy is flawed. If not, then I want you to conceede for now that Zech 12:10 says what it really says here.


www.info2000.net/~ise/bible/text.jpg

 

And if you can't read it, here it is again:

www.info2000.net/~ise/bible/text.jpg

 

and again:

www.info2000.net/~ise/bible/text.jpg

Ed, what do you think?

I'm tryin' not to bible bash ya, but in love I ask you to at least CONSIDER the truth as it is layed out before you. God has a divine appointment for you , and if you wish, call me! Email me now [email protected] - I'd love to set up a chat time.

 

Boy, there sure are a lot of threads concerning John 17:3.

Josephus,

I had asked over on the thread titled "Is John 17:3 True" if you were reading the actual Hebrew or the words below the Hebrew in the bible you have shown.

I mean no disrespect. If you are reading the Hebrew, I applaude you. But on the other hand, if you are reading the words below the Hebrew, are you not reading someone's interpretation of what the Hebrew said.

Just curious.

 

The relationship between God, Holy Spirit, Jesus and us, is crucially interwoven with this passage. John 17 is certainly one of the more crucial passages in the bible regarding the relationship between Jesus and God, as well as OUR relationship with them both.

Jesus taught his whole life from a place of selflessness. He was not on an ego trip at all. He's constantly explaining that his power comes from God, and describes himself as a *MAN* doing the will of the Father.

The trinity doctrine is not what Jesus himself taught, and John 17 clearly demonstrates this to be in error.

Jesus prays to God as son to Father the night before he is to be put to death.

Jesus was not God. He was not killed for suggesting he was God. He was killed for claiming to be the Messiah and Christ, but this is not the same as claiming to be God.

I can't recall a single instance of Jesus refering to himself as God in the first person sense in all of the Gospels. I can think of numerous examples though where he openly states he is *SON* of God, and refers to God in the *THIRD* person.

I think what Ed's been trying to show you is that Jesus didn't claim to be God. That was a church add-on hundreds of years later.

 

And who was the word when the Word became Flesh?