here we go again

[may]

Who​

Was "the Word"?​

what about John 1:1, which says in the King James Version: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"? John 1:14 tells us that "the Word became flesh and resided among us." Christendom claims that this "Word" (Greek, lo´gos) who came to earth as Jesus Christ was God Almighty himself. Yet, notice that even in the King James Version John 1:1 says "the Word was with God." Someone who is with another person is not the same as that other person. So even from this translation, two distinct personalities are shown. Also, no third person of any Trinity is mentioned at all.
As for the King James Version’s saying in the latter part of John 1:1 that the "Word was God," other translations say something different. Some are as follows:
1808: "and the word was a god." The New Testament, in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London.
1864: "and a god was the Word." The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London.
1935: "and the Word was divine." The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, Chicago.
1935: "the Logos was divine." A New Translation of the Bible, by James Moffatt, New York.
1975: "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany.
1978: "and godlike sort was the Logos." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin.
1979: "and a god was the Logos." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Jurgen Becker, Würzburg, Germany.​

Also, in 1950 the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., rendered the phrase, "and the Word was a god."

 

[wizanda]

I wouldn't trust the book of John: consider the temple destroying in the other gospels is said to be a lie made up, and then in John it is still quoted as fact and that disciples knew it meant the body, yet from what i can tell Mark and Matthew where disciples saying it's a lie.
Then on the ground it stands against Yeshua on many points by proclaiming he said thing that then contradict his teachings in the gospels.
Also the point of the scripture you question who wrote this? who was John?

 

[may]

I wouldn't trust the book of John: consider the temple destroying in the other gospels is said to be a lie made up, and then in John it is still quoted as fact and that disciples knew it meant the body, yet from what i can tell Mark and Matthew where disciples saying it's a lie.
Then on the ground it stands against Yeshua on many points by proclaiming he said thing that then contradict his teachings in the gospels.
Also the point of the scripture you question who wrote this? who was John?

i do trust the book of John ,
Christians of the early second century accepted John as the writer of this account and also treated this writing as an unquestioned part of the canon of the inspired Scriptures. Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen, all of whom were of the late second and early third centuries, testify to John’s writership,

 

[Polaris]

The Word was Jehovah.

Now the question is who was Jehovah with.... "the Word was with God", if the Word is Jehovah, then who is referred to as God in this context?

PS - I don't mean to redirect your thread, I'm just curious.

 

[sojourner]

The Word was Jehovah.

Now the question is who was Jehovah with.... "the Word was with God", if the Word is Jehovah, then who is referred to as God in this context?

PS - I don't mean to redirect your thread, I'm just curious.

"Jehovah" isn't a word -- it's a construct. It's not even a name. "Jehovah" is not found in either the LXX or the MT. "Jehovah" iwas dreamed up by German translators in an attempt to solve the problem of YHWH as an unpronounceable name in the Hebrew tradition.

Therefore, "Jehovah" can't be the word John speaks of...because the construct didn't exist in the first century.

 

[Polaris]

"Jehovah" isn't a word -- it's a construct. It's not even a name. "Jehovah" is not found in either the LXX or the MT. "Jehovah" iwas dreamed up by German translators in an attempt to solve the problem of YHWH as an unpronounceable name in the Hebrew tradition.

Therefore, "Jehovah" can't be the word John speaks of...because the construct didn't exist in the first century.

I wasn't referring to "Jehovah" the word I was referring to Jehovah (or YHWH or whatever you want to call it) the person -- Jesus Christ.

The point is the Word is reference to Jesus Christ. In this passage "God" has reference to two different people depending on which phrase you're conisdering:

"the Word was with God" - here "God" is God the Father
"the Word was God" - here "God" is God the Son

To me this verse shows that God the Father and God the Son are two different beings (notice the word "with" -- involves more than one) that share the title or status of "God".

 

[dawny0826]

I believe...

In John 1:1-5...the Eternal Word is defined as being both God and Christ...

"In the beginning, was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not comprehend it."

 

[may]

"Jehovah" isn't a word -- it's a construct. It's not even a name. "Jehovah" is not found in either the LXX or the MT. "Jehovah" iwas dreamed up by German translators in an attempt to solve the problem of YHWH as an unpronounceable name in the Hebrew tradition.

Therefore, "Jehovah" can't be the word John speaks of...because the construct didn't exist in the first century.

the word or logos isnt Jehovah, its Jesus , Jesus was the beginning of the creation by God, the only-one created by Jehovah alone. and as verse 2 says this one was in the beginning with God

 

[may]

The Word was Jehovah.

Now the question is who was Jehovah with.... "the Word was with God", if the Word is Jehovah, then who is referred to as God in this context?

PS - I don't mean to redirect your thread, I'm just curious.

the word or logos isnt Jehovah its Jesus , the first-born of creation , the only-one created by Jehovah alone , everything else was created through Jesus.

 

[may]

I believe...

In John 1:1-5...the Eternal Word is defined as being both God and Christ...

"In the beginning, was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not comprehend it."

John 1 ;18 no man has seen God, and john 1 ;14 so the word became flesh , the word is Jesus not God , he was an only-begotten son. translating 1;1 wrongly leads to false thoughts about Jesus. finding out from the bible who Jesus really is, leads to everlasting life John 17;3

 

[FFH]

May, this is another classic case where the King James has been changed and does not reflect the original content.

Joseph Smith has received inspiration concerning the errors in the King James version of John 1

John 1
Joseph Smith inspired version

1 In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made which was made.

4 In him was the gospel, and the gospel was the life, and the life was the light of men;

5 And the light shineth in the world, and the world perceiveth it not.

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

7 The same came into the world for a witness, to bear witness of the light, to bear record of the gospel through the Son, unto all, that through him men might believe.

8 He was not that light, but came to bear witness of that light,

9 Which was the true light, which lighteth every man who cometh into the world;

10 Even the Son of God. He who was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God; only to them who believe on his name.

13 He was born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

14 And the same word was made 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.

15 John bear witness of him, and cried, saying, This is he of whom I spake; He who cometh after me, is preferred before me; for he was before me.

16 For in the beginning was the Word, even the Son, who is made flesh, and sent unto us by the will of the Father. And as many as believe on his name shall receive of his fullness. And of his fullness have all we received, even immortality and eternal life, through his grace.

17 For the law was given through Moses, but life and truth came through Jesus Christ.

18 For the law was after a carnal commandment, to the administration of death; but the gospel was after the power of an endless life, through Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father.

 

[FFH]

May this is a classic passage of scripture which has been butchered by the hands of men over the centuries.

It's completely sad that this most important passage of scripture has been changed so drastically so as to confuse the reader to no end...

 

[may]

May this is a classic passage of scripture which has been butchered by the hands of men over the centuries.

It's completely sad that this most important passage of scripture has been changed so drastically so as to confuse the reader to no end...

now this is more like it such be

In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in [the] beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.

 

[sojourner]

the word or logos isnt Jehovah, its Jesus , Jesus was the beginning of the creation by God, the only-one created by Jehovah alone. and as verse 2 says this one was in the beginning with God

Then, how do you justify the next statement in that passage: "...and the Word was God?"

 

[Hema]

The first sound to come out of creation was "Om".

 

[sojourner]

The first sound to come out of creation was "Om".

That's because God is "om"-nipotent, "om"-iscient and "om"-nipresent.

 

[Hema]

That's because God is "om"-nipotent, "om"-iscient and "om"-nipresent.

Very cute.

Actually it's pronounced differently. It's pronounced "Aum".

 

[Katzpur]

the word or logos isnt Jehovah its Jesus , the first-born of creation , the only-one created by Jehovah alone , everything else was created through Jesus.

I disagree. I believe that the Word, or the Logos is Jehovah. I also believe it's Jesus. I'm sure you'll see this as a contradiction, but according to my theology, Jehovah = Jesus = the Son of God. Elohim = God the Father.

 

[may]

Then, how do you justify the next statement in that passage: "...and the Word was God?"

Since Jehovah is eternal and had no beginning (Ps 90:2; Re 15:3), the Word’s being with God from "the beginning" must here refer to the beginning of Jehovah’s creative works. This is confirmed by other texts identifying Jesus as "the firstborn of all creation," "the beginning of the creation by God." (Col 1:15; Re 1:1; 3:14) Thus the Scriptures identify the Word (Jesus in his prehuman existence) as God’s first creation, his firstborn Son.........................so the word was not God as some translations have put over , but the word is a god, or devine like , or like God even. and the bible does tell us that Jesus is the image of God so he is like God . which brings to mind that the name micheal means
(Mi´cha·el) [Who Is Like God?]. and the scriptures do seem to indicate that this michael in revelation 12;7 is Jesus christ as a warrior king .it all fits into place as far as i can see.
Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God’s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return.

 

[James the Persian]

Since Jehovah is eternal and had no beginning (Ps 90:2; Re 15:3), the Word’s being with God from "the beginning" must here refer to the beginning of Jehovah’s creative works. This is confirmed by other texts identifying Jesus as "the firstborn of all creation," "the beginning of the creation by God." (Col 1:15; Re 1:1; 3:14) Thus the Scriptures identify the Word (Jesus in his prehuman existence) as God’s first creation, his firstborn Son.........................so the word was not God as some translations have put over , but the word is a god, or devine like , or like God even. and the bible does tell us that Jesus is the image of God so he is like God . which brings to mind that the name micheal means
(Mi´cha·el) [Who Is Like God?]. and the scriptures do seem to indicate that this michael in revelation 12;7 is Jesus christ as a warrior king .it all fits into place as far as i can see.
Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God’s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return.

And yet for 1800+ years nobody noticed this apparently clear teaching of Scripture. Why do you think that is, May? How do you account for absolutely nobody (so far as I'm aware), even the Arians who shared your belief as to the Word being a created god, identifying Christ as the Archangel Michael prior to your group's doing so?

James