Unlike some passages, John 1:1 is one where the divinity of Jesus is indeed bound with the Trinitarian understanding. However, this is one of those areas (as I have said in general) about the Gospel of John where the real explanation may need not be a Trinity doctrine but simply Scriptures based on Greek/Roman/pagan father-son "gods" terminology that are taken too seriously/literally by Christians and JWs.
Understanding Greek language in the context of Jewish teaching is what gives us the key.
John 1:1 (NASB)
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Greek had no capital letters and nothing to identify the "one God" of Israel (because the divine name had vanished from Jewish speech) except by use of the definite article, especially in places where lesser "gods" (divine mighty ones) were spoken about. (John 10:34-35)
John 1:1 therefore reads in Greek....
"In
en the beginning
archē was
eimi the
ho Word
logos, and
kai the
ho Word
logos was
eimi with
pros · ho God
theos, and
kai the
ho Word
logos was
eimi God
theos." (Mounce Interlinear)
So it says that the Word (Jesus in his pre-human existence) was with "the God" (ho theos) and the Word was god (a divine mighty one). Addition of the indefinite article "a" is used elsewhere in the scriptures to help with the English translation.....as seen in Acts 12:22 which in the Greek says...." But
de the
ho crowd
dēmos began to shout
epiphōneō, “It is the voice phōnē of a god theos, and kai not ou of a man anthrōpos!”
Verse 14 of John 1 says that
"the Word became flesh" not "the God".
John 1:18 e.g. plainly says..
."No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him."
Here we have a direct statement that
"no one has seen God at any time" yet thousands saw Jesus. He is described as
"the only begotten god" (no capitals in Greek) and we know that "the God" (YHWH) is not "begotten". As "the Word", (logos) he is, and always was a 'spokesman' for his God and Father....conveying God's word to others.
Yes, Christians already agree with that in the sense that Christians don't believe that Jesus (the Son) is the Father. Christians are not claiming that the Father became flesh.
Splitting God up into three different persons makes it possible to pretend that polytheism is in fact monotheism. But Christendom's God is not the God of the Jews....he is not the God of Jesus Christ. (John 20:17)
Well, it's pagans that believe in "gods", remember what I have been saying about Greek/Roman/pagan influence and JWs and Christians taking Scriptures too seriously/literally. Case in point.
And in the context of pagan Greek language usage, we can only understand what is written with a Jewish understanding of the true nature of their God. (Deuteronomy 6:4) There is a time to be literal and a time to be figurative.....the truth revealed in God's word allows us to discern the difference.
Yes and this is where the distinction between "nature" and "person" must be understood in Trinitarian Christian theology. Christians interpret this as "Son of God" and that Jesus has the same infinite eternal/uncreated divine nature as the Father and therefore is equal with the Father in terms of nature but yet is a distinct person (related to the Trinity doctrine). JWs interpret this to mean that Jesus is a created being, "son" instead of "Son". I would say that if one interprets these Scriptures literally/seriously then it would be more of a stretch to say that a "divine" being is created than to say that He is equal in nature with the Father (God).
And by what do you judge this to be so? The scriptures themselves tell us that Jesus is a created being.
Colossians 1:15-16: (NASB)
"15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him."
The term "firstborn" means literally the first child in a family (used elsewhere in the scripture to describe other firstborn children)
"Only begotten" is "monogenes" and is used elsewhere to describe an only child. Neither of these terms take on special meaning outside of what was understood in Jewish life when applied to Jesus. Jews well understood his relationship to his Father. He was not God Almighty, but as God's "firstborn" ,he was next in line to his Father....but never his equal.
This firstborn son was used by the Father as the agency "through" which all other creation was fabricated.(Genesis 1:26-27; Proverbs 8:30-31)
Jesus calls himself
"the Beginning of the creation of God" in Revelation 3:14.
At any rate, in regards to John 1:1, I think the Trinity doctrine does the best it can to explain these Scriptures (again, for those Christians who interpret these Scriptures literally/seriously). To me, again, this is an example of Jewish theology mixed with Greek/Roman/pagan theology possibly also under pressure/influence of the Roman government so I am not sure how seriously anyone should take these Scriptures.
Actually, Jewish theology had little to do with it.....Constantine's fusion "universal religion" was a mix of weakened apostate Christianity and pagan Roman sun worship. The pagan influence obviously being the stronger of the two in a world influenced by the devil. (1 John 5:19)
Here's the way I look at it. What happens when a messianic Jewish movement gets modified by the Roman government and pagan theology and centuries later a Roman Emperor says he wants these matters settled by the scholars at the time who have these Scriptures to go by? What happens? You get a Trinity doctrine in regards to the one true God understood by Jewish people but the doctrine could also apply conceptually to Saturn-Jupiter Zeus-Hercules and many other father-son "gods". (Council of Nicea)
I agree, except that the "Jewish messianic movement" wasn't a new form of Judaism....it was a return to the true worship that God had instituted on Mt Sinai. Christianity was not a new religion, but the same worship of the same God under a new covenant. The "weeds" of false Christianity were foretold and they took over the church as weeds usually do.
Jewish monotheism was modified by "the church" to incorporate the ancient Babylonian concept of a three in one godhead and all manner of other pagan concepts crept in with it. This is what forms the foundations of Christendom....a place where Christ has never set foot. (Matthew 7:21-23)
