We can know the meaning of John 1:1 from John 1:3

[idav]

Jn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The “WORD” is God, and that is, the Lord Jesus Christ. The “WORD” and God are ONE.
Jn 1:14 And the 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.

Like I said the word became flesh, jesus is a person with a body made afterward.

 

[viole]

The Word of God is the Lord Jesus Christ that became flesh is John 1:14. Now, without The Word of God, which is, the Lord Jesus Christ, nothing we have seen or anything that human have seen from the beginning of time, from Genesis chapter 1 and 2 to the present, will be made and be seen.

IOW, “BY” or “BECAUSE” or “THROUGH” [a Greek preposition “dia’ that is in argument here] The Word of God, and that is, the Lord Jesus Christ, none of the events that took place from Genesis 1 and 2 to the present time would have taken place.

So, John says, basically, that everything we see or have seen has been created by God , or the Word thereof. It is not exactly what John 1:3 says, though. He says that everything that has been made, would not have been made without God.

I actually agree with him, on second thought, if we equivocate between what we observe and what has been made. It is basically what naturalists think as well, for we don't believe that anything we oberve in nature has been made, which leads to the conclusion that God does not exist (otherwise all those things would have been made).

But I wonder why you need additional confirmation by John if Genesis says the same.

IOW again, “The Word” of God, and that is, the Lord Jesus Christ, is the creator of everything known and unknown to human mind.

This sentence contains a redundancy and an absurdity.

Everything is either known or unknown to human mind. So, it would have been sufficient to say: the Lord Is the creator of everything, period.

But if He is the creator of everything, then He is the creator of Himself, if He is something.

It’s really hard to argue against John 1:1-3.

It is actually very easy.

Ciao

- viole

 

[JM2C]

1)
Then check out the century or so of debate among NT/classical/Greek scholars on anarthrous definite nouns that revolve around whether "and the word was god" equates "the word" with the "God" (as even in Christian & Hellenistic Jewish literature, theos doesn't necessarily mean the Jewish or Christian God).

Why argue on John 1:3 about The “Word”, with the definite article, as the “not the creator“, if it was “the word was a god” in verse 1?


Should we argue first if there was a definite article in verse 1 before we go to verse 3? That would have settled everything right there in verse 1 and didn’t have to argue in verse 3 if there was no definite article at all in verse 1.


Some do argue from verse 1, but you have to re-write the whole NT, ‘cause the Lord Jesus Christ as God is all over the NT.


I think you knew that there is a definite article in verse 1 ’cause you knew language, the Classical Greek, better than those who were trying pervert the Word of God.

 

[idav]

Why argue on John 1:3 about The “Word”, with the definite article, as the “not the creator“, if it was “the word was a god” in verse 1?

Why make a distinction between the word and god if there is no difference?

 

[idav]

Some do argue from verse 1, but you have to re-write the whole NT, ‘cause the Lord Jesus Christ as God is all over the NT.

Jesus makes a distinction all over the NT as well, despite his verse that he is one with the father but that can be taken in a number of ways, as long as the distinction like "the will of the father not mine" holds.

 

[JM2C]

Why make a distinction between the word and god if there is no difference?

There was no distinction from my side as I have explained it already.

 

[JM2C]

Jesus makes a distinction all over the NT as well, despite his verse that he is one with the father but that can be taken in a number of ways, as long as the distinction like "the will of the father not mine" holds.

Can you provide the verse or verses

 

[JM2C]

But if He is the creator of everything, then He is the creator of Himself, if He is something.

Should we read Genesis first before we assume on something that we are not sure about? When do you think time started?

 

[JM2C]

This sentence contains a redundancy and an absurdity.

Jn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jn 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
It maybe redundant and irrational to you, that is, because you can not see the message of John, which is idiomatic, and only those with spiritual perceptions could really understand the meaning of these “redundancies”, but they are not irrational, rather, they are what we Christians call the “revelations” from God.

I cannot force you to understand things you can not understand.

 

[idav]

Can you provide the verse or verses

John 17:3
"This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent."

Mark 13:32 (NASB)
"But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."

1 Timothy 2:5 (NASB)
For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, ...

1 Corinthians 8:6 (NASB)
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

Ephesians 4:5-6 (NASB)
one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.

 

[idav]

John 17:3
"This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent."

Mark 13:32 (NASB)
"But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."

1 Timothy 2:5 (NASB)
For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, ...

1 Corinthians 8:6 (NASB)
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

Ephesians 4:5-6 (NASB)
one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.

That doesn't change the fact that jesus points to gods will, and the verse referenced calls it Gods creation, as in not Jesus creation.

Also the will doesn't even come from Jesus but at the same time does have independence.
"For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me."

I also mentioned the will of the father being sepearte earlier in the thread. John 6:38

 

[JM2C]

If something has been made, then it is impossible that nothing has been made.

So, the author is begging the question.

What author you are talking about, you are the one who wrote this circular fallacy.

 

[JM2C]

It assumes that everything that exists has been made and deduces that without a maker this everything would not be made.

Again, the author or John, if we are talking about John the apostle, did not assume anything in John 1:3 ‘cause it was God who authorized John to write what he wrote in the gospel of John.

John did not write anything base on his own opinion only and that is the meaning of “assume” to take for granted without any proof at all.

You see how human make his own fallacy by twisting the word of God and blame it on Him.

Not today dude!

 

[JM2C]

It is the logical equivalent of saying: without storks no child that was carried by storks has been carried by storks.
Which does not look very deep, even if technically true.

Hen and the egg. Appeal to ignorance or confusing cause and effect. I think both.

 

[JM2C]

If that is the inspired word of god, then I think god need to study logical fallacies. i am afraid.
Ciao
- viole

You made it look like logical fallacy with your circular fallacy and blame it on God.

The Word of God is absolute.
Human can not understand the Word of God.
Therefore, human is to blame and not God.

Not begging the question here but more like syllogism.

 

[JM2C]

But I wonder why you need additional confirmation by John if Genesis says the same.

I thought you are the one looking for an additional confirmation with all these questions you have. I am good where I am right now, are you?

 

[JM2C]

Compare this,

I think the verse has a logical fallacy embedded in it.

to this,

So, John says, basically, that everything we see or have seen has been created by God , or the Word thereof.
It is not exactly what John 1:3 says, though.
He says that everything that has been made, would not have been made without God.

Made or created in China is like everything we see or have seen were made or created in China. Without made or created in China we would be naked, wouldn’t we?

 

[JM2C]

John 17:3
"This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent."

If you read verse 2 it says,
Jn 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

In what state the Lord Jesus Christ was in this verse?

Incarnate state.
Remember in John 1:14 “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us” here on earth. -Read V4.

If you read carefully in verses 2 and 3, who gives eternal life? Both!

The only distinction here is, God in heaven, and the Lord Jesus Christ in the flesh, here on earth -read v4- but as far as giving eternal, only God and the Lord Jesus Christ can do that.

Do you know any god/s or human can do that?

 

[viole]

What author you are talking about, you are the one who wrote this circular fallacy.

John 1:3

3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

I assume you are not speaking of Elton John or other people who share the same name.

So, if you mean John the apostle, or whomever he was, that is exactly what he wrote: without him nothing was made that has been made.

Which is obviously absurd. For if something has been made, how is it possible that without him it was not made?

Does His non existence unmake things?

Either John, or his alleged inspirer, (or both) don't seem to be very confident with logic, I am afraid.

Ciao

- viole

 

[idav]

If you read verse 2 it says,
Jn 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

In what state the Lord Jesus Christ was in this verse?

Incarnate state.
Remember in John 1:14 “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us” here on earth. -Read V4.

If you read carefully in verses 2 and 3, who gives eternal life? Both!

The only distinction here is, God in heaven, and the Lord Jesus Christ in the flesh, here on earth -read v4- but as far as giving eternal, only God and the Lord Jesus Christ can do that.

Do you know any god/s or human can do that?

He can give eternal life but was given it first. He was "given power over the flesh". There is a huge distinction here. I am not arguing christ isn't god but I do argue to what extent.

We are given the same opportunity in John 1 verses 12 and 13. "12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God."

Meaning Jesus is first born but not the last.