The God
Chapter Six
John 1:1-2: In the beginning was the Word (Greek: logos throughout), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God (KJV).
The Greek word logos appears 330 times in the NT and is translated into English primarily as “word” or “saying.” Its basic meaning is “to speak.” This word is derived from the verb legein which means to “say or speak.” It can also mean “reason or mind.” Nothing in its definition denotes personhood. The capitalization of “word” (logos) in John 1:1-2 does not indicate personhood for logos. Some English translations prior to the 1611 KJV did not capitalize “word” because it is not capitalized in the Greek texts used for translation. The Greek texts of the NT capitalize the Greek words for God and Jesus in John chapter one but not the word logos. For example, the Tyndale translation of the NT printed in 1526 in the English of that day reads as follows:
John 1: 1-3: In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. The same was in the beginnynge with God. All thinges were made by it and with out it was made nothinge that was made.
In this translation the non-capitalization of “word” better reflects the Greek in that it doesn’t give the false perception of the logos being a person. It should also be noted that “it” is used instead of “Him” to refer to “word.” In all eight English versions of the NT prior to the 1611 KJV translation, the word “it” is used instead of “Him” to identify logos and express what logos does.
Since there is nothing in the word logos to indicate personhood and since this word means “to speak” and is also defined as “reason or mind,” John’s use of logos should not be seen as a direct reference to the person of the Son but instead seen as the expressed will, purpose and thought of the one God by which He brought the Son into existence.
The phrase “and the word was with God” is not a person being with God but is purpose, knowledge and wisdom being with God. In Job 12:13 the writer speaks of God by saying, “With him is wisdom and strength, he hath counsel and understanding.” In Proverbs 8, wisdom is seen as existing from the beginning and being the instrument whereby God creates. The Hebrew word translated wisdom in this chapter is qanah and is very similar in meaning to logos. Here is a portion of what is written about wisdom in this chapter.
Proverbs 8:1: Does not wisdom call out? Does not understanding raise her voice?
Proverbs 8:22: The Lord (YHWH) possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old (KJV).
Proverbs 8:27-31: I (wisdom) was there when he set the heavens in place, when he marked out the horizon on the face of the deep, when he established the clouds above and fixed securely the fountains of the deep, when he gave the sea its boundary so the waters would not overstep his command, and when he marked out the foundations of the earth. Then I (wisdom) was the craftsman at his side. I (wisdom) was filled with delight day after day, rejoicing always in his presence, rejoicing in his whole world and delighting in mankind.
Many Scriptures speak of YHWH Elohim, through knowledge wisdom, and purpose of thought, creating heaven and earth.
Proverbs 3:19-20: By wisdom the LORD (YHWH) laid the earth's foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place; by his knowledge the deeps were divided, and the clouds let drop the dew.
Psalm 104:24: How many are your works, O LORD (YHWH)! In wisdom you made them all; the earth is full of your creatures.
Jeremiah 10:12: But God (Elohim) made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding.
In the Apocrypha book of Wisdom is found a prayer of Solomon that speaks of God creating through His word.
Wisdom 9:1-4: God of my fathers, LORD (YHWH) of mercy. you who have made all things by your word and in your wisdom have established man to rule the creatures produced by you, To govern the world in holiness and justice, and to render judgment in integrity of heart: Give me Wisdom, the attendant at your throne.
Here the author speaks of God by His word making all things and in His wisdom establishing man to rule. The author writes that wisdom is attendant at the very throne of God. Is the word of God and the wisdom attendant at his throne a person of a Triune indwelling of Father, Son and Spirit or is the word of God His cognitive function whereby He creates and sustains all things?
There are Biblical Scriptures that make it clear YHWH created all things through His word which is seen as the breath of His month. The Psalmist writes of God speaking His creation into existence.
Psalm 33:6-9: By the word of the LORD (YHWH) were the heavens made, their starry host by the breath of his mouth. He gathers the waters of the sea into jars; he puts the deep into storehouses. Let all the earth fear the LORD (YHWH); let all the people of the world revere him. For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood firm.
Trinitarianism teaches God is Father, Son and Spirit. OT Scripture identifies YHWH as Father. Nowhere is YHWH identified as Father, Son and Spirit. The Psalmist writes that YHWH by His word (the breath of His month) spoke the creation into existence. YHWH is identified as creator. Trinitarianism teaches God (YHWH) created everything through the person of the Son who is seen as the word John writes about in John, chapter one. Yet we see nothing in OT creation passages that suggest YHWH created through a person called the Son. There is nothing in OT creation passages to suggest the word of God is actually a person of a tri-unity of Father, Son and Spirit.
Although Trinitarianism teaches God is Father, Son and Spirit, it also teaches they are not each other. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father and the Spirit is not the Father or the Son. Father, Son and Spirit are seen as distinctions or dimensions of the single entity that is God (YHWH Elohim). Trinitarians see the Father, Son and Spirit indwelling each other. This concept of mutual indwelling of Father, Son and Spirit is derived from several Scriptural passages.
Colossians 2:9: For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form.
John 10:30 I and the Father are one. John 14:9-11: Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father….Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me.
While it is true the Scriptures speak of Jesus and the Father being one and the Father being in Christ and Christ in the Father, the Scriptures also speak of the Father being in us and we in the Father and we being one as Christ and the Father are one.
John 17:22: “I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one.
John 14:20: “On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.”
Colossians 2:10: and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority.
Ephesians 3:19: that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.
1 John 4:12, 15: No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us. If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God.
The oneness and fullness passages do not show that we become God as the Father is God and neither do the oneness and fullness passages pertaining to Jesus and the Father show Jesus to be God as the Father is God. These are statements pertaining to being one in spirit and purpose as Jesus and the Father are. The Scriptures clearly show God indwells us and we indwell God. This obviously doesn’t mean we are God as God is God.
Because Trinitarians believe the Father and Son dwell in each other in a literal sense, they understand John 1:1-2 to read in the following ways:
John 1:1-2: In the beginning was the Word (the Son), and the Word (the Son) was with God (Father, Son and Spirit) and the Word (the Son) was God (Father, Son and Spirit). The same (Jesus) was in the beginning with God (Father, Son and Spirit).
John 1:1-2: In the beginning was the Word (the Son), and the Word (the Son) was with God (A dimension of God) and the Word (the Son) was God (a dimension of God). The same (Jesus) was in the beginning with God (A dimension of God).
Some Trinitarians see the first mention of God in John 1:1 and the reference to God in verse two as referring to the Father and understand John 1:1-2 to read as follows:
John 1:1-2: In the beginning was the Word (the Son), and the Word (the Son) was with God (The Father) and the Word (the Son) was God (Father, Son and Spirit or a dimension of God). The same (Jesus) was in the beginning with God (The Father).
There is a branch of Christianity called “Oneness theology” which rejects Trinitarianism and understands the Father is the one and only God. This theological system also believes the “Word” of John chapter one is God the Son. To avoid apparent polytheism, they see John 1:1 teaching the Son (the Word) and God (the Father) are one and the same single person. When John says the Word became flesh (verse 14), it is believed John is actually saying the one God became flesh. It is pointed out that since God is Father, when John says the Word was God it is the same as saying the Word is the Father. Therefore, the Word is seen as the manifestation of the one God who is the Father. This one God, the Father, is seen as becoming incarnate in the Son as to the Son’s Divinity and becoming Father to the Son as to the Son’s humanity. Oneness theologians read John 1:1 as:
John 1:1-2: “In the beginning was the Word (Jesus), and the Word (Jesus) was with God (The Father) and the Word (Jesus) was God (The Father). The same (Jesus) was in the beginning with God (The Father).
Believing Jesus and the Father are one and the same person does not square with the many Scriptures we have discussed which clearly show the Father and the Son to be different and separate entities. Jesus is shown as being a separate entity from the Father while He was a human and also after his ascension and glorification. Daniel 7:13-14, as quoted in chapter three, is sufficient evidence to establish the separation between Father and Son.
In view of what we have discussed in this chapter and throughout this material to this point, can it rightly be concluded John is writing about the word of God being a person of a Triune God who became the man Jesus? Would it not be more consistent with the whole of Scripture to conclude John is seeing the word of God manifested in the Son and not the actual Son? Remember, this is the same John who records Jesus as saying the Father is the only true God and the Father is the one and only God (John 17:3 and 5:44). This is the same John who quotes Jesus as saying His very life was given to Him by His Father and His Father is greater than He (John 5:26, and 14:28). This is also the same John who distinguishes Jesus from God the Father and writes of the Father being the true God and eternal life (1John 5:20).
Apostle John was a monotheist. There is every reason to believe John embraced the Hebrew Shema which defines God as one. Nothing in the Shema indicates the oneness that is God is of a pluralistic nature. Is John identifying a new way of understanding the nature of God? Are we seeing progressive revelation at work here? Is John reveling God’s oneness to be a pluralistic entity of Father and Son? I submit John is doing none of these things.
In view of what John writes about the Father being the one and only true God, it appears inconceivable John would be writing of Jesus also being this God in the introduction to His Gospel. I submit John is writing of Jesus being the manifestation of the word of God and not the literal word of God. The literal word of God is the speech of God expressed as His knowledge, wisdom, power and will. Scriptures reveal it is through God’s word that all things are created and all things exist. Understanding John’s use of the Greek logos in John 1:1-2 as relating to the speech of God is consistent with the actual meaning of this word and consistent with how this word is used throughout the NT to reflect the cognitive activity of God.
Understanding John’s use of the Greek logos as God’s spoken word allows for understanding John 1:14 to show that the will and purpose of God the Father to bring salvation to mankind was expressed in the birth of Jesus, the promised Messiah to
John 1:14: The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
The word of the Father became flesh in that the Father’s purpose as expressed by His logos was made manifest in the birth of Jesus who became the Son of the Father through the Father’s begettal of Jesus in the womb of Mary and through resurrecting Him from the dead. Jesus did not pre-exist as the “word” of the Father. Jesus is not an incarnation of the one and only God the Father. Jesus is the one and only unique human manifestation of the will and purpose of God the Father as expressed through His logos. Jesus is God’s anointed envoy to facilitate God’s purpose to have man become adoptive sons of God in an eternal relationship with Him. Jesus fulfilled this purpose of God and was subsequently elevated by God to the highest position in the universe next to God Himself.
In John 1:1-2, the logos is revealed to have been from the beginning and was with God and virtually is God. Scripture reveals the logos is the expressed wisdom, understanding, knowledge and purpose of God and thus identifies and defines who God is. We are all identified by our speech which is a reflection of our thoughts which defines the essence of who we are. The same is true of God as the scriptures reveal. Verse three of John one reveals it was through God’s logos all things were created. Using the pronoun “He” in association with logos is misleading as it suggests personhood for the logos which is not supported by the Greek construction or the Scriptures we have already discussed. Logos requires the neuter pronoun “it” as is seen in early English translations of the Greek to English.
In John 1:4-5, the Apostle writes of the logos being life and light. In 1 John 1:1-2, the Apostle writes of Jesus being the logos of eternal life which was with the Father and appeared in the first century. Trinitarians believe this identifies Jesus as the literal logos of God who has intrinsic life. Therefore, Jesus is God as the Father is God. Jesus, however, clearly said His Father is the source of His life (John 5:26). Scripture shows eternal life comes from the Father through the Son. The logos of God is expressed and manifested in Jesus in every way including that of being life and light. This doesn’t make Jesus the literal logos of God but the vehicle through whom God’s logos is articulated.
1 John 1:1-2: That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched--this we proclaim concerning the Word (logos) of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.
As previously discussed, God is identified as light and Jesus is identified as the Son of this God who is light. In John’s first epistle, light is contrasted with darkness and appears to be a way of expressing righteousness versus unrighteousness, truth versus falsehood. Jesus is seen in Scripture as reflecting the righteousness and truth that is God. Jesus said God’s word is truth and Jesus, as the manifestation of the word of God, is seen as light. The use of the word light in association with Jesus in the NT Scripture can be seen by context to refer to Jesus reflecting His Father’s will, purpose and righteousness. Jesus is the light of the world because He is a reflection of God His Father who is identified by John as one in whom there is no darkness at all and is therefore perfect light.
1 John 1:5-7: This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.
Apostle Peter shows Jesus is not the literal logos of God but is the expression of God’s logos in fulfilling the promises made to the fathers.
Acts 13:32-35: "We tell you the good news: What God promised our fathers he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm: "`You are my Son; today I have become your Father' (In KJV, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee). The fact that God raised him from the dead, never to decay, is stated in these words: "`I will give you the holy and sure blessings promised to David.'
What God promised to the fathers He fulfilled by raising Jesus from the dead. As mentioned earlier, Jesus was dead. He would have remained dead but for the resurrection facilitated by the source of all life, God the Father. The message delivered to Mary by the angel Gabriel, shows how the Son of God came to be.
Luke 1:31-35: You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end." "How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?" The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.
The one and only Eternal Creator God, here pictured as “the Most High,” would by His power (Holy Spirit) beget Jesus who through the Virgin Mary is a human descendant of David. This totally human descendant of David would be given David’s throne and because of being conceived by the power of God and later resurrected by God’s power to eternal life, He was confirmed as the Son of God.
Romans 1:3-4: regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.
Some Christian groups who, reject Trinitarianism, nevertheless see the logos in John chapter one as a pre-existent Being who became Jesus but is not one and the same with the one God who is the Father. These folks point out that the first mention of God in John 1:1 is the Greek “tov Theos” with “tov” being the grammatically definite article identifying God as “the God.” This part of the passage literally translated can read “was with the God.” The second mention of God is without the definite article and can be translated “was a god.” or “the word a god was.” It is believed that being “a god” does not equate with being “the God.” Therefore, Jesus is seen as god (with a small g) and not YHWH Elohim.
The conclusion that John 1:1-2 is speaking of the one and only true God the Father and a lesser Being also called God is based on seeing this passage according to a particular perspective as to how the Greek should be read. This perspective includes seeing the definite article or the lack thereof as a significant dynamic in determining how the word God is to be understood. My examination of this issue has led me to conclude the presence or absence of the definite article in association with the word God is not a significant dynamic as to how the word God is to be understood. Various Greek scholars have come to the same conclusion.
As is true of all languages, Greek has rules of grammar that identify and define the manner in which sentences are constructed and words are used. Various Greek scholars and grammarians have identified certain dynamics in the writing of Greek that some believe provide evidence for Jesus being co-eternal, co-equal and con-substantial with the Father. One such dynamic involves what is referred to as Colwell’s Rule.
Colwell’s Rule:
In the early 1930’s the Greek scholar E.C. Colwell, proposed a rule of Greek grammar which states that a predicate nominative (a noun in the nominative case which is more or less the same as the subject) which precedes the verb cannot be translated as an indefinite or a qualitative noun solely because of the absence of the article. If the context suggests that the predicate is definite, it should be translated as a definite noun in spite of the absence of the article. This “rule” is often applied to John 1:1 to “prove” Jesus is God in every respect that the Father and Spirit is God.
John 1:1: In the beginning was the Word (Greek logos), and the Word was with God (tov Theos), and the Word was God (Theos).
The first mention of God in this passage is tov Theos where Theos is of an articular construction meaning that Theos is preceded by the definite article tov (the) and literally means “the God.” The phrase “tov Theos” is called a predicate noun. The second mention of God is Theos without the definite article and so it is called an anarthrous noun. Anarthrous simply means non-articulated or without the article. Without the article, Theos is a singular predicate noun and occurs before the verb logos in the sentence and is literally translated “god was the word.” In Greek an articular noun points to an identity whereas a singular predicate noun points to a quality.
Trinitarians see the application of Colwell’s rule as confirmation of their position that both occurrences of God in John 1:1 refer to the one God and since it is believed the Word is Christ, it is believed Christ is the one God. It is believed since the first mention of God in this passage has the definite article, thus pointing to an identity, the second occurrence of God, even though it lacks the definite article (the), should be defined in the same manner as the first mention of the word God in this passage where God is preceded by the definite article.
It should be noted, however, that Colwell’s rule doesn’t always apply as there are numerous exceptions to this rule that have been found in the NT scriptures. It has been pointed out that Colwell’s rule applies well when the anarthrous theos is in the genitive and dative case but is not generally true when in the nominative case which is the form used in John 1:1.
More importantly, this “rule” does not require a predicate nominative which precedes the verb to be definite when a predicate in the same passage is definite. Nothing in this rule says anything about what must be definite. All the rule is saying is that if the context indicates it, a predicate nominative should be defined as definite (as though it had the definite article). Some research has shown that anarthrous predicate nominatives preceding the verb are qualitative around 94% of the time. Some feel this could indicate a high probability of the anarthrous being qualitative in John 1:1 rather than pointing to identity. By being qualitative, Word (word) could be seen as expressing a quality of God rather than identifying “the God.”
One has to question the significance of the present or absence of the definite article in establishing how Theos is being used. If Theos is used as the equivalent of the Hebrew elohim, it can be applied to the Supreme God or it can be applied to a lesser being than the Supreme God as is seen in different applications of elohim in the OT. The presence or absence of the definite article does not appear to be the determining factor. For example, it can be seen by context in John chapter one, verses 6, 12, 13 and 18, that Theos is referring to God the Father. Yet these occurrences are not preceded or followed by the definite article.
The fact that in John 1:1, the author uses the definite article in the first use of Theos and doesn’t use the article in the second use of Theos doesn’t, of itself, tell us what is intended. If John’s second use of Theos in verse one was in John’s mind equivalent to his first use of Theos and if John is using the Greek logos to signify a pre-existent Son of God, his writing presents somewhat of a dilemma.
John writes that the word was with God and was God. How can the Son be with the one God and be the one God at the same time. The Word is seen as being with “the God.” If Colwell’s rule applies to John 1:1, both appearances of Theos would have to refer to the one God. Trinitarians believe the one God is Father, Son and Spirit. If the Son is the word, John is virtually saying the Son was with the Father, Son and Spirit and the Son was the Father Son and Spirit. This is tantamount to saying the Son was with Himself and the Son is Himself.
Trinitarians try to get around this problem by saying the first mention of God refers to the Father as God and the second mention of God refers to God as God’s essence. Because of the problems seen in applying Colwell’s rule to John 1:1, some scholars, such as Daniel B Wallace in his Greek Grammar, Beyond the Basics, has concluded the first use of Theos in John 1:1 refers to the Father and the second use of Theos in John 1:1 is qualitative in that it is describing the Son as having the qualities of the Father. To say, however, that the first mention of God in John 1:1 means Father and the second mention of God means God essence is not based on any evidence that this is in fact the case. Rather, such conclusions are quite arbitrary and appear to be an attempt to make this passage support an assumed Jesus is God position.
Trinitarians sometimes point out that logos is a masculine noun in the Greek preceded by the masculine pronoun “he” which indicates the personhood of logos. However, the masculine gender in Greek has nothing to do with such identification. Masculine and feminine genders randomly apply to persons, places and things and are not at all indicative of sexuality. Though logos is masculine, and according to Greek rules of grammar requires a masculine pronoun such as “he” or “him,” this has nothing to do with the noun signifying a person. Masculine nouns often relate to places and things in the Greek language. Therefore, masculine nouns can be legitimately translated into another language with a pronoun such as “it.”
Some Christian groups take the position God is a family presently consisting of two eternal God Beings, the Father and the Son. It is believed we can be born into this God family through resurrection from the dead at a yet future return of Christ. Proponents of this position understand John 1:1 to identify the Father as one God Being and the Word (the Son) as a separate God Being. The Word of John 1:1 is seen as the Son who became Jesus. The God who the Word is seen as being with in John 1:1 is the Father who is seen as separate and superior to the Son. This position defines God as Father and Son and the Spirit as a shared power.
While this position is non-Trinitarian, it still sees the logos of John 1:1 as an eternally existing Being called the Son and as the YHWH of the OT. As will be seen throughout this material, YHWH is the one and only Supreme, Most High God and is identified as the Father and only as the Father. Jesus is the supernaturally born Son of YHWH who upon completion of His ministry was granted eternal life and great glory, power and authority over YHWH’s creation.
All of this discussion of Colwell’s rule and how it relates to John 1:1 becomes superfluous when one understands logos to be the cognitive function of God the Father whereby His will is expressed and materialized. It is through His word as facilitated by His Spirit that all creation has occurred including the creation of Jesus. When John writes that the word became flesh (John 1:14), John is informing us God expressed His word (speech, mind thought) and made it manifest through the power of His Spirit in the birth of Jesus via the supernatural impregnation of Mary.