 |
Bible-Discussion.com Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Texas Kitten
Joined: 19 Dec 2007 Posts: 135 Location: Ontario
|
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:02 am Post subject: An examination of John 1:1-20- The context reveals what? |
|
|
An examination of John 1: 1-20! The context Reveals What?
Trinitarians will take this scripture out of context using only verse 1 to support the Trinity Doctrine. It is true most Bible Translations word this scripture in this manner: "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God." Ignoring the entire context of this scripture, that to them is the last word. To them, Jesus was God, and he was with himself. Does that sound a trifle strange to you, the reader? It should, because it is. Right from the outset there is something wrong with their teaching. That is because they are ignoring what the entire context is saying. When one takes the entire context into consideration, as should be done, quite a different picture emerges than what the Trinitarians would have us believe. Note how my Websters New World Dictionary defines this word 'Context.' ...
... a joining together ... to weave together ... ... the parts of a sentence, paragraph, discourse/ immediately next to or surrounding a specified word or passage and determining its exact meaning / to quote a remark out of context/ the whole situation, background, or environment relative to a particular event, personality, creation, ect."
Did you notice? One can, 'quote a remark out of context'? By reading only one verse of scripture, or perhaps two, Trinitarians are quoting John 1:1 out of context and clouding the true meaning of what the entire context is saying, because reading the context in its entirety, shows their thinking to be terribly wrong.
Permit me now to 'join together' or 'weave together' certain other verses of this scripture in John 1: 1-18 so we can see clearly what the entire context is saying. Beginning with verse 1 which informs us: "In the beginning was the Word" ... Now Bible scholars recognize that the Word spoken about here is, none other than our Lord Jesus Christ. He is identified by that name in the Revelation by John, in the following words: "And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in Blood: and his name is called THE WORD OF GOD."
[Revelation 19:13] So, no doubt Jesus is the Word that was with God in the beginning.
Now, I will follow the rule given by Paul at 2 Corinthians 13:1 to supply two or three witnesses to, what I will now point out about the Christ being with the Father in the beginning. My first witness is found at Micah 5:2 where we learn this: "But thou, Beth'-le-hem Eph'-ra-tah, though thou be little among the Thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." So, according to that verse Jesus has been in existence from, as it said, 'from of old.' Paul adds to that this information: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature." [Colossians 1:15] Added to that, John calls Jesus "The faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God." [Revelation 3:14] Now, I know from experience that Trinitarians will try to distort the aforementioned scriptures, but they do that to their own peril. I will go on to show why that is. "Ye shall not add unto the word that I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." [Deuteronomy 4: 2] Compare [Deuteronomy 12: 32] [Proverbs 30:6] {Ecclesiastes 3:14] Now just how serious is adding to, or subracting from Jehohah's Word of Truth? The Apostle John in the Revelation account will answer that: "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this Book: And if any man shall take away from the words of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of life, and out of the Holy City, and from the things that are written in this Book." [Revelalation 22: 18,19] My advice to you Trinitarians is, don't tamper with Jehovah's word of Truth. Leave it alone! If you value at all your opportunity for everlasting life under God's Kingdom!
Thus far we see that Jesus has been with the Father from the beginning, being himself 'the beginning of the creation by God,' the 'firstborn of all creation.' As well, we have learned that he is the word who was with God in the beginning. Now move on down to verse fourteen and consider these words of John: "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." Now does this scripture tell us that God became flesh, and dwelt among us? Does it tell us that we beheld the glory of God? No! It does not does it! Now consider verse 18 where we read these words: "No man has seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosum of the Father, he hath declared him."
Now would be a good time to use scripture to support scripture. By this, I am making reference to the words of Jesus at John 5:37 where Jesus is telling us this: "And the Father himself which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape." Now all of Jesus followers saw his shape, and heard his voice.. They stood face to face with Jesus, saw clearly his form, heard clearly his voice, but Jesus very pointedly said, "Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. So, then, how could Jesus himself have been God? The truth is, he simply was not God Jehovah in the flesh. That is a Trinitarian lie, that is seen clearly now. I think in this instance we should believe the words of Jesus, for he taught nothing but the truth. Listen to this further truth stated by Jesus: "Not that any man has seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father." Of course, in his heavenly existence he would have had to have seen his Father on many occassions. But, again, he pointed out that no man had ever seen the Father, because no man could look directly at Jehovah God and continue living. Jehovah told Moses who had asked, "I beseech thee, shew me thy glory. He was told, in part: "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me and live." [Exodus 34: 12-20] First Century Christians looked upon the face of Christ, and yet there is no record of anyone ever dying because of that fact. No Christ was not God in the flesh. That is so far from the truth its laughable.
In conclusion then, I would like to focus attention back to my dictionary definition of this word, "Context" a reading of it again is very revealing: "A joining together, to weave together" ... "the parts of a sentence, paragraph, discourse, etc immediately next to or surrounding a specified word or passage and determining its exact meaning... the whole situation, background, or environment relevant to a particular event, personality, creation, etc. In other words, no one simply reads the first line of a discourse, and from that set forth a hard and fast interpretation, without first taking the entire discourse into consideration. The only way to determine the exact meaning of Johns discourse would be by examining closely every word, every sentence, every paragraph. When one does that with John 1: 1-18 he will find he has a very different picture painted than what the Trinitarians would have us believe is the case.
I have shown that by joining together, or weaving together certain passages in John 1: 1-18 and then by supplying other supportive scriptures from the Bible, as I have done, one comes up with a picture quite different from the one drawn by Trinitarians. One must examine closely the whole situation as described by John in order to determine the exact meaning of what John is trying to draw out in his discourse.
By ignoring what is being focused on in the entire context, and setting forth an interpretation based on only one sentence; one is not only robbing himself, but he/she is robbing others of accurate knowledge of Jehovah and his Son, because only the truth will set us free, and only the truth will put us on the road to everlasting life. Trinitarians would rob us of these treasures, by teaching a doctrine that completely misrepresents Jehovah God and his dear Son, Jesus Christ.[John 8:32] [John 17:3] By following this lying doctrine one would be led on a path to certain death at the hands of the two who are being so sadly misrepresented. Jehovah and his Son Jesus Christ!
So, what does a thorough examination of John 1: 1-20 reveal? The context reveals that the Trinity Doctrine ia a teaching inspired by demons, for who else would wish to so malign our great creator and his Son Jesus Christ, so as to mislead mankind into believing something about the creator and his son that is simply not true? [1 Timothy 4:1] [Revelation 12:9] [1 John 5:19] [2 Corinthians 4:3,4] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
ragman13 Labrador
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
 Posts: 320
|
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hello Texas,
I enjoyed your opening post. I was very excited to read your exposition of John 1: 1-18 because you were so concerned about keeping it in context.
But:
| Texas wrote: | | I have shown that by joining together, or weaving together certain passages in John 1: 1-18 and then by supplying other supportive scriptures from the Bible, as I have done, one comes up with a picture quite different from the one drawn by Trinitarians. One must examine closely the whole situation as described by John in order to determine the exact meaning of what John is trying to draw out in his discourse. |
You quoted parts of two verses out of eighteen from John 1 :1-18 and then took a bunch of other verses, and wove them into your argument. If you would like I would be more than happy to discuss 1-18 with you in a word for word discussion. You have however done exactly what you state that Trinitarians do; you have used selected passages and taken them out of context.
May I suggest step one, Study the passage itself. Step two study it in comparison to the rest of the Book of John. Step three study it in comparison to other writings of John. Then step four study it in comparison to the rest of scripture.
I know that time will not permit us to do this all here but we can start by studying the selected text.
I will be in class until Sunday, but I will try and keep up with your posts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
45degreeN King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
   Posts: 2455 Location: Salem Oregon
|
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
It seems the anti-trinitarians would never be happy except if somehow there was a plain English statement in scripture stating "I am God" attributed to Jesus and even then they wouldn't accept it as being real.
Arguments like this one are habituated by people of dogma rather than faith and they bat their heads against each other in essence saying "I'm right, you're wrong." Few if any people change their minds since they are dogmatic about their positions and feel animosity towards anyone who disagrees.
This is merely one of those sites within scripture that people point to as proof and yet no one is convinced. Both sides it seems have their explanations about why it says what it says and like two ships in the night crossing paths nothing changes.
What they cant do is offer some overwhelming proof, simply because the Bible offers no proof of such a thing. Proofs are not of faith they are of knowledge. God wants us to operate out of faith and since knowledge destroys faith there is no proof. There has never been a person outside of Jesus Himself who knows God the way God knows Himself. Anyone today who claims to know God in this way is a liar.
Outside of dogmatic statements meant to separate people of faith from each other there is no use for such an argument. Dogmatic statements are for weak minds who feel insecure in what little they know and attempt to control other's path to God. Lastly God is not understandable in the human sphere and anyone who attempts such an argument will end up with futility |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lone-traveler Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 02 Jul 2005
   Posts: 6342 Location: USA
|
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Texas..
You mind if I go diggin with ya?..
Gen 15:1 After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.
Exo 6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Rev 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
Deu 4:7 For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for?
Isa 55:6 Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near:
Isa 55:7 Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Joh 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
Joh 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
That was cool see that??
IN HIM..was LIFE.
I am come in my Father's name.
Joh 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Joh 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Joh 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection,: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:
Joh 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Col 3:4 When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
Joh 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
Joh 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.
So the way I'm hearing this is..
God is life. When the (son) was born he was given life.
So then the life that he had was not his own life but God who gave it to him.
And it is God in the flesh who gave himself a new name Jesus.
So then God/life created a vessel (son) to put his own life in. So that God through his life in his son could save the world from death by giving his own life for it.
And because God created life in the beginning, even before he created death, it was not possible for death to be greater than life.
It was not possible for the thing that was created to destroy the one which created it.
Joh 8:53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?
That's like asking God..who do you think you are?..
Joh 8:54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:
Joh 8:55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.
Joh 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
Joh 8:57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
Joh 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
They believed Abraham to be "dead". And so Jesus told them their father is dead. They had no faith in life. No faith in the resurrection. no faith in hope..no seed of Abraham in them.
If you don't have faith like your father Abraham who believed God/me/life/resurrection..and you believe that the faith Abraham had went to the grave with him, then you are dead too.
And you don't know life or hope or love or grace or mercy or truth..because when you buried Abraham you buried the truth of who I am.
You burried me.
I'm Back...
just diggin texas..
hugs
lone |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pastor2022 Moderator
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
 Posts: 693
|
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would agree with Ragman on this. If you're going to examine a passage of scripture correctly, then you need to do proper exegesis and hermeneutics before homeletics. And that means exegeting the entire passage in question in context.
I would also strongly suggest that one needs to use the Greek text or the LXX and not the NWT, KJV, NKJV, etc. to do exegesis.
Without the above, all you're going to get into is a debate about what each "believes" not what does the text "say."
God bless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
45degreeN King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
   Posts: 2455 Location: Salem Oregon
|
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pastor 2022: is there not scriptural evidence for both sides of this debate? I think it is unresolvable. Are we to weigh each syllable and see which weighs more and then agree that one word more than the other makes the argument sounder?
What do we gain by being the victor in this debate? Saying we're right and the other is wrong? So we can force the other to change? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pastor2022 Moderator
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
 Posts: 693
|
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 45degreeN wrote: | Pastor 2022: is there not scriptural evidence for both sides of this debate? I think it is unresolvable. Are we to weigh each syllable and see which weighs more and then agree that one word more than the other makes the argument sounder?
What do we gain by being the victor in this debate? Saying we're right and the other is wrong? So we can force the other to change? |
The point of exegesis and hermeneutics is not to prove someone wrong or right but to find out what the Word of God is saying. If what it says confirms what you believe, well and good, but, if it contradicts what you believe then you should seriously consider revising your beliefs to conform to the Word of God. The problem too often is that people go into interpretation with their minds already made up about the text means without doing proper exegesis and hermenuetics to discover what the text means. I can proof text all day long to make some doctrine I want to believe true. That's bad hermeneutics and is what a lot of cults, etc. do to prove their "false doctrines." Or, I can write my own version of the Bible and declare it the "most reliable." That's bad exegesis and hermeneutics and translation (if any at all!).
That was my point in my post above. If proper exegesis and hermeneutics are done, then you can do proper homeletics. Perhaps, homeletics is where there can be some differences (maybe even to some degree even in interpretation as we all have some bias I grant). But the fact remains, the Word of God still says what It says and there is a proper method for interpretation.
God bless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Texas Kitten
Joined: 19 Dec 2007 Posts: 135 Location: Ontario
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 5:25 am Post subject: ... 'anti-Trinitarians." |
|
|
| 45degreeN wrote: | It seems the anti-trinitarians would never be happy except if somehow there was a plain English statement in scripture stating "I am God" attributed to Jesus and even then they wouldn't accept it as being real.
Arguments like this one are habituated by people of dogma rather than faith and they bat their heads against each other in essence saying "I'm right, you're wrong." Few if any people change their minds since they are dogmatic about their positions and feel animosity towards anyone who disagrees.
This is merely one of those sites within scripture that people point to as proof and yet no one is convinced. Both sides it seems have their explanations about why it says what it says and like two ships in the night crossing paths nothing changes.
What they cant do is offer some overwhelming proof, simply because the Bible offers no proof of such a thing. Proofs are not of faith they are of knowledge. God wants us to operate out of faith and since knowledge destroys faith there is no proof. There has never been a person outside of Jesus Himself who knows God the way God knows Himself. Anyone today who claims to know God in this way is a liar.
Outside of dogmatic statements meant to separate people of faith from each other there is no use for such an argument. Dogmatic statements are for weak minds who feel insecure in what little they know and attempt to control other's path to God. Lastly God is not understandable in the human sphere and anyone who attempts such an argument will end up with futility |
"45 Degree N"
Consider the following:
Statements about the Trinity Doctrine from various sources!
The illustrated Bible Dictionary: "The word Trinity is not found in the Bible. It did not find a place formally in the theology of the Church till the 4th Century."
New Catholic Encyclopedia: "the Trinity is not directly and immediately {the] word of God."
The encyclopedia of Religion: "Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity."
New Catholic encyclopedia says: "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the O[ld] T[estament]."
In his Book The Triune God, Jesuit Edmond Fortman admits: "The Old Testament ... tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit ... There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead ... Even to see in ["Old Testament"] suggestions or foreshadowings or 'veiled signs' of the Trinity of persons is to go beyond the words and intent of the sacred writers."
A dictionary of Religious knowledge notes that many say that the Trinity "is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and ingrafted on the Christian faith." And The Paganism in our Christianity declares: "The origin of the [Trinity] is entirely pagan."
The Encyclopedia of Religion says: "Theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity."
Jesuit Fortman states: "The New Testament writers ... give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are thre co-equal divine persons ... Nowhere do we find any trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead."
The new encyclopedia Britannica observes: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament."
Bernard Lohse says in A short History of Christian Doctrine: "As far as the New Testament is concerned, one does not find in it an actual doctrine of the Trinity.”
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology similarly states: “The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity. ‘The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of equal essence’ [said Protestant theologian Karl Barth.”]
Yale University Professor E. Washburn Hopkins affirmed: “To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the Trinity was apparently unknown; ... they say nothing about it.” --- Origin and Evolution of Religion.
Historian Arthur Weigall notes: “Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word ‘Trinity’ appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord.” --- The Paganism in our Christianity -
The New International Dictionary of the New Testament Theology tells us: “Primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds.”
“The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the [Trinity] idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognised the Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in one.” --- The Paganism in our Christianity --
“At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian ... It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the N[ew] T[estament] and other early Christian writings.” Encyclopedia of Religion and ethics.
“The formulation ‘one God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the fourth Century. ... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” -- New Catholic Encyclopedia
I think that should about do it! Don't you? Texas |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|