4

John 1:3 speaks of the logos.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.

Are we at liberty to read this as if it says, all things came into being through Jesus ?

5
  • 6
    What would you not? Does not the Bible say what it means and means what it says?
    – Dottard
    Jan 9 at 4:10
  • 5
    The 'Word' was in the beginning. 'Jesus' is the name given to the one born in Bethlehem. They are the same Person, but the different aspects of that Person should be named, accordingly.
    – Nigel J
    Jan 9 at 4:15
  • 2
    Very much so, for as @NigelJ says just above, Logos/Son is the eternal Hypostasis/Person who after adoption of a human nature became also man and as any man was given a human name Jesus, but by this He did not change a bit in His divine eternal Person. You can pray to Him in both ways: "Jesus help me understand John 1:3" or "O, Logos, help me understand John 1:3", the effect will be the same for the same Person is addressed. Jan 9 at 7:26
  • 2
    The above comment is really full of eisegesis. If you read up on the history of the 'church', including their definition of "heretics" based on political advantage, you will find that the true historical origin of the modern notion of "υποστασις" is not actually in the original writings. In particular, note carefully the political purpose of the Nicene creed, and that almost surely some verses were deliberately altered to match the creed (e.g. earlier quotes of Matt 28:19 are different from later ones).
    – David
    Jan 30 at 4:04
  • 1
    Jesus himself plainly and unequivocally ascribe creation to God, not himself. Mark 13:19, Mark 10:6 and Matthew 19:4. If he is not the creator, then he is not the true God. The true God is the God that Jesus worship and prayed to, John 17:3. To say there is another Creator/ God other than the God of Jesus is polytheism. Jesus means what he says. May 7 at 17:18

10 Answers 10

2

The 'Word' was in the beginning.

'Jesus' is the name given to the one born in Bethlehem.

They are the same Person, but the different aspects of that Person should be named, accordingly.

The unique Person of Christ - 'God manifest in flesh' and 'the Word made flesh' and 'the Son of God', require care in treating of each aspect of that unique Person. And in the naming of each aspect of that unique Person.

1

Not necessarily, as Nigel J's comment has indicated. However we are also not at liberty to assume that the Logos, apart from whom not even one thing came into being that has come into being, ceased to exist when he became flesh and was given the name Jesus.

Logos, through whom all things exist, did not cease nor was He diminished when He was made into flesh. Did Jesus (Logos) bring all things into being? Yes. Did Jesus (flesh) bring all things into being? No.

If Logos did not cease when He became Jesus (flesh) then one might even dare to say, since Jesus (the incarnation) came into being through the Logos (all things being through him) that He (Jesus), as the Logos made flesh, brought himself into being. That is a unique attribute of God.

Before Abraham was, I am.

1
1

Let us compare some texts:

  • John 1:3 - Through Him [the Word] all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made.
  • Col 1:16 - all things have been created through Him [= the Son, v15] and unto Him.
  • Heb 1:2 - But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, and through whom He made the universe.

These all give a very similar message - Jesus Christ the Son of God was involved in the creation of all things. In commenting on Col 1:16 Ellicott observes:

(16) For by him . . . all things were created by (through) him, and for (to) him.—Carrying out the idea of the preceding clause with accumulated emphasis, St. Paul speaks of all creation as having taken place “by Him,” “through Him,” and “for Him.” Now we note that in Romans 11:36, St. Paul, in a burst of adoration, declares of the Father that “from Him, and through Him, and to Him are all things;” and in Hebrews 2:10 the Father is spoken of as One “by whom are all things, and for whom are all things” (the word “for whom” being different from the word so rendered here, but virtually equivalent to it). Hence we observe that the Apostle here takes up a phrase belonging only to Godhead and usually applied to the Father, and distinctly applies it to Christ, but with the significant change of “from whom” into “in whom.” The usual language of holy Scripture as to the Father is “from whom,” and as to the Son “through whom,” are all things. Thus we have in Hebrews 1:2, “through whom He made the world;” and in John 1:3-10, “All things were made”—“the world was made”—“through Him.” Here, however, St. Paul twice adds “in whom,” just as he had used “in whom” of God in his sermon at Athens (Acts 17:28), probably conveying the idea, foreshadowed in the Old Testament description of the divine “Wisdom,” that in His divine mind lay the germ of the creative design and work. and indirectly condemning by anticipation the fancy of incipient Gnosticism, that He was but an inferior emanation or agent of the Supreme God.

1

Yes! But first I would like to prove that Jesus Christ preexisted His incarnation as a man to support the fact that He is the creator.

Isaiah 9:6 says, "For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;" Jesus Christ was the Son before He was given and before He was born." To be "given" you must have preexisted.

Jesus had life in Himself according to John 1:4, "In Him was (past tense) life, and the life was the light of men." 1 John 1:1-3 backs this up.

At John 12:41 it says, "These things Isaiah said, because he saw His glory, (that is the glory of the Son) and spoke of Him." (Isaiah 6:1).

Then there are numerous verses where Jesus speaks about where He came from at John chapter 6. John 6:41, John 6:50, 51, John 6:58. At John 6:42 the Jews said, "They were saying, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, "I have come down out of heaven?"

Finally John 6:62, "What then if you should behold the Son of Man ASCENDING WHERE HE WAS BEFORE." Even the parable of the Vineyard at Mark 12:1-8 proves His preexistence.

So since Jesus preexisted His incarnation as a man it would make complete sense that He is identified clearly as the creator at John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16-17, Hebrews 1:10 by His own Father and at Revelation 3:14.

6
  • 1
    If Jesus pre-existed as a spirit being (I believe he did), this does not guarantee he was absolute creator. In John 1:1-3 and Colossians 1:16-17, Jesus is the agent of creation ("thought whom", etc.). An agent acts for the principal (God). Therefore, these verses don't credit Jesus as the direct source of creation. Revelation 3:14 seems to imply that Jesus is the first one to come into existence in God's creation. It comes down to the interpretation of the word firstborn. It usually means the first in order of something --literally or figuratively. Jan 10 at 0:51
  • @JesusSaves John 1:1-3 credits Jesus with creation. Vs2, The actual Greek is en arche-that is, "in beginning." The "Word of God " was there before the creation of the space, mass, time universe, so John's beginning "ANTECEDES" the Genesis "beginning." The main though in Genesis 1:1 is "WHAT HAPPENED" in the beginning. And in John 1:1the emphasis is on "WHO EXISTED" in the beginning." John 1:3 backs this up along with the other verses I mentioned including Revelation 3:14. The Greek word there is also "arche." We get our English word architect from that word. He is the origin/planner etc.
    – Mr. Bond
    Jan 10 at 1:40
  • 2
    I agree that John 1:1-2 describe a beginning before the Genesis creation took place. Jesus was there with God. But this does not change that Jesus is never described as the direct source of the Genesis creation. He is always an intermediary. As I understand the Bible, God is the author of creation. If God enables someone today do His work, and that person does the work for God. God would be the author/source of the work. In Jewish agency, an agent acts for the benefits of the principal as if the principal did it. Jan 10 at 2:13
  • Yes, Jesus was there with God and 1:1 says He was God, past tense. Isaiah 44:24, I, the Lord am the maker of ALL things, Stretching out the heavens BY MYSELF, Spreading out the earth ALL ALONE. So why does God need a created being to help Him? There is a difference between the words "by" and "through." By indicates ORIGIN or by the agency of. Through indicates the manner in which something is achieved. Yes, the Jews have the law of agency, "shaliah" acts as a emissary or messenger as a legal agent for a principal. The angel of the Lord, the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ is a messenger in the OT.
    – Mr. Bond
    Jan 10 at 2:50
  • There are many OT and NT verses which state that God is the Creator. Of course, if you're starting from the premise that Jesus is the Almighty God, then those verses do nothing to disprove that premise, and then, by extension, it only follows that "Jesus is the Creator". In Mark 13:19 Jesus clearly proclaims God, his Father, to be the Creator. Nothing ambiguous that I can see there. But, to make that point absolutely clear, shouldn't Jesus have echoed his statement in Mark 13:19 many, many times in the NT, so as to leave no room for doubt about God being Creator? I guess he could have. Sep 11 at 19:38
1

Does John 1:3 identify Jesus Christ as the creator?

The answer to your question is "No".

Jesus himself credited God with the creation, as do all the scriptures. Jesus said:

Matthew 19:4-6 New (NET Bible)

4 He answered, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male and female,[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason, a man will leave his father and mother and will be united with his wife, and the two will become one flesh’?[b] 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

YTL Gen. 2:4 These [are] births of the heavens and of the earth in their being prepared, in the day of Jehovah God's making earth and heavens;

Isaiah 45:18 Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

18 For thus said Jehovah, Creator of heaven, He is God, Former of earth, and its Maker, He established it -- not empty He prepared it, For inhabiting He formed it: `I [am] Jehovah, and there is none else. Jesus shared in the creative works, however, did not make him a co-Creator with his Father. The power or the source for creation came from God through his holy spirit, hence all creation owes its life to him. (Psalm 36:9 )

Genesis 1:2 (NASB)

2 And the earth was a formless and desolate emptiness and darkness was over the [b]surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the [c]surface of the waters.

Isaiah 40:28 (NET Bible)

28 Do you not know? Have you not heard? The Lord is an eternal God, the Creator of the whole earth.[a] He does not get tired or weary; there is no limit to his wisdom.

Psalm 33:6 (NET Bible)

6 By the Lord’s decree the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all the starry hosts.

Rather than a co-Creator, then, the Son was the agent or instrumentality through whom God, the Creator, worked. Jesus himself credited God with the creation, as do all the Scriptures.​Matthew 19:4-6

4
  • 2
    I like your answer. Thank you! Jan 10 at 0:42
  • Jesus Saves: I do not believe in trinity either. The closest parallel to Titus 2:13 is Titus 1:4, "Thess,.1:12 and similarly the parallel to 1 Peter 1:1 is 2 Peter1:2. Correct "Sharps rule" does not survive close scrutiny. Thks Jan 10 at 8:39
  • The translation of Matthew 19:4 misstates the Greek text of "ὅτι ὁ κτίσας" which is "that the having made" κτίσας is a verb not a noun. So to claim this as a basis for a belief Jesus was not the one through whom things were made is simply not consistent with the Greek. Jan 26 at 17:23
  • Revelation Lad: GRK: ὅτι ὁ κτίσας ἀπ' ἀρχῆς, NAS: Have you not read that He who created [them] from the beginning, INT: that he who having created [them] from [the] beginning... YTL Gen. 2:44 These [are] births of the heavens and of the earth in their being prepared, in the day of Jehovah God's making earth and heavens; Jan 27 at 20:31
1

Logos created, or better to say, co-created with the Father, the world/universe (John 1:3). Now, at that moment He was not Jesus and continued to be bare Logos before adoption of human nature more than two thousand years ago.

Afterwards, the Logos is called Jesus, for He is also man, fully so with regard to the human nature; and since every man is given name, so also He has name; however, this name applies not only to His human nature, and not, God forbid, to His human person which He has not adopted, for He adopted only human nature and can be said to be a human person exclusively in the sense that His eternal Person of Logos, since His incarnation became eternally associated with human nature, human unique ensouled body, and cannot be any more, for all eternity be thought without this adopted nature, but again, what is adopted by the Person of Logos is not a person of Jesus, but a human nature, not person (Thus, He has only one divine Person in two natures - divine and human: in fact, it was a horrible heresy of Nestorius who thought that Jesus was born as a plain man, with a human person and then this human person was adopted by the divine Person of Logos, thus there being two [P]persons in Jesus). The name Jesus Christ applies, therefore, uniquely to this very divine eternal Person in terms of this Person's adoption of human nature, which this Person after the Incarnation has inseparably and eternally; in fact one can say that even this divine Person of Logos changed changelessly, because now this Person cannot be ever thought without or disentangled from the human nature that He adopted, so that human nature became in the most intimate and inseparable way united and associated with the divine eternal changeless Person of Logos.

Thus Jesus Christ is name for two natures a) Uncreated (divine) and b) created (human), both united in one Uncreated Hypostasis/Person of Logos.

In fact, is not this name "Jesus"? And what does this name mean? It means "salvation", "for He will save His people from sins" (Matthew 1:21). Now, how is mankind saved, by Jesus' human nature, or by His divine Person, divine nature and activity, or by both? Surely, by His divine Person's and divine nature's activity, but manifested in human nature, in human suffering and death, in concrete historical drama of the life of the Incarnate Logos. Therefore, if salvation implies both divine aspects of the Savior (i.e. His divine Person and divine Nature) and the human aspect (i.e. His human nature), therefore the name Jesus, which means salvation also entails the divine Person and Nature + human nature.

This does not mean that the abovementioned union of the divine nature and human nature in the divine Person of Logos implies those two natures' fusion or blurring into each other, so to ruin both divine and human natures and bring about a third, neither divine nor human but a mixture or a hybrid. No way! Divine Logos has His divine nature and His human nature in union in Himself, without mixture and fusing, distinctly. This is the essence of Chalcedonian (451) Christology, the only correct Christology as a matter of fact.

Now, if after the Incarnation, the divine eternal Person of Logos has, together with His divine nature, also the human nature already inseparably from Him for all the eternity to come, and since this inseparable union of Logos and human nature is called Jesus Christ, so that henceforth it is unlawful and impossible to consider divine Person of Logos without His human nature, we can with absolute safety say that Jesus created universe.

In fact we cannot say otherwise already, because did not the Person of Logos create the universe? Yes! But after the incarnation did He who created the universe disappear? No! Does He continue to be as ever, because He is eternal? Yes, changeless as ever, for Logos is eternal and changeless! But what is the name of this eternal and changeless Person now, after the Incarnation? - Logos and Jesus simultaneously, for Jesus means the changeless Person of Logos having adopted human nature endlessly!

But is not this a change? For before the Incarnation Logos was purely spiritual, with no alloy of anything created, while after Incarnation He has already a created nature of man on Him? Yes, in a way it is a change, and a drastic one, but nevertheless it is a changeless change, for the divine Person remained absolutely the same and unaltered, like a radio wave of a music, if caught on my radio receiver, becomes also an audible melody, and is called already not a sheer Radio Wave (cf. Logos) but also Audible Music, for this Radio Wave got, as it were, incarnated into my radio receiver, but the Radio Wave did not change a tiny bit in itself by this "incarnation", so similarly Logos did not change with adoption of human nature, and not, God forbid this Nestorian schizophrenia, of human person.

Since after Incarnation the Person of Logos cannot be any more separated or imagined without also the adopted human nature, and since the sustaining of the created universe is absolutely the same action on the part of Trinity as the creation of this universe, for absolutely the same divine energy is exerted for sustaining as for the creating, we can safely say that as world was created by the Father, the Logos and the H. Ghost, so also after the Incarnation the world is sustained into existence by the Father, Jesus and H. Ghost, for Person of Logos is, since Incarnation, called Jesus, and so without end, ever.

P.S. That's why we, humans, are crown of the creation and more dignified than angels or, if they exist, any extra-terrestrial intelligent beings, because God's Logos became one of us, adopted our nature, not that of angels or that of any other being. Even if there will be revealed any extra-terrestrial being of intelligence far surpassing ours, we still are incomparably more dignified then they, because their and our Creator adopted our, human, nature, unendingly, and not theirs!

6
  • @user48152 That is not an appropriate way to converse on this site. If you don't want to chat, simply don't do so. Further rude comments will not be tolerated.
    – curiousdannii
    Jan 11 at 12:50
  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    – curiousdannii
    Jan 11 at 12:50
  • I don't feel safe making that assumption. In fact, it could be a very dangerous assumption. Sep 11 at 19:57
  • @CoryHaffly Thanks for taking time reading my post. You say "dangerous assumption", not specifying. No, it is not dangerous but the only correct one: if Mugambu defeats another African chief Zumbambu and 10 years later Mugambu adopts Christianity and as Christian has a new baptismal name Christopher. It is 100% legitimate to say that "Christopher has defeated Zumbambu 10 years ago" although at that time he was not called Christopher. His name changed, but his person, hypostasis remains the same, so you can alternately call him both Mugambu and Christopher as Paul was Called both Paul and Saul. Sep 12 at 5:21
  • Similarly, even now, you can address God's Son like "Jesus Christ, help me!" or "Logos of God, help me!" with exactly the same effect for you are addressing the very same Person. Sep 12 at 5:23
0

The Creator, Both Lord And God

Let’s compare OT to NT and see who was being described as Creator, Jesus or the Father?

“Have you not known? Have you not heard? The Lord is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He does not faint or grow weary; his understanding is unsearchable.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭40:28‬ ‭

Even deniers of OT Trinity agree that this passage says God is the Creator, as opposed to saying the Lord was the channel through which God created. God is that creator, God is also the Lord. Now let’s explore the God being described.

1 The Way was prepared for Him

“A voice cries: “In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord; make straight in the desert a highway for our God.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭40:3‬ ‭

We know John the Baptizer was to prepare the way of the Lord

“For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah when he said, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord; make his paths straight.’”” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭3:3‬ ‭

But was John preparing the way for God to work through Jesus or for Jesus himself?

““I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭3:11‬ ‭

John prepared the way and expected someone to follow after him, he affirms it is Jesus

“This is he of whom it is written, “‘Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.’” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭11:10‬ ‭

Jesus affirms both that John was sent to prepare the way and that this was for himself (Jesus).

Let’s agree it’s still ambiguous. Continuing on

2 The Reward is with Him

“Behold, the Lord God comes with might, and his arm rules for him; behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭40:10‬ ‭

Jesus says

““Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done.” ‭‭Revelation‬ ‭22:12‬

3 The Good Shepherd

“He will tend his flock like a shepherd; he will gather the lambs in his arms; he will carry them in his bosom, and gently lead those that are with young.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭40:11‬ ‭

God is compared to a shepherd. Jesus says He is the good shepherd.

“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd.” ‭‭John‬ ‭10:11, 16‬ ‭

The First and the Last

“Who has performed and done this, calling the generations from the beginning? I, the Lord, the first, and with the last; I am he.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭41:4‬ ‭

Jesus says He is the first and the last

“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”” ‭‭Revelation‬ ‭22:13‬ ‭

John 1:3 OP

“All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” ‭‭John‬ ‭1:3‬ ‭

Even if OT trinity deniers will use the argument that Jesus was the means THROUGH which God made all things, implying that somehow He isn’t the Creator merely the channel, Isaiah says that the Creator made all things, He will have the way prepared ahead of him, He will repay everyone, He is the shepherd and He is the first and the last. All apply to Jesus and at least three unambiguously relate exclusively to Jesus, where Jesus is being quoted as making the claims about Himself, rather than someone claiming it about Him.

Conclusion

Jesus is the Creator not merely the channel through whom God created. He was the Channel because He was the Creator. And now we can also say Jesus is most definitely the Logos being described as the Creator and the means through which all things were Created.

2
  • 1
    Thx for your answer, sadly it seems you have missed the question entirely. Does John 1:3 identify Jesus Christ as the creator? The focus should be on what John says in one verse, not a theological interpretation based on conjecture.
    – steveowen
    Jan 26 at 20:15
  • @user48152 unfortunately what you conflate as conjecture is context. If the LOGOS is what God used to create everything and nothing created/made was made without the LOGOS, and verse 1 says the Logos was God, then whoever is identified as the Creator, is the Logos, is with God and is God. Isaiah 40&41 shows Jesus is that Creator. All the other NT passages say Jesus is that Creator Col 1:16, Heb1:12. No matter how you spin it Jesus is the Logos. And consequently God. Meaning your definition of the shema God is one (singular) is unbiblical. God is one/echad/united/hen Jan 26 at 20:49
0

A grammatical premise

The question is based on a standard English translation and the phrases "through Him" [Greek: di'autou], "apart from Him" [Greek chôris autou], which suggests implicitly that the logos is a person. This is NOT so (not necessarily so, anyway). In fact, the Greek pronoun houtos is in the masculine gender to agree with the noun logos - as is mandeted by Greek grammar. This is somewhat difficult to understand for English speaking persons (not familiar with Greek), because in English the masculine is reserved for unquestionably "male" nouns (or subjects), the feminine for unquestionably "female" nouns (or subjects), and all the rest of nouns and subjects are in the neuter gender.

A couple of counter-examples.

  • In Greek, sophia is a feminin noun, yet it would sound bizarre to think of the English translation "wisdom" as a "she", other than rhetorically.
  • In Greek, hagion pneuma is a neuter noun, with agreeing adjective, yet no "well behaved Christian" would dare to think of the English translation, "holy spirit" as an "it", because of the trinitarian conditioning.

Conclusion

Try to apply the above considerations to the whole Prologue to the Gospel of John (John 1:1-18), and you will get quite a different picture from the one you're accustomed to.

2
  • Be aware that your statement "no 'well behaved Christian' would dare to think of the English translation, 'holy spirit' as an 'it', because of the trinitarian conditioning" may be taken as a slight against those that are non-trinitarian.
    – agarza
    Mar 30 at 16:59
  • 1
    @agarza Thank you for the heads up. The general tone of my answer, and the way I put the expression "well behaved Christian" in quotes (and, may I add, my pen-name) should get rid of any doubt as to my gist :) Mar 30 at 17:41
-1

While defining the Hebrew word ‘bara (1254)’ that stands for the English word ‘create’, STRONG’s Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible offers a great explanation as to who is the creator.

Bara’ means “to create, make.” (1) This verb is of profound theological significance, since it has only God as it’s subject. (1a) Only God can “create” in the sense implied by bara’. (5) Though a precisely correct technical term to suggest cosmic, material creation from nothing, bara’ is a rich theological vehicle for communicating the sovereign power of God, who originates and regulates all things to His glory.

Since there is one Creator, therefore, it’s in my knowledge that we are at liberty to read John 1:3 saying “all things came into being THROUGH Logos/Jesus” as written in the Scripture: Genesis 1:1; Psalms 33:6; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2; 11:3; 2Peter 3:5.

1
  • We are not at liberty to make the bible read as we like. There is nothing written about Jesus being 'in the beginning'. He is the 'logos become flesh' once born - not before.
    – steveowen
    Aug 2 at 4:36
-1

John 1:3 speaks of the logos.

All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.v3

There is no mention of Jesus until V14 as the son of God.

...the only son from the Father...

As Jesus is not mentioned by name in the early verses until v14. Then John, in v3, is not talking about Jesus. To use 'logos' and 'Jesus' interchangeably in this context is eisegetical. John is quite specifically speaking of the word, which will become Jesus.

When did the logos become flesh/Jesus? When Jesus was born.

When was Jesus born? ~4BC, through Mary.

Clearly then, Jesus is NOT the one in the beginning. The person of Jesus cannot be this one 'in the beginning' as he was not yet born. Whatever the 'beginning' means, John has ruled out Jesus being there.

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. And we beheld His glory, a glory as of an only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.v14

John here is linking the 'word becoming flesh', with, 'and dwelt among us'. They should not be separated. Further linking the event of Jesus birth with those who dwelt with him and beheld his glory. (See Note 1 regarding this glory)

Clearly then, John is not saying that Jesus is the Creator. God is the Creator and made all through His logos/word - which is not Jesus - not until Jesus is born.

God is credited with creation in Mark 10:6, 13:19, Matt 19:4. There are several other passages where Jesus confirms he has a God - this same God that created. If we plainly see God being the Creator, then the logos is not the Creator as the logos was with God and the means through which it was done. (Even is we force Jesus to be in the beginning, being with God is not then the Creator.)

Another passage sheds light on this logos of God.

What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life— 2 and the life was revealed, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was revealed to us— 3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. 1 John 1:1-3

This categorically states nothing about a 'person' called logos. It is a which, a what and this is clearly not a person. But the logos of God, His word, will and purpose.

What they say is revealed to them - that they touched and saw is Jesus who is the logos manifested as a man - their Lord and Saviour with whom they have fellowship.

Rev 19:13 Jesus is given the title of 'the word of God'. "...His name is called The Word of God..."

Jesus IS the embodiment of God's word, intent and prophecy - in bringing many sons to glory.(Heb 2:10)

We are not at liberty to assume that logos and Jesus are interchangeable. The timeline is important. The logos is 'at the beginning', Jesus is not. After Jesus' birth, he IS the logos and the logos (God's will, word) IS represented in Jesus.

For the word of God is living and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, even penetrating as far as the division of soul and spirit... and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart

This is the logos - no mention of Jesus, but we see the representation in the judging which God has given Jesus the authority to do.

"For He (God) has set a day when He will judge the world with justice by the man (Jesus) He (God) has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising Him from the dead.” Acts 17:31

And, the following verse shows us that God still has a word which He delivers through Jesus. While Jesus is the logos - representing God's will, God the Father still has things to say which Jesus - as the logos, does not have on his own.

Rev 1:1 The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him...

If as some suggest the logos IS God - i.e. immortal, ever-living, cannot be tempted etc, then this figure cannot be tempted, sin or die. If such a logos became flesh and died - this cannot be God. Scripture confirms this truth abundantly.

If we choose to entertain ideas outside of scripture, that is another matter that is irrelevant to this question.

Does John 1:3 identify Jesus Christ as the creator? No, he does not.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Using texts such as:

Col 1:16 - all things have been created through Him and unto Him.

Heb 1:2 - But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, and through whom He made the universe.

shows the fragility of the 'Jesus is creator' premise as they are used out of context or reliant on biased translations. (imagine Jesus being appointed heir - if he made everything)

Note 1

What glory? The glory of God? No man can have the glory of God, but Jesus had some of God's glory as His special son.

Jesus was born without sin and the default severance from God all men since Adam have experienced. As a man, he represented his Father's nature in every way. Yet as we are told, he had to become perfect or complete before he could fulfil his role as the Lamb.

Heb 2:10 For it was fitting to Him (God), for whom are all things and by whom are all things, having brought many sons to glory, to make perfect the author (Jesus) of their salvation through sufferings.

Hebrews 5:9 And having been made perfect, He became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.

Jesus was full of glory because he exhibited the ways of God - as a man he was selfless, humble, loving, sacrificial, wise, gracious, truthful, dependable, kind, faithful...

3
  • 2
    If you apply this line of reasoning to the Old Testament, you would conclude YHVH had no part of creation since there is no mention of that name in Genesis 1. Jan 28 at 1:53
  • 1
    @RevelationLad - agreed - very poor exegesis and clearly betrayed as cafeteria theology - selecting only texts that agree with the predetermined position.
    – Dottard
    May 7 at 20:48
  • As someone pointed our previously, believing that Jesus preexisted, as I do, does not somehow automatically make him also the Creator. Unitarians deny that Christ preexisted, therefore, in their minds, he couldn't possibly have been the Creator, and therefore, he wasn't. They're coming at it from the wrong angle. Sep 11 at 19:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.