3

John 1:1 (NIV):

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:14 (NIV):

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

By connecting the dots, is it a valid conclusion that if the Word was God and the Word became flesh and was the Son, therefore the Son is God? I'm just using basic reasoning by transitivity (if A = B and A = C, then B = C)

3
  • While I agree with you, your argument depends on answering this question: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/47593/… – Perry Webb Feb 7 at 14:07
  • 2
    @PerryWebb That question was answered (very competently) and the answer was up-voted 11 times (down-voted 2 times). – Nigel J Feb 7 at 14:28
  • 2
    This question has been debated for 2000 years and you expect to settle it here? I will provide an answer but I am sure that will not settle the matter. – Dottard Feb 7 at 21:07
3

The opening 18 verses of the John’s Gospel have been the subject of intense study and debate primarily because of their theological content. Let us examine the first few verses. Note the staircase parallelism of verse 1-5:

In the beginning was the Word

. And the Word was with [the] God

. . And god was the Word [This is the literal word order but for English it should be reversed]

. . .This one was in the beginning with [the] God

All things through him became [= came into being]

. And without him became not one thing

. . That which became in him was life

. . . And that life was the light of mankind

. . . . And the light in the darkness shines

. . . . . And the darkness it [did] not grasp.

This prologue lays out all the theological subjects that John’s Gospel explores. One of the most significant is the early statement that builds up to the final climax: John 1:1 - … the Word was god [a qualitative category statement. See Daniel B Wallace, “Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics”, p269.]

John 20:28 – Thomas answered Him, “The Lord of me and the God of me.” This latter statement (uncorrected by Jesus) declares Jesus to be “ho theos” – God in the fullest sense.

This, "the Word was god" is a category statement like saying "my car is a Ford". Later (John 20:28) in John, we see John's point, that the Word, Jesus was God in the absolute sense, "ho theos". We find a few similar statements with "ho theos" elsewhere such as:

  • Matt 1:23, "He shall be called Emmanuel ... "the God with us"
  • John 20:28, "the Lord of me and the God of me"
  • Titus 2:13, “…our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.” [This also has, “ho theos”.]
  • Heb 1:8, “About the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last forever’”. [ho theos]
  • Heb 1:9, “therefore O God, Your God, has anointed You above Your companions with the oil of joy.” [ … also, “ho theos”]
  • 2 Peter 1:1, “…righteousness of our God [= ὁ Θεός] and Saviour, Jesus Christ.”
2

I would say, that the question is not put entirely correctly, for it contains an implicit information, with which I (and anybody) may not agree from the outset; namely, the question implies that "Son" is, or can be, Logos' name only after the Incarnation (when the Logos was called also Jesus), but not prior to the Incarnation, so as to affirm that even in eternity, even before the world was created, the Logos of the Father was simultaneously the Son of the Father.

However, this is not even a moot point, for the eternal Logos is also the eternal Son, even before the Son's Incarnation. How otherwise indeed?! Is not God eternally the Father? Yes, He is! Even before creation of the universe? Surely, even before creation of the universe, for 'eternally Father' means that creation of the universe, which exists not in eternity, but in time, does not introduce fatherhood in Him. Now, if He is eternally the Father, then given that the universe does not yet exist, He must not be called Father with reference to anything created, must He? No, He mustn't. But to be father means to have son (or daughter, but let us forget for a while this political correctness nausea, for it adds nothing to argument), yes? Yes! And thus the eternal Father must have co-eternal Son, mustn't He? Yes, He must indeed and necessarily so. But is not it acme of absurdity to affirm that Father has co-eternal Logos and, besides, co-eternal Son also, and + Holy Ghost who proceeds From Him (John 15:26), so that we get not Trinity but Quaternity of Father the Son the Logos and the Holy Ghost. But let us send to the world of phantasy this idea and return to a sound theology which identifies Logos with the Son. For also Jesus calls the One with Whom He enjoyed Glory before even the creation of the universe "Father" (John 17:5), and since it is contrary to any sound reason to think that God became His Father only after He adopted created human nature, then we must necessarily assume that He was the Father's Son already in eternity before the creation of universe, to say nothing before the Incarnation. In fact, when He says "I came from the Father and entered the world" (John 16:28) does not this show without any taint of ambiguity that the Father was His Father even before the Incarnation, for the Incarnation means 'entering the world', while even before that He came out of Father, to the effect that the Incarnation has nothing to do with His and Father's eternal Fatherhood-Sonship.

Therefore, yes, it is a perfectly good logic that you bring: if eternal God's co-eternal Logos is God and if this Logos is also Son, then necessarily the Son is also God.

2
  • opinion only -1 – user48152 Feb 7 at 21:06
  • @user48152 Not at all, I have adduced scriptural evidence and gave logic, that what exegesis is. If you refuse to listen, that is your problem, not mine. But listen, what does hinder you? The down-votes bother me not, but please substantiate your out-of-blue claim that it is "opinion only". – Levan Gigineishvili Feb 7 at 21:15

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.