Does Oneness theology (Modalism) teach a "sock puppet" view of God's nature?
- Thread starter UnitedWithChrist
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
VI. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit Are Each Someone Distinct from the Other Two (i.e., they are three “persons”)
A. Matt. 28:19
1. “the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit”: use of definite article before each personal noun indicates distinct persons unless explicitly stated otherwise; compare Rev. 1:17; 2:8, 26
2. The views that “Father” and “Son” are distinct persons but not the Holy Spirit, or that the Holy Spirit is not a person at all, or that all three are different offices or roles of one person, are impossible in view of the grammar (together with the fact that in Scripture a “spirit” is a person unless context shows otherwise).
3. Does singular “name” prove that the three are one person? No; cf. Gen. 5:2; 11:14; 48:6; and esp. 48:16. Thus, the word “name” can apply distinctly to each of the three (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) and does not imply that they have only one name.
4. “Name” need not be personal name, may be title: Is. 9:6; Matt. 1:23.
B. Acts 2:38 and Matt. 28:19
1. Neither passage specifies that certain words are to be spoken during baptism; nor does the Bible ever record someone saying, “I baptize you in the name of....”
2. Those said to be baptized in the name of Jesus (whether or not the formula “in the name of Jesus” was used) were people already familiar with the God of the OT:
a. Jews: Acts 2:5, 38; 22:16
b. Samaritans: Acts 8:5, 12, 16
c. God-fearing Gentiles: Acts 10:1-2, 22, 48
d. Disciples of John the Baptist: Acts 19:1-5
e. The first Christians in Corinth were Jews and God-fearing Gentiles: Acts 18:1-8; 1 Cor. 1:13
3. Trinitarian formula for baptism (if that is what Matt. 28:19 is) was given in context of commissioning apostles to take the gospel to “all the nations,” including people who did not know of the biblical God
4. Cross-referencing Acts 2:38 and other Acts references to baptism “in Jesus’ name” with Matthew 28:19 to prove that Jesus is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is hermeneutically flawed, since none of these passages is seeking to make such a point and none of them is claiming that baptism must be performed using a particular formula.
C. God the Father and the Son Jesus Christ are two persons
1. The salutations: Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3; Eph. 1:2; 6:23; Phil. 1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1, 2; 1 Tim. 1:1, 2; 2 Tim. 1:2; Tit. 1:4; Philem. 3; James 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:2; 2 John 3
2. Two witnesses: John 5:31-32; 8:16-18; cf. Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15
3. The Father sent the Son: John 3:16-17; Gal. 4:4; 1 John 4:10; etc.; cf. John 1:6; 17:18; 20:21
4. The Father and the Son love each other: John 3:35; 5:20; 14:31; 15:9; 17:23-26; cf. Matt. 3:17 par.; 17:5 par.; 2 Pet. 1:17
5. The Father speaks to the Son, and the Son speaks to the Father: John 11:41-42; 12:28; 17:1-26; etc.
6. The Father knows the Son, and the Son knows the Father: Matt. 11:27; Luke 10:22; John 7:29; 8:55; 10:15
7. Jesus our Advocate with the Father: 1 John 2:1
D. Jesus is not God the Father
1. Is. 9:6: “Father of eternity” means eternal; compare other names formed with word “father”: Abialbon, “father of strength” = strong (2 Sam. 23:31);Abiasaph, “father of gathering” = gatherer (Ex. 6:24); Abigail, a woman’s name (!), “father of exultation” = exulting (1 Chron. 2:16).
2. John 10:30
a. Jesus did not say, “I am the Father,” nor did he say, “the Son and the Father are one person.”
b. The first person plural esmen (“we are”) implies two persons.
c. The neuter word for “one” (hen) is used, implying essential unity but not personal unity.
d. John 10:30 in context is a strong affirmation of Christ’s deity, but does not mean that he is the Father.
3. John 5:43: Jesus’ coming in his Father’s name means not that he was the Father because he had the Father’s name, but that, while others come in their own name (or their own authority), Jesus does not; he comes in his Father’s name (on his Father’s authority).
4. John 8:19; 16:3: Ignorance of Jesus is indeed ignorance of the Father, but that does not prove that Jesus is the one he calls “My Father.”
5. John 14:6-11
a. Jesus and the Father are one being, not one person.
b. Jesus said, “I am in the Father,” not “I am the Father.”
c. The statement, “the Father is in me,” does not mean Jesus is the Father; compare John 14:20; 17:21-23.
6. John 14:18: An older adult brother can care for his younger siblings, thus preventing them from being “orphans,” without being their father.
7. Colossians 2:9: Does not mean that Jesus is the Father, or that Jesus is an incarnation of the Father; rather, since “Godhead” (theotês) means Deity, the state of being God, the nature of God, Jesus is fully God, but not the only person who is God. “The Godhead” here does not = the Father (note that Jesus is in the Father, John 10:38; 14:10, 11; 17:21), but the nature of the Father. See II.B.3.
8. The Father and the Son are both involved in various activities: raising Jesus (Gal. 1:1; John 2:19-22), raising the dead (John 5:21); 6:39-40, 44, 54, 1 Cor. 6:14), answering prayer (John 14:13-14; 15:16; 16:23), sending the Holy Spirit (John 14:16; 15:26; 16:7), drawing people to Jesus (John 6:44; 12:32), etc. These common works do prove that the two persons are both God, but not that Jesus is the Father
E. The Son existed before his Incarnation, even before creation
1. Prov. 30:4: This is not predictive prophecy; “prophecy” in 30:1 translates massa, which is rendered elsewhere as “burden.”
2. The Son created all things, requiring of course that he existed when he did so: See above, IV.E.1.
3. Jesus was “with” (pros or para) God the Father before creation: John 1:1; 17:5; pros in John 1:1 does not mean “pertaining to,” although it does in Hebrews 2:17; 5:1 (which use pros with ta).
4. Jesus, the Son of God, existed before John the Baptist (who was born before Jesus): John 1:15, cf. 1:14-18, 29-34.
5. Jesus, the Son, came down from heaven, sent from the Father, and went back to heaven, back to the Father: John 3:13, 31; 6:33; 38, 41, 46, 51, 56-58, 62; 8:23, 42; 13:3; 16:27-28; cf. Acts 1:10-11; cf. the sending of the Holy Spirit, John 16:5-7; 1 Pet. 1:12
6. Jesus, speaking as the Son (John 8:54-56), asserts His eternal preexistence before Abraham: John 8:58
7. The Son explicitly said to exist “before all things”: Col. 1:17, cf. 1:12-20
8. These statements cannot be dismissed as true only in God’s foreknowledge
a. We are all “in God’s mind” before creation; yet such passages as John 1:1 and John 17:5 clearly mean to say something unusual about Christ.
b. To say that all things were created through Christ means that He must have existed at creation.
c. No one else in Scripture is ever said to have been with God before creation.
9. Texts which speak of the Son being begotten “today” do not mean he became the Son on a certain day, since they refer to his exaltation at his resurrection (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:3-5; 5:5; cf. Ps. 2:7; cf. also Rom. 1:4).
F. Jesus is not the Holy Spirit
1. The Holy Spirit is “another Comforter”: John 14:16; compare 1 John 2:1.
2. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit: John 15:26; 16:7.
3. The Holy Spirit exhibits humility in relation to, and seeks to glorify, Jesus (John 16:13-14).
4. The Son and the Holy Spirit are distinguished as two persons in Matt. 28:19.
5. The Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus: Luke 3:22.
6. Is Jesus the Holy Spirit?
a. 2 Cor. 3:17: the Spirit is here called “Lord” in the sense of being Yahweh or God, not Jesus (cf. v. 16, citing Ex. 34:34; cf. v. 17 in the Revised English Bible); note Acts 28:25-27, cf. Is. 6:8-10.
b. 1 Cor. 15:45: Jesus is “a life-giving Spirit,” not in the sense that he is the Holy Spirit whom he sent at Pentecost, but in the sense that he is the glorified God-man; and as God he is Spirit by nature. All three persons of the Trinity are Spirit, though there are not three divine Spirits; and only one person is designated “the Holy Spirit.”
c. Rom. 8:27, 34: the fact that two persons intercede for us is consistent with the fact that we have two Advocates (John 14:16; Rom. 8:26; 1 John 2:1).
d. John 14:18: Jesus here refers to his appearances to the disciples after the resurrection (compare 14:19), not to the coming of the Spirit.
e. Jesus and the Holy Spirit are both involved in various activities: raising Jesus (John 2:19-19-22); Rom. 8:9-11), raising the dead (John 5:21; 6:39-40, 44, 54, Rom. 8:9-11), dwelling in the believer (John 14:16; 2 Cor. 13:5; Col. 1:27), interceding for the believer (Rom. 8:26; Heb. 7:25), sanctifying believers (Eph. 5:26; 1 Pet. 1:2), etc. These works prove that the two persons are both God, but not that Jesus is the Holy Spirit.
G. The Father is not the Holy Spirit
1. The Father sent the Holy Spirit: John 14:15; 15:26.
2. The Holy Spirit intercedes with the Father for us: Rom. 8:26-27.
3. The Father and the Holy Spirit are distinguished as two persons in Matt. 28:19.
4. Is the Father the Holy Spirit?
a. Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35: It is argued that the Holy Spirit is the Father of the incarnate Son of God; this argument ignores the fact that the “conception” is not a product of physical union between a man and a woman!
b. The Father and the Holy Spirit are both said to be active in various activities; the resurrection of Jesus (Gal. 1:1; Rom. 8:11), comforting Christians (2 Cor. 1:3-4; John 14:26), sanctifying Christians (Jude 1; 1 Pet. 1:2), etc. The most these facts prove is that the two work together; they do not prove the two are one person.
A. Matt. 28:19
1. “the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit”: use of definite article before each personal noun indicates distinct persons unless explicitly stated otherwise; compare Rev. 1:17; 2:8, 26
2. The views that “Father” and “Son” are distinct persons but not the Holy Spirit, or that the Holy Spirit is not a person at all, or that all three are different offices or roles of one person, are impossible in view of the grammar (together with the fact that in Scripture a “spirit” is a person unless context shows otherwise).
3. Does singular “name” prove that the three are one person? No; cf. Gen. 5:2; 11:14; 48:6; and esp. 48:16. Thus, the word “name” can apply distinctly to each of the three (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) and does not imply that they have only one name.
4. “Name” need not be personal name, may be title: Is. 9:6; Matt. 1:23.
B. Acts 2:38 and Matt. 28:19
1. Neither passage specifies that certain words are to be spoken during baptism; nor does the Bible ever record someone saying, “I baptize you in the name of....”
2. Those said to be baptized in the name of Jesus (whether or not the formula “in the name of Jesus” was used) were people already familiar with the God of the OT:
a. Jews: Acts 2:5, 38; 22:16
b. Samaritans: Acts 8:5, 12, 16
c. God-fearing Gentiles: Acts 10:1-2, 22, 48
d. Disciples of John the Baptist: Acts 19:1-5
e. The first Christians in Corinth were Jews and God-fearing Gentiles: Acts 18:1-8; 1 Cor. 1:13
3. Trinitarian formula for baptism (if that is what Matt. 28:19 is) was given in context of commissioning apostles to take the gospel to “all the nations,” including people who did not know of the biblical God
4. Cross-referencing Acts 2:38 and other Acts references to baptism “in Jesus’ name” with Matthew 28:19 to prove that Jesus is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is hermeneutically flawed, since none of these passages is seeking to make such a point and none of them is claiming that baptism must be performed using a particular formula.
C. God the Father and the Son Jesus Christ are two persons
1. The salutations: Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3; Eph. 1:2; 6:23; Phil. 1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1, 2; 1 Tim. 1:1, 2; 2 Tim. 1:2; Tit. 1:4; Philem. 3; James 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:2; 2 John 3
2. Two witnesses: John 5:31-32; 8:16-18; cf. Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15
3. The Father sent the Son: John 3:16-17; Gal. 4:4; 1 John 4:10; etc.; cf. John 1:6; 17:18; 20:21
4. The Father and the Son love each other: John 3:35; 5:20; 14:31; 15:9; 17:23-26; cf. Matt. 3:17 par.; 17:5 par.; 2 Pet. 1:17
5. The Father speaks to the Son, and the Son speaks to the Father: John 11:41-42; 12:28; 17:1-26; etc.
6. The Father knows the Son, and the Son knows the Father: Matt. 11:27; Luke 10:22; John 7:29; 8:55; 10:15
7. Jesus our Advocate with the Father: 1 John 2:1
D. Jesus is not God the Father
1. Is. 9:6: “Father of eternity” means eternal; compare other names formed with word “father”: Abialbon, “father of strength” = strong (2 Sam. 23:31);Abiasaph, “father of gathering” = gatherer (Ex. 6:24); Abigail, a woman’s name (!), “father of exultation” = exulting (1 Chron. 2:16).
2. John 10:30
a. Jesus did not say, “I am the Father,” nor did he say, “the Son and the Father are one person.”
b. The first person plural esmen (“we are”) implies two persons.
c. The neuter word for “one” (hen) is used, implying essential unity but not personal unity.
d. John 10:30 in context is a strong affirmation of Christ’s deity, but does not mean that he is the Father.
3. John 5:43: Jesus’ coming in his Father’s name means not that he was the Father because he had the Father’s name, but that, while others come in their own name (or their own authority), Jesus does not; he comes in his Father’s name (on his Father’s authority).
4. John 8:19; 16:3: Ignorance of Jesus is indeed ignorance of the Father, but that does not prove that Jesus is the one he calls “My Father.”
5. John 14:6-11
a. Jesus and the Father are one being, not one person.
b. Jesus said, “I am in the Father,” not “I am the Father.”
c. The statement, “the Father is in me,” does not mean Jesus is the Father; compare John 14:20; 17:21-23.
6. John 14:18: An older adult brother can care for his younger siblings, thus preventing them from being “orphans,” without being their father.
7. Colossians 2:9: Does not mean that Jesus is the Father, or that Jesus is an incarnation of the Father; rather, since “Godhead” (theotês) means Deity, the state of being God, the nature of God, Jesus is fully God, but not the only person who is God. “The Godhead” here does not = the Father (note that Jesus is in the Father, John 10:38; 14:10, 11; 17:21), but the nature of the Father. See II.B.3.
8. The Father and the Son are both involved in various activities: raising Jesus (Gal. 1:1; John 2:19-22), raising the dead (John 5:21); 6:39-40, 44, 54, 1 Cor. 6:14), answering prayer (John 14:13-14; 15:16; 16:23), sending the Holy Spirit (John 14:16; 15:26; 16:7), drawing people to Jesus (John 6:44; 12:32), etc. These common works do prove that the two persons are both God, but not that Jesus is the Father
E. The Son existed before his Incarnation, even before creation
1. Prov. 30:4: This is not predictive prophecy; “prophecy” in 30:1 translates massa, which is rendered elsewhere as “burden.”
2. The Son created all things, requiring of course that he existed when he did so: See above, IV.E.1.
3. Jesus was “with” (pros or para) God the Father before creation: John 1:1; 17:5; pros in John 1:1 does not mean “pertaining to,” although it does in Hebrews 2:17; 5:1 (which use pros with ta).
4. Jesus, the Son of God, existed before John the Baptist (who was born before Jesus): John 1:15, cf. 1:14-18, 29-34.
5. Jesus, the Son, came down from heaven, sent from the Father, and went back to heaven, back to the Father: John 3:13, 31; 6:33; 38, 41, 46, 51, 56-58, 62; 8:23, 42; 13:3; 16:27-28; cf. Acts 1:10-11; cf. the sending of the Holy Spirit, John 16:5-7; 1 Pet. 1:12
6. Jesus, speaking as the Son (John 8:54-56), asserts His eternal preexistence before Abraham: John 8:58
7. The Son explicitly said to exist “before all things”: Col. 1:17, cf. 1:12-20
8. These statements cannot be dismissed as true only in God’s foreknowledge
a. We are all “in God’s mind” before creation; yet such passages as John 1:1 and John 17:5 clearly mean to say something unusual about Christ.
b. To say that all things were created through Christ means that He must have existed at creation.
c. No one else in Scripture is ever said to have been with God before creation.
9. Texts which speak of the Son being begotten “today” do not mean he became the Son on a certain day, since they refer to his exaltation at his resurrection (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:3-5; 5:5; cf. Ps. 2:7; cf. also Rom. 1:4).
F. Jesus is not the Holy Spirit
1. The Holy Spirit is “another Comforter”: John 14:16; compare 1 John 2:1.
2. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit: John 15:26; 16:7.
3. The Holy Spirit exhibits humility in relation to, and seeks to glorify, Jesus (John 16:13-14).
4. The Son and the Holy Spirit are distinguished as two persons in Matt. 28:19.
5. The Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus: Luke 3:22.
6. Is Jesus the Holy Spirit?
a. 2 Cor. 3:17: the Spirit is here called “Lord” in the sense of being Yahweh or God, not Jesus (cf. v. 16, citing Ex. 34:34; cf. v. 17 in the Revised English Bible); note Acts 28:25-27, cf. Is. 6:8-10.
b. 1 Cor. 15:45: Jesus is “a life-giving Spirit,” not in the sense that he is the Holy Spirit whom he sent at Pentecost, but in the sense that he is the glorified God-man; and as God he is Spirit by nature. All three persons of the Trinity are Spirit, though there are not three divine Spirits; and only one person is designated “the Holy Spirit.”
c. Rom. 8:27, 34: the fact that two persons intercede for us is consistent with the fact that we have two Advocates (John 14:16; Rom. 8:26; 1 John 2:1).
d. John 14:18: Jesus here refers to his appearances to the disciples after the resurrection (compare 14:19), not to the coming of the Spirit.
e. Jesus and the Holy Spirit are both involved in various activities: raising Jesus (John 2:19-19-22); Rom. 8:9-11), raising the dead (John 5:21; 6:39-40, 44, 54, Rom. 8:9-11), dwelling in the believer (John 14:16; 2 Cor. 13:5; Col. 1:27), interceding for the believer (Rom. 8:26; Heb. 7:25), sanctifying believers (Eph. 5:26; 1 Pet. 1:2), etc. These works prove that the two persons are both God, but not that Jesus is the Holy Spirit.
G. The Father is not the Holy Spirit
1. The Father sent the Holy Spirit: John 14:15; 15:26.
2. The Holy Spirit intercedes with the Father for us: Rom. 8:26-27.
3. The Father and the Holy Spirit are distinguished as two persons in Matt. 28:19.
4. Is the Father the Holy Spirit?
a. Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35: It is argued that the Holy Spirit is the Father of the incarnate Son of God; this argument ignores the fact that the “conception” is not a product of physical union between a man and a woman!
b. The Father and the Holy Spirit are both said to be active in various activities; the resurrection of Jesus (Gal. 1:1; Rom. 8:11), comforting Christians (2 Cor. 1:3-4; John 14:26), sanctifying Christians (Jude 1; 1 Pet. 1:2), etc. The most these facts prove is that the two work together; they do not prove the two are one person.
The above is from this website by Rob Bowman called The Biblical Basis for the Trinity:
http://bib.irr.org/biblical-basis-o...2XWq1YXRAfRgBJ1F_KupvTOtzrGdC-KiOk_lXfJ3IKevI
http://bib.irr.org/biblical-basis-o...2XWq1YXRAfRgBJ1F_KupvTOtzrGdC-KiOk_lXfJ3IKevI
Rob Bowman has a complete set of Scriptural reasons for the subpoints of the Trinity doctrine here:
http://bib.irr.org/biblical-basis-o...2XWq1YXRAfRgBJ1F_KupvTOtzrGdC-KiOk_lXfJ3IKevI
There is one God.
This one God is the single divine being known in the OT as Jehovah or Yahweh (“the LORD”).
The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is God.
The Son, Jesus Christ, is God.
The Holy Spirit is God.
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each someone distinct from the other two.
Conclusion: The Bible teaches the Trinity.
What difference does the doctrine of the Trinity make?
Using his Scripture proofs, you can easily defend the Trinity against heretical views of God's nature.
For instance, Oneness people deny this point: The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each someone distinct from the other two.
Like I have said, heretical groups also distort church history to justify their claims and to support their boogeyman narrative of Constantine or the Roman Catholic church. The RC Church has doctrinal errors but the Trinity is not one of them.
http://bib.irr.org/biblical-basis-o...2XWq1YXRAfRgBJ1F_KupvTOtzrGdC-KiOk_lXfJ3IKevI
There is one God.
This one God is the single divine being known in the OT as Jehovah or Yahweh (“the LORD”).
The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is God.
The Son, Jesus Christ, is God.
The Holy Spirit is God.
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each someone distinct from the other two.
Conclusion: The Bible teaches the Trinity.
What difference does the doctrine of the Trinity make?
Using his Scripture proofs, you can easily defend the Trinity against heretical views of God's nature.
For instance, Oneness people deny this point: The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each someone distinct from the other two.
Like I have said, heretical groups also distort church history to justify their claims and to support their boogeyman narrative of Constantine or the Roman Catholic church. The RC Church has doctrinal errors but the Trinity is not one of them.
"But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame."
J
After dividing the Most High into three, later on they had to divide Jesus into two. When doctrine conflicts so much with scripture you have to continuously adjust it to make it fit. With the Trinity they were adjusting all the way into the 500s. And sad thing is it still doesn't work. It's probably best to just say it's a mystery and hope people don't question it.
-
1
- Show all
You obviously have never formally studied Koine Greek under some of the world's top Greek scholars, like I have. It was a privilege!
Prepositions like "pros" are notoriously tricky. Koine was a language in transition. From Classical Greek to later forms. You simply cannot pick up Strong's and take the first gloss and run with it. So that is your first mistake.
In actuality, you need a lexicon, like BDAG Bauer, where Greek is translated to English and all the possibilities are listed. Get both Bauer and Brown-Driver-Briggs for Hebrew and it will help.
I have studied much on this topic, have lots written, but I am traveling. Maybe later today I can fire up my computer and post it, if the campground has wi-fi! For now, I'll leave you with the footnotes from the NET Bible, which I am copying from the internet, although that is my hardcover bible too! Hopefully I can show you where you have gone so badly wrong by using English word order, which in fact destroys the meaning of the verse. Noun cases are vital in translating this verse!
The Prologue to the Gospel
1 In the beginning[a] was the Word, and the Word was with God,[b] and the Word was fully God.[c]
Footnotes:
Prepositions like "pros" are notoriously tricky. Koine was a language in transition. From Classical Greek to later forms. You simply cannot pick up Strong's and take the first gloss and run with it. So that is your first mistake.
In actuality, you need a lexicon, like BDAG Bauer, where Greek is translated to English and all the possibilities are listed. Get both Bauer and Brown-Driver-Briggs for Hebrew and it will help.
I have studied much on this topic, have lots written, but I am traveling. Maybe later today I can fire up my computer and post it, if the campground has wi-fi! For now, I'll leave you with the footnotes from the NET Bible, which I am copying from the internet, although that is my hardcover bible too! Hopefully I can show you where you have gone so badly wrong by using English word order, which in fact destroys the meaning of the verse. Noun cases are vital in translating this verse!
The Prologue to the Gospel
1 In the beginning[a] was the Word, and the Word was with God,[b] and the Word was fully God.[c]
Footnotes:
- John 1:1 sn In the beginning. The search for the basic “stuff” out of which things are made was the earliest one in Greek philosophy. It was attended by the related question of “What is the process by which the secondary things came out of the primary one (or ones)?,” or in Aristotelian terminology, “What is the ‘beginning’ (same Greek word as beginning, John 1:1) and what is the origin of the things that are made?” In the New Testament the word usually has a temporal sense, but even BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 3 lists a major category of meaning as “the first cause.” For John, the words “In the beginning” are most likely a conscious allusion to the opening words of Genesis—“In the beginning.” Other concepts which occur prominently in Gen 1 are also found in John’s prologue: “life” (1:4) “light” (1:4) and “darkness” (1:5). Gen 1 describes the first (physical) creation; John 1 describes the new (spiritual) creation. But this is not to play off a false dichotomy between “physical” and “spiritual”; the first creation was both physical and spiritual. The new creation is really a re-creation, of the spiritual (first) but also the physical. (In spite of the common understanding of John’s “spiritual” emphasis, the “physical” re-creation should not be overlooked; this occurs in John 2 with the changing of water into wine, in John 11 with the resurrection of Lazarus, and the emphasis of John 20-21 on the aftermath of Jesus’ own resurrection.)
- John 1:1 tn The preposition πρός (pros) implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, “Πρός…means more than μετά or παρά, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another” (“The Gospel of St. John,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1:684). See also Mark 6:3, Matt 13:56, Mark 9:19, Gal 1:18, 2 John 12.
- John 1:1 tn Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (theos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “the Word was fully God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.sn And the Word was fully God. John’s theology consistently drives toward the conclusion that Jesus, the incarnate Word, is just as much God as God the Father. This can be seen, for example, in texts like John 10:30 (“The Father and I are one”), 17:11 (“so that they may be one just as we are one”), and 8:58 (“before Abraham came into existence, I am”). The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the personof God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”); rather it affirms that the Word and God are one in essence.
- https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+1:1&version=NET
Like I have said, I don't need to provide you with historical refutations since your position is that of a cult, and I have provided Scriptural support for the Trinity.
The distorted or false version of the history of Trinitarianism that you present as a Oneness Pentecostal doesn't need to be addressed, because as an evangelical, we believe in sola Scriptura.
Sola Scriptura means that Scripture is our standard.
If you want to refute anything, try refuting the analysis Rob Bowman has done concerning those who would deny the distinct Personhood of the Trinity.
https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...ew-of-gods-nature.189684/page-17#post-4291777
I don't suppose you will be doing this, because you cannot.
http://bib.irr.org/biblical-basis-o...-father-son-and-holy-spirit-are-three-persons
The distorted or false version of the history of Trinitarianism that you present as a Oneness Pentecostal doesn't need to be addressed, because as an evangelical, we believe in sola Scriptura.
Sola Scriptura means that Scripture is our standard.
If you want to refute anything, try refuting the analysis Rob Bowman has done concerning those who would deny the distinct Personhood of the Trinity.
https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...ew-of-gods-nature.189684/page-17#post-4291777
I don't suppose you will be doing this, because you cannot.
http://bib.irr.org/biblical-basis-o...-father-son-and-holy-spirit-are-three-persons
The Triune God is co-essential, meaning that the three Persons share the same essence. They mutually indwell one another. This essence is spirit. Therefore, there is only one spirit. Jesus has a dual nature, being both glorified man and Yahweh.
This is why the person can be indwelt by the Holy Spirit, which is the Spirit of the Father, and the Spirit of Christ, and the Holy Spirit at the same time.
This is why the person can be indwelt by the Holy Spirit, which is the Spirit of the Father, and the Spirit of Christ, and the Holy Spirit at the same time.