Is Jesus Christ a created being (Begotten Son) or has He always existed alongside God the Father (Eternal Son)?

[RandyK]

RandyK,
I consider that The Word, "Logos" in John 1:1 is a personification of the character of the One God, Yahweh, God the Father, similar to "Wisdom" in Proverbs 8, but in John 1:14 Jesus has become The Word, "his glory", moral glory, not physical glory, he was "full of grace and truth".

Wisdom itself is not personified unless it is expressed as though a person. That happened when it was represented as a woman.

The Word of God is not personified unless it is given human-like attributes. That is not happening. The Word became flesh because it actually was a transition from God's thoughts to a realized physical reality. It was not, as such, a "personification."

You say that "Jesus has become The Word," and that he did not become God's "physical glory." What does this even mean?

How could Jesus "become the Word?" He was a human being, and not he sort of conforms, morally, to what he thinks God is like, and so becomes "the Word?"

I find nothing in the Scriptures suggesting this. I read that he *was* in fact the Word. He did not *become the Word.* Jesus existed before Abraham.

He did not just summon the moral courage to be more moral than other people to represent God's Word! Why wouldn't anybody else be able to do the same, unless he is viewed as either Divine or sinless, or both? And if he was sinless, how is he not something beyond human, which would have to be Divine?

I could be wrong, but you seem to reflect some aspects of Oneness Pentecostalism.

Yes, you're wrong. I am Trinitarian, but having been in a modalistic Christian cult (for a short time) I've developed my own language in describing the Trinity. If it helped me I thought perhaps it could help others who, like me, needed a better understanding?

I distinguish the Persons of God based on the difference between His transcendence and His immanence within the world. God is the infinite Source of His revelations in time, and as such the revelations of His Person, or Word, was with Him in eternity and is revealed in time and space.

Then I show that these multiple Persons, though all expressing the infinite God in our finite reality all inter-relate with one another. This is a characteristic of different Persons.

One God and one Divine Substance uniting 3 distinct Divine Persons and really--many theophanies. God is simply able to appear in time, distinguishing Himself in time from His Person beyond time.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again RandyK,

Wisdom itself is not personified unless it is expressed as though a person. That happened when it was represented as a woman.

Yes.

The Word of God is not personified unless it is given human-like attributes. That is not happening. The Word became flesh because it actually was a transition from God's thoughts to a realized physical reality. It was not, as such, a "personification."

I am interested in your definition and agree with some aspects. But you are possibly the first Trinitarian that I have met that does not define "The Word" as the pre-existent Jesus, or God the Son, one third of the Trinity.

You say that "Jesus has become The Word," and that he did not become God's "physical glory." What does this even mean?
How could Jesus "become the Word?" He was a human being, and not he sort of conforms, morally, to what he thinks God is like, and so becomes "the Word?"
I find nothing in the Scriptures suggesting this. I read that he *was* in fact the Word.

Let us go back to what I stated:

in John 1:14 Jesus has become The Word, or rather The Word has become Jesus, "his glory", moral glory, not physical glory, he was "full of grace and truth".

I will still resort to the definition that The Logos represents the One God, Yahweh, God the Father's Plan, Purpose, Wisdom and Character. Please note that I have stated both "Jesus has become The Word", and with a major adjustment of perspective "The Word has become Jesus".

Looking at the first of these, John states that at the time of his ministry, the disciples and others beheld "his glory". Now this was not physical glory as revealed on the Mount of Transfiguration, but moral glory, reflecting the character of God. Jesus was at the time of his ministry "full of grace and truth". This was a development, growing in wisdom as a child, and being instructed by His Father throughout his whole life. So this was in many respects was all a matter of growth. So going back to the definition, Jesus' willing submission to the Plan and Purpose of God, and his development of Wisdom and God's Character "full of grace and truth", then Jesus has become The Word.

Looking at the second, "The Word has become Jesus" places the emphasis on the work of Salvation, by means of the development of Jesus. God's Plan, Purpose, Wisdom and Character came to fruition in the birth, growth, ministry, trials, crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus.

I find nothing in the Scriptures suggesting this. I read that he *was* in fact the Word. He did not *become the Word.* Jesus existed before Abraham.

I consider that Jesus was in the plan, purpose and wisdom of Yahweh before the existence of Abraham. I briefly considered John 8:58 in my previous post.

He did not just summon the moral courage to be more moral than other people to represent God's Word! Why wouldn't anybody else be able to do the same, unless he is viewed as either Divine or sinless, or both? And if he was sinless, how is he not something beyond human, which would have to be Divine?

Jesus is a special human, the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection raised by God to achieve his work of salvation. I will not respond to the rest of your post as it is outside my understanding.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RandyK]

I am interested in your definition and agree with some aspects. But you are possibly the first Trinitarian that I have met that does not define "The Word" as the pre-existent Jesus, or God the Son, one third of the Trinity.

True, my Trinitarian explanation is unusual, which is due to my experience in a modalist cult. I'm aware of the problem and difference of opinion, as I had a "go around" way back in the mid-70s with Walter Martin's group, Christian Research Institute. Martin disagreed but never proved that what I said was heterodox or wrong--it was simply "irrational" from his perspective.

To this day, nobody has proven my position heterodox or even truly "irrational." I've developed it after a personal study of Western philosophy. I give you credit for recognizing it, as did Free. The goal has never been to challenge orthodox definitions of the Trinity, but rather, to explain it better for myself or for anybody else who had problems with it as I did.

I will still resort to the definition that The Logos represents the One God, Yahweh, God the Father's Plan, Purpose, Wisdom and Character. Please note that I have stated both "Jesus has become The Word", and with a major adjustment of perspective "The Word has become Jesus".

What you said was this: "in John 1:14 Jesus has become The Word, "his glory", moral glory, not physical glory, he was "full of grace and truth"."

So your "major adjustment of perspective" appears to be your editting of your statement to add "the Word has become Jesus," which is what John 1.14 is actually saying--not "Jesus has become the Word."

And this is an important "adjustment" because you can defend what the passage is actually saying--not what it is not saying. It did not say that "Jesus has become the Word." It said that "the Word became flesh."

Looking at the first of these, John states that at the time of his ministry, the disciples and others beheld "his glory". Now this was not physical glory as revealed on the Mount of Transfiguration, but moral glory, reflecting the character of God.

And I'm just to take your word for this, that on the Mt. of Transfiguration there was only "moral glory," and not "physical glory?" It's pretty presumptuous of you to think that all should agree with you on this, since there is zero evidence that this is so apart from your claim that it is so. At least, I don't see any evidence for your claims?

Jesus was at the time of his ministry "full of grace and truth". This was a development, growing in wisdom as a child, and being instructed by His Father throughout his whole life. So this was in many respects was all a matter of growth. So going back to the definition, Jesus' willing submission to the Plan and Purpose of God, and his development of Wisdom and God's Character "full of grace and truth", then Jesus has become The Word.

"Growing in wisdom" is not "becoming the Word!" We can all "grow in wisdom." Are you then saying that we can all "become the Word?" What a strange way to say things. And I'm virtually certain that is not what the Apostle John meant to say when he wrote this!

Beyond this, the Scriptures do not define "becoming the Word" in this way. You simply assume it is true because the Scriptures say, "the Word became flesh." But for God's "moral Word" to become flesh we are not being told that Jesus grew in wisdom to attain to such a reality.

You apparently just refuse to believe that Divine revelation can crystalize into the appearance of a human being. But if that is how God created the entire universe, how is it so incredible that God revealed His own Person in the appearance of a single man?

And if He had already done that in the past through theophanies, why suddenly think that the only way it could be done with Jesus is through "growing in wisdom?" It doesn't sound realistic to me.

Looking at the second, "The Word has become Jesus" places the emphasis on the work of Salvation, by means of the development of Jesus. God's Plan, Purpose, Wisdom and Character came to fruition in the birth, growth, ministry, trials, crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus.

Yes, that is your obvious intent, but that is not the obvious meaning of "the Word became flesh." But thanks for answering. Have a nice day...