"The Word Became Flesh"

[Arial]

You might want to check @Fred's source because he completely missed the mark.

I did check it. DId you? Well---read it and weep for it comes directly from Meyer's writing. What is your source? You failed to give it and I expect you to do so since you bring into question another source used.

 

[CrowCross]

You're asking me about Mormons. You should know full well I am not a Mormon. I think the OP of this thread would greatly appreciate it if you would stay on topic. Page 1 is way too soon to start derailing a thread. My comments have been directly related to the OP.

I know you're not a mormon...but your false theology concerning the "Word"...and who the Word was and what Word means is very mormon like. Your view on this topic reminds me of the mormon cult viewpoint.

You presented Jesus, the WORD that became flesh, the savior and creator of the world as.... embodying generally the divine will...basically the "thoughts" of God. You turned God into an "it".

 

[Arial]

"The reality contained in this representation, anthropomorphic as to its form, of the revelation of Himself made in creation by God, who is in His own nature hidden, became the root of the Logos idea. The Word as creative, and embodying generally the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry (Psalm 33:6; Psalm 107:20; Psalm 147:15; Isaiah 55:10-11); and consequent upon this concrete and independent representation, divine attributes are predicated of it (Psalm 34:4; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:105), so far as it was at the same time the continuous revelation of God in law and prophecy

This quote is what is dealing with various methods of interpretation that existed and were incorrect, Philo being here referred to But Meyers view was that of John.
"The form which John gave to his doctrine is understood much more naturally and historically---"


"that while the ancient popular wisdom of the Word of God, which (as we have above shown) carries us back to Genesis 1:1 (NAS)

is acknowledged to be that through which the idea of the Logos, as manifested in human form in Christ, was immediately suggested to him, and to which he appended and unfolded his own peculiar development of this idea with all clearness and spiritual depth, according to the measure of those personal testimonies of his Lord"


"That main truth in it is to be referred simply to Christ Himself, whose communications to His disciples, and direct influence upon them (John 1:14 (NAS)
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

as well as His further revelations and leadings by means of the Spirit of truth, furnished them with the material which was afterwards made use of in their various modes of representation. This procedure is specially apparent also in John, whose doctrine of the divine and pre-existent nature of Christ, far removed from the influences of later Gnosticism, breaks away in essential points from the Alexandrine type of doctrine,"

 

[Arial]

What Meyer personally believes about the logos is that it's a thing, the divine expression of God, not a literal person. As he said, it's poetry and personification of a non-person thing.

You are misrepresenting Meyer. That is the opposite of what he believes. You have been given quotes from him to the contrary. I encourage readers to look it up so as to not be deceived on the matter.

 

[Arial]

Meyer, a well-respected, studied, and highly-qualified Trinitarian and Greek expert disagrees with you.

"The reality contained in this representation, anthropomorphic as to its form, of the revelation of Himself made in creation by God, who is in His own nature hidden, became the root of the Logos idea. The Word as creative, and embodying generally the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry (Psalm 33:6; Psalm 107:20; Psalm 147:15; Isaiah 55:10-11); and consequent upon this concrete and independent representation, divine attributes are predicated of it (Psalm 34:4; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:105), so far as it was at the same time the continuous revelation of God in law and prophecy."

That is not a statement of what Meyer believes but of Philos and Alexandrian thought.

 

[Arial]

It's an appeal to a well-respected Trinitarian commentator who disagrees with you. On Meyer's belief that the Word is an it, a thing, not a person, not God, I agree with him completely on this point and I applaud him for his honesty.

What you represent him as saying is not what he believes and not what he is saying. It has been proven.

 

[Arial]

Catholicism performs that kind of ideology with Peter. The word it used in both places represents the key that the gates of hell could never prevail against the gospel key. Not Peter a dying flesh and blood person. His key locked it . Not as you will father. But as I will.

Mathew 16:17-18 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Stick to the OP please.

 

[Fred]

You have misrepresented Meyer.

No, you did.

Meyer, a well-respected, studied, and highly-qualified Trinitarian and Greek expert disagrees with you.

"The reality contained in this representation, anthropomorphic as to its form, of the revelation of Himself made in creation by God, who is in His own nature hidden, became the root of the Logos idea. The Word as creative, and embodying generally the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry (Psalm 33:6; Psalm 107:20; Psalm 147:15; Isaiah 55:10-11); and consequent upon this concrete and independent representation, divine attributes are predicated of it (Psalm 34:4; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:105), so far as it was at the same time the continuous revelation of God in law and prophecy."

Addressed in post 10.

 

[Fred]

What you represent him as saying is not what he believes and not what he is saying. It has been proven.

Runningman is being really dishonest with this.

 

[Runningman]

He doesn't agree with you. You simply pulled it out of context. See post # 10

Read post !10 and refuted it. Read post #11.

 

[Runningman]

Runningman is being really dishonest with this.

I quoted Meyer's words about his belief that the Word in John 1:1 is a thing and that's dishonesty? Incredible. You quoted something that Meyer didn't even say, but cited from someone else. He even sourced it in his commentary.

 

[Runningman]

No, you did.



Addressed in post 10.

Refuted in post #11.

 

[Runningman]

Thanks. . Yes, not the word became flesh. The word "Let there be" created flesh You could say the invisible word of God became visible by the flesh. like magic children paint add water.. good job

Not of the flesh, the dying creatures. God has shown us, some heed the warning others worship the creature, Jesus the Son of man above the Father our faithful Creator the unseen head of the church

Romans1:19-20 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Roman 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

It demonstrates that Jesus is a man in whom the Word of God manifested in.

If we look at John 1:9, says "The true Light who gives light to every man was coming into the world."

Jesus was already born by the the time apostle John wrote that the true Light "was coming" into the world. That means the true Light was in process of coming into the world even 30 years after Jesus had already been born and became a man. That means the True Light is God, not Jesus, because Jesus is a man whom the True Light gave light to.


John 1
4In Him was life, and that life was the light of men.

John 5
26For as the Father has life in Himself, so also He has granted the Son to have life in Himself.

 

[Runningman]

I did check it. DId you? Well---read it and weep for it comes directly from Meyer's writing. What is your source? You failed to give it and I expect you to do so since you bring into question another source used.

https://biblehub.com/commentaries/meyer/john/1.htm

 

[Fred]

I quoted Meyer's words about his belief that the Word in John 1:1 is a thing and that's dishonesty? Incredible.

Already addressed in post 10.

 

[Fred]

https://biblehub.com/commentaries/meyer/john/1.htm

More proof that you don't know what you are talking about.

Meyer on John 1:2:
for if it was this same Logos, and no other than He, who Himself was God, who lived in the beginning in fellowship with God, and consequently when creation began, the whole creation, nothing excepted, must have come into existence through Him.

The boldface and underline above are mine.

 

[Runningman]

This quote is what is dealing with various methods of interpretation that existed and were incorrect, Philo being here referred to But Meyers view was that of John.
"The form which John gave to his doctrine is understood much more naturally and historically---"


"that while the ancient popular wisdom of the Word of God, which (as we have above shown) carries us back to Genesis 1:1 (NAS)

is acknowledged to be that through which the idea of the Logos, as manifested in human form in Christ, was immediately suggested to him, and to which he appended and unfolded his own peculiar development of this idea with all clearness and spiritual depth, according to the measure of those personal testimonies of his Lord"


"That main truth in it is to be referred simply to Christ Himself, whose communications to His disciples, and direct influence upon them (John 1:14 (NAS)
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

as well as His further revelations and leadings by means of the Spirit of truth, furnished them with the material which was afterwards made use of in their various modes of representation. This procedure is specially apparent also in John, whose doctrine of the divine and pre-existent nature of Christ, far removed from the influences of later Gnosticism, breaks away in essential points from the Alexandrine type of doctrine,"

Unfortunately for Trinitarianism, that isn't the case. He keeps pressing the narrative about the Word being a thing through which God created with in his commentary of John 1:2.

"Thus it is assumed, as a self-evident middle term, that God created the world not immediately, but, according to Genesis 1, through the medium of the Word."

 

[Fred]

Unfortunately for Trinitarianism, that isn't the case. He keeps pressing the narrative about the Word being a thing through which God created with in his commentary of John 1:2.

"Thus it is assumed, as a self-evident middle term, that God created the world not immediately, but, according to Genesis 1, through the medium of the Word."

And this "Word" has been further detailed in the previous post which you ignored.....who Himself was God

 

[Runningman]

More proof that you don't know what you are talking about.

Meyer on John 1:2:
for if it was this same Logos, and no other than He, who Himself was God, who lived in the beginning in fellowship with God, and consequently when creation began, the whole creation, nothing excepted, must have come into existence through Him.

The boldface and underline above are mine.

That isn't calling the Logos God. The premise for John 1:2 is already that the Logos is a thing, an it. He's quoting from John 1:2 what it says about the Word, but Meyer's commentary is that the Word isn't God. It's thing through which God created with.

Read Genesis 1 where God created with words and that YHWH created alone in Isaiah 44:24. God wasn't with someone in the beginning named the word. The Word is a thing being personified as Meyer said.

Isaiah 44
24Thus says the LORD,
your Redeemer who formed you from the womb:
“I am the LORD,
who has made all things,
who alone stretched out the heavens,
who by Myself spread out the earth,

 

[Fred]

Renowned Trinitarian Heinrich Meyer said of John 1:1 in his New Testament Commentary that the "Word" was created, is personified, and is poetic. He called the Word an it as the rest of the Bible says of the logos.

Here's Meyer on John 1:15:

The meaning of the sentence and the point of the expression depend upon this,—namely, that Christ in His human manifestation appeared after John, but yet, as the pre-mundane Logos, preceded him, because He existed before John.

John 1 Meyer's NT Commentary

biblehub.com

So much for the Logos being an "it."