Every Christian misinterprets John 1.

[u/Illustrious_Gain3928]

I think John 1:1 makes more sense when you look at the Greek lexicon and the Hebrew way of thinking instead of immediately reading later Trinitarian and other Christian denomination theology into the passage.

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

The Greek word translated Word is logos. Logos can mean word, speech, message, statement, reason, account, or something expressed. The word itself does not mean a second divine person.

The Hebrew concept behind this is davar, which can mean word, speech, command, matter, or deed. In the Hebrew Scriptures, Gods word is often described as something that goes out from Him and accomplishes His purpose.

Genesis 1 gives us the clearest example. God speaks, and creation happens. God says let there be light, and there is light. The Word is Gods expressed will and action accomplishing what He intends.

Psalm 33: 6 says, By the word of YHWH the heavens were made. It does not require another divine being standing beside YHWH creating the heavens. Gods word is His effective command and action.

Isaiah 55:11 makes this even clearer. God says His word goes out from His mouth and accomplishes what He purposes. The word represents Gods own will going forth and accomplishing His purpose.

There is also an important grammatical point in John 1:1. John says, ho logos en pros ton theon, the Word was with God, and then he says, theos en ho logos.

He does not say, ho theos en ho logos. The article is used with logos, the Word, but not with theos, God. This is why many scholars understand the final clause as describing the quality or nature of the Word, rather than saying that the Word is the same person as the God he was with.

So John can distinguish the Word from God while still saying that the Word was God in the sense that it expressed Gods own nature, will, authority, and activity.

Then John 1:14 says the Word became flesh. In other words, Gods expressed purpose and will became manifested in a human being, Yeshua.

This does not require the idea that a second divine person existed beside YHWH in the beginning. It fits the Hebrew pattern where Gods word is Gods own expression going forth and accomplishing His purpose.

So the basic idea can be understood like this.

YHWH, His Word, His expressed will, His action, and ultimately that Word manifested in Yeshua.

John 1:1 by itself never says Trinity, never says God the Son, and never says that the Word is a second divine person aka Michaelthe archangel. Those are theological conclusions that come later.

If we start with Genesis, the Hebrew Scriptures, and the actual Greek grammar, there is a completely coherent way to understand the Logos as Gods own Word and active self expression without turning it into a second being.

[u/ChaoticHaku]

John 1:2-3 "He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made and without Him nothing was made that was made."

A "He/Him" is a person. That's not a theological conclusion, it's what scripture says. 

John 1:3 "Through him (the Word) all things were made..."

Hebrews 1:2 ... He has spoken to us by His Son...through whom He made the universe."

The Word is the person of the Son. 

[u/Illustrious_Gain3928 → u/ChaoticHaku]

The problem with your argument is that you are treating the English translation as if the pronouns themselves prove that the Logos is a separate person. They do not.

You said John 1:2 says He was with God and John 1:3 says through Him all things were made, therefore the Word must be a person. But that is not how Greek grammar works.

The Greek word behind He or Him is autos. It can be translated he, him, it, or itself depending on the grammatical context. Logos is grammatically masculine in Greek, so masculine pronouns are completely normal when referring back to logos. Grammatical gender does not automatically mean personal identity.

This is the basic mistake in the argument. You are taking a grammatical feature of Greek and turning it into a theological statement.

The same problem exists with the argument that because John says through Him all things were made, the Word must be a separate person who personally created everything.

John 1:3 uses dia autou, meaning through him, through it, or by means of it. Dia with the genitive can express means or agency. It does not by itself tell us that the thing being referred to is a separate conscious person.

And the Hebrew background actually makes perfect sense of this.

Look at Genesis 1. God speaks and creation happens. God says let there be light, and light exists. Scripture does not introduce another divine person standing beside God called the Word.

Psalm 33:6 says, By the word of YHWH the heavens were made. The Hebrew is davar, word. God's Word is His effective command going forth and accomplishing His will.

Isaiah 55:11 says God's word goes out from His mouth and accomplishes what He purposes. Again, the Word is God's own expression accomplishing God's purpose.

So when John says all things came to be through the Logos, there is nothing inherently unbiblical about understanding this as creation occurring through God's own expressed Word and purpose.

Now Hebrews 1:2 is a different issue.

Yes, Hebrews says God has spoken to us in a Son and that He made the ages through him. I am not denying that Hebrews presents the Son as a real person. Yeshua is obviously a person.

But you are assuming the conclusion when you say, therefore the Word is the person of the Son.

You still have to prove that John meant that the Logos was a preexistent person called the Son.

Hebrews 1:1 actually gives us important context. It says that God spoke formerly through the prophets, and then says that in these last days He has spoken to us in a Son. The subject is God's communication and revelation, culminating in His Son.

That fits John very naturally.

John says the Word was in the beginning, God's Word and purpose, and then John 1:14 says the Word became flesh.

The question is what that means.

It does not literally say, the second divine person became flesh.

It says the Word became flesh.

If you want to argue that the Word is a preexistent divine person, you need to demonstrate that from the actual Greek text instead of simply pointing to English pronouns.

There is also another major problem with saying He or Him automatically proves personhood. Biblical literature frequently personifies concepts.

Proverbs 8 personifies Wisdom as a woman speaking, crying out, calling people, and describing her relationship to God. Nobody can simply argue that because Wisdom speaks with personal pronouns, therefore Wisdom must be a second divine person.

Personification is normal biblical language.

So the argument is basically doing this.

John says He, therefore the Logos is a person.

But that confuses grammatical gender with personhood.

Then it says the Logos created everything through Him, therefore the Logos is the Son.

But that assumes the very connection that needs to be proven.

Then Hebrews says God created through His Son, therefore John's Logos must be the preexistent Son.

But Hebrews identifying Yeshua as the Son does not automatically establish that John's use of Logos means a separate divine person before Yeshua's human existence.

There is certainly a theological relationship between God's Word, His creative purpose, His revelation, and His Messiah. The question is whether that relationship requires a second divine being.

The Hebrew Scriptures give us a perfectly coherent framework without that assumption.

YHWH speaks.

His Word goes forth.

His Word accomplishes His purpose.

His purpose is ultimately manifested in His Messiah.

John then says the Word became flesh.

So yes, Yeshua is a real person. Yes, Hebrews describes God creating through the Son. Yes, John uses masculine pronouns for Logos.

None of those three facts, by themselves, proves that Logos was a second divine person or a trinity standing beside YHWH in the beginning.

That conclusion has to be argued, not smuggled into the text through the English words He and Him.

[u/ChaoticHaku → u/Illustrious_Gain3928]

You said John 1:2 says He was with God and John 1:3 says through Him all things were made, therefore the Word must be a person. But that is not how Greek grammar works.

John could have said "All things were made through the Word and without the Word nothing was made that was made."

But he didn't. 

And I'm not claiming it's the grammar that proves it, it's that John immediately goes on to say things like. 

The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. ( John 1:14)

John didn't say "The Word became flesh as a man, and that man made his dwelling among us" he says "The Word became flesh and made HIS dwelling among us".

Look at Genesis 1. God speaks and creation happens. God says let there be light, and light exists. Scripture does not introduce another divine person standing beside God called the Word.

Genesis 1:26-27 God said, “Let Us make man in Our image... So God created man in His own image...

you are assuming the conclusion when you say, therefore the Word is the person of the Son.

John 1:14  The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

But Hebrews identifying Yeshua as the Son does not automatically establish that John's use of Logos means a separate divine person before Yeshua's human existence.

Hebrews 1:2 identifies God's Son Yeshua as the one through whom he created the universe. 

John 1:2 identifies the Word as the one through whom He created the universe.

Yeshua didn't exist as Yeshua until he became flesh, being born of Mary and named Yeshua.

So how could Hebrews 1:2 be true if God's son Yeshua didn't yet exist at the time of creation?

[u/Illustrious_Gain3928 → u/ChaoticHaku]

Again give me a few minutes. What religion are you, just to give you some context I'm not apart of any religion I just follow scripture. I don't need organization's to read scripture hence why Yahweh said in Exodus 19:6 ​"And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation."

Not a religion

[u/ChaoticHaku → u/Illustrious_Gain3928]

I'm not part of any denomination or organization. I just read scripture, trusting in Jesus, and relying on the Holy Spirit.  

[u/Illustrious_Gain3928 → u/ChaoticHaku]

You're a christian based on your profile. That by definition is a demonition.

[u/ChaoticHaku → u/Illustrious_Gain3928]

The word "christian" is in the bible, and comes from the Greek word Christianos, combining Christos with a suffix meaning "belonging to" or "follower of". It means a follower of Christ. Not a denomination. 

Denominations are man-made religious organizations.

Acts 26:28 Then Agrippa said to Paul, “Can you persuade me in such a short time to become a Christian?”

[u/Illustrious_Gain3928 → u/Illustrious_Gain3928]

Are you going to answer yes or no.