Most complex explanation of the Godhead ever!

[Michael The Disciple]

Phil.2:6 is speaking of the man not Preincarnate.

So you think the man Jesus Christ was equal to God? If so why did he say my Father is greater than I? Why did he say he could do nothing of himself, only what he saw the Father do? Why did he pray not my will but thine be done? If he were equal to God in his humanity why did he pray at all?

HEB.1:3 speaking of the man not a Preincarnate image.

But why did Paul say God made the worlds by his Son? Was the man Jesus Christ before the Universe as its creator?

Jonh 1:1 speaking of the word not a form or image

Well what was the WORD/LOGOS?

Was the word a plan in this verse?

1 John 5:7

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the PLAN, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Was the word a plan in this verse?

11And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The PLAN of God.

Was a PLAN riding the white horse? Or was it the person of Jesus Christ?

[Esaias]

Although I believe Paul was not teaching on Incarnational Christology (!) in Phil. 2 - I believe that passage has to do with Christ as second Adam reversing the Fall rather than Christ as God becoming man - nevertheless, Michael has presented good evidence for the pre-incarnate Word being the manifest presence of Jehovah's "person".

[Esaias]

William Arnold III:

"In the beginning was the logos (word). Whether we want to say the word of God, the expression of God or the glory of God, this is what existed in eternity past, not an eternal second person in the Godhead. Jesus is the visible representation of the one invisible God. It can be said that he was with God and it can be said that he was God, but this does not make God himself multiple persons for the scriptures emphatically teach that God is one."

https://www.onenesspentecostal.com/logos.htm

[Evang.Benincasa]

Logos to the ancient philosophers meant reasoning and word. its definition from ancient times is "word, speech, discourse, story, cause, communication, doctrine, purpose, preaching, thought, mind, plan, activity, statement, expression. Dr James White and other Trinitarian apologists (including their dictionaries/Lexicons, see logos as meaning second person of the Trinity.)Which in the ancient past was a foreign idea, which no one would of even considered.
Logos is the root of the word logic, God's logic, thought, expression became His expressed image Hebrews 1:3, Colossians 1:15.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Logos to the ancient philosophers meant reasoning and word. its definition from ancient times is "word, speech, discourse, story, cause, communication, doctrine, purpose, preaching, thought, mind, plan, activity, statement, expression. Dr James White and other Trinitarian apologists (including their dictionaries/Lexicons, see logos as meaning second person of the Trinity.)Which in the ancient past was a foreign idea, which no one would of even considered.
Logos is the root of the word logic, God's logic, thought, expression became His expressed image Hebrews 1:3, Colossians 1:15.

amen.

Please clarify Genesis 1:27

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Logos to the ancient philosophers meant reasoning and word. its definition from ancient times is "word, speech, discourse, story, cause, communication, doctrine, purpose, preaching, thought, mind, plan, activity, statement, expression. Dr James White and other Trinitarian apologists (including their dictionaries/Lexicons, see logos as meaning second person of the Trinity.)Which in the ancient past was a foreign idea, which no one would of even considered.
Logos is the root of the word logic, God's logic, thought, expression became His expressed image Hebrews 1:3, Colossians 1:15.

The Apostle John had no comprehension about what ancient Greek philosophers believed. He was teaching about something that was WITH GOD in the OT and simultaneously WAS GOD.

The word "logo" is from logos. What is a logo?

Think about a business. They make a little emblem or "picture" they put on documents or advertisements. When people see THE LOGO they think about the business.

The logo is not the business but it REPRESENTS the business.

The logo that was with God was not God in omnipresence but God in {visible} expression. His REPRESENTATION to the Universe.

The last thing the Spirit was trying to teach the Church was Greek philosophy.

[Michael The Disciple]

In the OT the Jews thought of God in connection with the angel of God. To them they were the same.

Zechariah 12:8

8In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

Genesis 48:15-16

15And he blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day,

16The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.

Jacob (Israel) was the Father of the Jews. He taught that the God (Elohim) that he knew WAS THE ANGEL.

So the angel was with God but the Angel was God.

This is the lesson John was teaching in John 1:1

In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God.

Or Literally in the Greek, Aramaic, and Latin "GOD WAS THE WORD".

It was God himself possessing a form with his own eternal life before the word was.

Proverbs 8:22-31


22The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.

23I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.

24When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.

25Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:

26While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.

27When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:

28When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:

29When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:

30Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;

31Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.

Does the Bible teach that Gods eternal life was with him?

1 John 1:1-2

1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us

So the Logos was the "word of life" or we might say the EXPRESSION OF GODS ETERNAL LIFE.

It was neither a second person or merely a "plan".

It was God possessing a form where some of his eternal life would be MANIFESTED.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Logos to the ancient philosophers meant reasoning and word. its definition from ancient times is "word, speech, discourse, story, cause, communication, doctrine, purpose, preaching, thought, mind, plan, activity, statement, expression. Dr James White and other Trinitarian apologists (including their dictionaries/Lexicons, see logos as meaning second person of the Trinity.)Which in the ancient past was a foreign idea, which no one would of even considered.
Logos is the root of the word logic, God's logic, thought, expression became His expressed image Hebrews 1:3, Colossians 1:15.

This is the truth, that's why I had a hard time with what you were saying too. Because, Logos from early antiquity meant these things.

For Neo Platonic thought is what brought Logos to mean what your explaining, not the other way around. Neo Platonic thought says well in this case it means exactly what Brother EB just "thought, plan, etc." But when it relates to Jesus it means "expression, and image."

Look at what the Encyclopedia Brittanica says about it:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/logos

It's part of Philo of Alexandria's school of thought. I understand what your saying but John understood this word in another way then your understanding it. We understand it today in a Trinitarian line of thinking, but John never knew it the way you are saying it. That whole concept would be unheard of until years after his death.

So what your presenting is a progressive revelation. Do you think that the one's that experienced this firsthand needed progressive revelation?

[1ofthechosen]

Marvin D Treece on John 1:1-4 the Greek scholar. This is just one of the tapes from the 1986 Oneness Symposium. I have them all on my page. They did a extensive study upon Neo Platonic thought, and the trinity in this Symposium. It was very interesting. I recommend listening to all of them if you have time. The whole thing was well put together. I just posted this one, because this one is dealing with the topic at hand.

[1ofthechosen]

If you want to follow along here's the text of what Elder Treece is saying. I'll break it up in posts:
THE ONENESS EXPOSITION OF JOHN 1:1-14 "The gospel of John posits a harmonious conclusion to the synoptic gospels. Although it does not lay side by side with the other gospel writers, it reaches the same collective viewpoint regarding Christ. Each gospel writer views Christ with an eye to his own feelings. It is interesting to see them relate events of His life that reveal something of themselves as well. Matthews sees Him as the King and the kingdom; Mark sees Him as the Son of God; Luke sees Him as the Son of man; but John, in an awesome manner, brings all this to the observer yet joins all these impressions into clear focus. He marvels at the “mind” behind it and presents to us the God-man. He sets forth the Christ as a “unique One from God” not just the familiar “only begotten one” but a “one of a kind, a unique one.” Ardnt-Gingrich says it quite accurately in the Johannine expression τòν υíòν τòν µονογενῆ (John 3:16-18, I John) as unique.1 He sets Him forth as the unique apparition of invisible God fused with man in a glorious being. John begins his gospel the same as his epistle, with the beginning (John 1:1 ἐν ἀρχῇ and I John 1:1 ὁ ἦ ἀπ’ ἀρχῇς). He omits the detailed nativity of Christ, which was covered in the synoptics. John evidently had these other gospel accounts before him. He does not relate all the miracles as Matthew, Mark, and Luke. It seems he is quite willing to leave some of these things for them to relate and concludes that all Christ did and said would be impossible to tell. Yet he dares to go farther than his partners in both time and perception. He goes back to the beginning, past the incarnation, completely back to eras preceding man and time. He wants to take us back to the very outset of all history and to investigate the powers that flowed into the universe. Here the gospel could be viewed as just a cold science lesson dealing with the concept of “life” and energy coming from one indisputable source, God. It describes His actions analytically, taking us through the steps of all beginnings. “Biological life on earth, mysterious and conducive to awe for those who know the most about it, had its beginning and transmission to living things in the universe by means of Him.” However, when we turn to the epistle of John, though he once again starts from the beginning, it is more personal with the thrill of having seen, felt, and heard this great, brilliant creator. John does not speak now, after Pentecost, about the beginning in the same scientific manner. No longer is it “concept suspended in space,” but the “Logos” which produced this Light and Life has been in very close contact with us. The depth of the emotional thrill was expressed by him who leaned upon Christ’s breast, saying, “We have seen with our eyes,” not just in history. We have not listened to someone else’s word but, we have seen the “Logos” with our own eyes; our ears have heard Him; our hands have handled Him, “the Word of Life.” John does indeed bring Him down to us in his gospel narrative, and we see His “glory.” Whereas in I John, it was remarkable to the apostle to have handled this “Word of Life.” It is from this beginning with concept, “Light” and “Life” that Christ comes to us. Without a detailed account of Bethlehem’s manger scene, he tells of Him already fully grown, full of “grace and truth” (John 1:14). It is clear that we are to associate these powers of eternal knowledge with the “man.” We move from ζωἡ the in verse 4 as the originator of man to see the “true” man in verse 14; we go immediately from the great blast of creation light to “true light” (verse 9). Let us first look at an analysis of the major words in the first fourteen verses of John. (Parsing of these words will be found under another heading.) λόγος = Word The Greek background of λόγος goes back as far as 560 B.C. with a Greek philosopher named Heraclitus.2 William Barclay quoted Heraclitus and says that λόγος “was the reasoning of God”—the principle of order under which the universe continued to exist. Heraclitus believed that since everything was in a “changing state of flux” nothing stayed the same. The thing that controlled it all was λόγος. He believed if one steps twice into the same river, it is a different river the second time. The river flows on; things are always changing. Heraclitus reasoned if there is constant change, why is not everything in complete chaos? His answer was the λόγoς, the “reasoning of God,” the order of God’s reasoning.3 This is the first known use of λόγος in a sense of its being more than just a “word” or “saying.” The Stoics (a school of philosophers founded at the close of the 4th century B.C.) were always left in wondering amazement at the order of the world. They would ask what keeps the stars in their courses. What makes the action of the ocean, the rise and fall of the tide? Their answer was the λóγoς of God controlled all things. It is the power that puts sense into the world, the power which makes the world an order instead of a chaos, the power which sets the world going and keeps it in its perfect order. Perhaps the most illustrious of philosophers (as far as λόγος goes) was a Jew called Philo who joined the Greek thought with the Jewish thought and knew the Scriptures as no other Jew knew them. He said the Logos was the thought of God stamped upon the universe; he talked about the Logos by which God made the world and all things; he said that God, the pilot of the universe, held the Logos as a tiller and with it steered all things. He said that man’s mind was stamped also with the Logos, that the Logos was what gave a man reason, the power to think and the power to know. There is no disparity between these first seeds of the idea of λόγος in philosophy and John’s use of the same concept. They believed λόγος to be the “reasoning of God.” As such, it was a part of creation and universal power. John said this “reasoning” was with God and was God. It would have been ludicrous to both ancient philosophers and apostles of Christ to suggest that the λόγος was a separate individual or another “person” of God. God, in their reasoning, was absolute and independent. Any power, reasoning, or expression was nothing separate from the one God. In time the λόγος became flesh and “God with us” (Matthew 1:23), not a God but “the God.” Logos is the word we expect to consider mostly; however, the other words, such as ἦν, play an important role in defining certain limits of logos. The same importance must be ascribed to the preposition πρòς because of certain ideas of Trinitarianism which literalize its definition beyond intended expression. Though the definition might express ‘face to face” action, it does violence to responsible exegesis to conclude that these are two actual faces. This is the reason why it is necessary to consider certain other words in this passage as well. Logos is without question the outstanding word in John 1 and perhaps in all of John’s writings. The “Logos” is a viable argument for the authorship of John’s writing John 1:14, I John 1:1, Revelation 19:13. Whether he had the knowledge of early philosophers’ expressions is unknown. It certainly is true that the inspiration of God was directing his heart. In some respects it seems to allow an insight into the type of thinking of the apostle and almost surely reveals the spiritual nature of the man. He seems to see more in some actions of Christ than his peers. One of the remarkable things that identifies Johannine writings is the ability to see more than surface action and find its existence in prophecy. From Christ’s birth to His crucifixion, John constantly said of Him, “Thus fulfilled He the Scriptures.” To him Christ fulfilled the entire purpose of preceding programs of God; such programs and structures serve as a backdrop, or prop, to focus on Jesus Christ. Logos is one of those expressions which sets forth a scheme that extends back into eternity, as far as the eye might see, and travels into the ages until our thoughts are dwarfed by awesome infinity. Yet what strange interpretation often results from much commentary. Everyone, through the ages, reading the comments of the earlier writers adds his own until much more is said than was probably intended. With the accumulated volumes written on the subject of “Logos,” it would be beneficial to all to examine only what John said and minimize the elaborate, speculative comments of others. So much commentary has resulted in differing views that it is “hardly possible…to give a full history of the Greek words for ‘to say,’ ‘to speak,’ ‘to tell,’ ‘word,’ and ‘speech.’”4 Kittel and Freidrich list no less than fifteen major divisions by time period and theological difference in history with twenty to twenty-five subheadings, e.g., “(1.) The meaning of the Greek and Hellenistic world…(5.) Hellenistic Logos speculation and the New Testament.”5 It is amazing how one word has collected such a following of commentaries."