BIBLE DIGEST -
Number 6 (Revised)
December 1993
IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD
by Allon Maxwell
|
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word
was with God, and the Word was God; He was in the beginning with God; all
things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was
made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in
the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it".
(John 1:1-5) What does this
mean? Theologians
have managed to complicate it beyond all logic, to say something like: Jesus
is called the Word. We may substitute the name "Jesus" in place of
"Word" so that the passage now reads: "Jesus
already existed in the beginning. Jesus was with God in the beginning, and
Jesus actually was God!" This totally
illogical foundation has then been used by the theologians to build a number
of complicated and confusing dogmas concerning the nature of Jesus and His
relationship to his Father. The Church has fought and divided amongst its
opposing factions for most of its history about these theories (in many cases
proving by their behaviour towards one another, that they were not really
disciples!). There are too
many variations of these theories, and too much confusion in them, to attempt
to explain the subtleties of them all adequately within the compass of one
short paper. However, the following attempts to set down the heart of the
main theories which still exist to some significant degree in the 20th
century church. 1. THE TRINITY This is THE
MAJOR THEORY found in most of the creeds of the mainstream of today's church,
e.g.: *
the Athanasian Creed *
the Nicene Creed In these creeds
Jesus is said to be one of three divine persons (the Father and the Holy
Spirit are the other two) who together constitute one God. However, the
theologians also tell us that these three persons are not three separate
persons! "Person",
THEY say, is not an adequate word! The theologically correct word is the
Greek "hypostasis", for which they say the English
"person" does not convey the real sense. In fact, they say, there
is no direct translation into English! In language which I find quite
confusing, the textbooks say that God is "personal"
or "supra personal" (whatever that means!) without
being a person as we understand the word! (Nowhere in the
New Testament is "hypostasis" used in any way which would
even remotely justify this "clever" theological use of the word to
describe the "mystery" of these three "not really
persons " of the doctrine of the Trinity.) We are told that
these three persons (who are not really persons, but untranslatable "hypostases"!)
are each equally: - *
God *
glorious *
eternal *
uncreated *
incomprehensible *
almighty *
Lord Each person (who
they say is not really a person!) must be acknowledged in his own right to be
Lord and God, but at the same time it is heresy to say that there are
three Lords or three Gods. They also say
that, although Jesus is co-eternal with His Father, he is at the same time
begotten (but not made or created). They insist
that all three are to be worshipped as "Unity in Trinity"
and "Trinity in Unity" (whatever that means!). They say that
Jesus has two natures, being both God and man at the same time; equal to his
Father because He is God, and yet inferior because He is man. Finally, they
say we must all believe this contradictory gobbledygook to be saved! To be honest
enough to say that one does not understand it all, and therefore cannot
rationally believe it, is (according to the Athanasian Creed) to be eternally
lost. It is all, say
the theologians, a mystery to be taken in a blind leap of "FAITH". It is
significant that this confusing dogma, now required as essential to
salvation, was not really put into words in its present form, until the 4th
century. It is not found at all in the Old Testament, or in the teaching of
the Apostles in the New Testament. Nor, in its present form was it known to
any of the Church Fathers of the first three centuries. The story of
how it came to be adopted by the Church is one of politics, intrigue and
bitter and murderous warfare amongst 4th century leaders. It is blot in the
history of the Church. (This history is briefly described in Bible Digest No
12 - "How the Doctrine of the Trinity Came to the Church".) 2. ARIANISM This is the
"other side" of that 4th century controversy which led to the
mainstream adoption of the doctrine of the Trinity. It takes its name from
Arius who was the loser in the fight with Athanasius, the leader of the
Trinitarian faction. Arius taught
that if Jesus really was the Son of God, then there must have been a time
when there was a Father but no Son. Jesus, he said was therefore created at
some time prior to the creation of the world existing as a separate person (a
spirit being) prior to His birth as the son of Mary. Although
finally outlawed by the Council of Constantinople in AD381 and made
punishable by death by the Emperor Justinian in the 6th century, Arianism
persisted for several centuries as a significant doctrine in a section of the
Church, especially in northern Europe. It was finally almost extinguished by
warfare and politics, but has continued to surface in small pockets, from
time to time. Today, the only
significant group to support it is the Jehovah's Witnesses, although one does
occasionally find individuals in mainline churches who are (usually secretly)
Arian rather than Trinitarian. 3.
MONARCHIANISM (Sometimes also
called "Sabellianism", or "Jesus only") This variation
asserts that if Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God and the Father is
God, then there are not three persons but one person, who plays three
different roles, from time to time, as the occasion warrants! This is, of
course, even more incomprehensible, and illogical than the dogma of the
Trinity. It leads to the
following totally impossible conflicts: - *
God, when he plays the role of
Father, is not a man, yet when He plays the role of Jesus, is a man. *
God, as Jesus, prays to and
worships Himself as Father (the ultimate schizophrenic ego trip!) *
God, as Jesus, sits at His own
right hand as Father. (In two places at once! That is real role playing!) *
Jesus, as a finite man, is somehow
still everywhere present as an infinite Spirit. *
Jesus, with His two natures, could
be tempted in His human nature, but could not sin at all because of His
second Divine nature! (Making his temptation and victory over sin into a
total farce). *
On the cross, only His human
nature died, since His second Divine nature could not die. (Meaning in
effect, that He has not paid the price for our sins after all!) The theory is
not widely held but does exist in several Pentecostal denominations of which
the largest is the United Pentecostal Church. It is also found occasionally
in individuals in mainline churches and in the complicated writings of some
theologians who in trying to explain the Trinity, actually seem to come down
on the side of Monarchianism. (But
then perhaps I didn't understand what they wrote, any more than they seemed
to. It really was as incomprehensible as what they were trying to explain.) THE PROBLEM
WITH ALL THREE OF THE ABOVE THEORIES There is one
major problem with all three of these theories. The scriptures
are quite clear that Jesus is a real man, and that God is not a
man. Although all three pay lip service in so many words, to the manhood
of Jesus, they very effectively deny the reality. *
No other man has ever been born
with two natures. *
No other man has ever had an
eternal or infinite mind. *
No other man ever existed before
his birth as an infinite uncreated spirit being. Simple logic
says that if Jesus did have any of those advantages, then He was not
really a man! In fact, the
three theories quoted above which do give Jesus those advantages, are nothing
more or less than a modern form of the old Gnostic heresy described in
John's first epistle. The Gnostics held that Jesus was a sort of lesser God
or spirit being who came down from heaven and assumed the appearance of a
man, without the reality. It was because
of this (they say) that he was able to live a sinless life, unaffected by the
limitations of real humanity. Further, they
then went on to say that since Jesus was not really man, God did not really
expect other men to be like Him, and therefore obedience was not really
necessary. God, they said, was not concerned with what men did with their
flesh. It was what they were in their spirits that counted for salvation! Along with the
dogma of the "God Man", this last point makes its cleverly
disguised appearance in many of the false Gospels encountered in the modern
Church. One regularly encounters such statements as "What you are is
more important than what you do", or "Insistence on obedience to
what God says is mere legalism", or "it is impossible for these
fleshly bodies to obey or overcome sin". THE FACT IS
THAT JESUS WAS AND IS A REAL MAN There are four
essential differences which show that Jesus is different in nature to His
Father (who is called the only true God in John
17:3). Those four things are: -
HOW THEN DO WE
UNDERSTAND WHAT JOHN WROTE? We must start with
the reality of the manhood of Jesus. If we keep that firmly in mind, the rest
falls into place.
JESUS IS NOT
ONLY "THE WORD", BUT ALSO "THE WORD MADE FLESH" The Greek word "logos"
which is translated "Word" in this passage, simply means "a
spoken word", "a saying", "a communication", etc.
According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon it also means the inward
thought which is expressed in the spoken word. There are many
other shades of meaning, but all derive in some sense from these primary
definitions. By far the most common use of "logos" is in
connection with the preaching of the Word of God. This spoken and written
word communicates God's thoughts to us and reveals the plan by which Jesus
has become Lord of all creation ..... and our Savior. "Logos"
does not have the capital first letter given to "Word" in the
English translation. It should properly be translated "word" (with
a small "w"). Further,
although in Greek "logos" is a masculine noun, this is no
proof of personality. Many words which are neuter in English, are either
masculine or feminine in Greek. For example, the word translated
"beginning" is feminine. No one would
seriously claim that this means that "beginning" should be regarded
as having a feminine personality! In the same way
it is quite improper to give "logos" a masculine
personality, or make it into a proper name, as the theologians have done. If
we paraphrase "logos" honestly in John 1, it ought to say
something like this: -
Of course, the
man made in the image and likeness of God is the man Jesus. It is this
man who is the main subject and fulfillment of every other PROPHETIC word
spoken by God, to reveal His inward thought or intention about the birth of
His Son "in the fullness of time". (Galatians 4:4).
Before Jesus
was born, there was only God's inward thought or plan for that to happen. It
was prophesied. It was certain to happen. (Isaiah
44:6-8 and 55:11) After Jesus was
born, the Word spoken about Him became a reality. The MAN was here at last,
no longer just a plan on the drawing board, but the completed object of that
plan. WITHOUT HIM WAS
NOT ANYTHING MADE (John
1:3) Jesus was the
starting point of God's plan - the beginning of it. Jesus was the
goal of God's plan - the end of it. Everything else
that God said or did was directed to that central purpose, which was to
create a human son in the image and likeness of the Father. If Jesus was to
exist and have dominion over all creation, then God first had to create the
universe and the world on which He would exist and have that dominion. If Jesus was to
be The Son of Man, then there had first to be a human race from which He
could trace His descent. God began this work by creating Adam and Eve. If the birth of
Jesus was to take place in "the fullness of time", then there had
first to be a history of other men preceding that time. If Jesus was to
be the Savior of all other men, there first had to be a failure of all other
men to create a situation from which they needed to be saved. If Jesus was to
be both Son of God and Son of Man, there had first to be a willing and
suitable Virgin Mother. If there was to
be a resurrection from the dead for all men, in which Jesus was the first,
then there had to be first a death for Jesus, in circumstances in which He
could clearly be the first to conquer the grave. These thoughts
could be multiplied and expanded to demonstrate that Jesus is central to all history,
the final expression of the Word that God spoke in the beginning which
ultimately reveals to us what God himself is. The "Word that was
God" is no longer just a word in God's mind, or spoken by God's mouth,
but a real living person ..... JESUS. HOW COULD THE
WORLD BE MADE BY THE WORD (JESUS) IF JESUS WAS NOT LITERALLY THERE? GOD (the
Father) spoke the world into existence (Psalm 33:6 and Psalm 148:5-6). The Word which
was spoken to create the world was all a part of what God spoke to reveal His
inward thought or intention to create Jesus. It was the same Word through
which even Jesus Himself came into existence. WHY THEN DID
GOD SAY, "LET US MAKE MAN"? Of course, the
Hebrew word for "God" in Genesis chapter 1 is plural. However, this
does not mean that the plurality includes JESUS. Other parts of
the Bible tell us that there were other beings present with God at creation.
These were the ANGELS. Job
38:7 speaks of "all the sons of God"
who shouted for joy when God laid the foundation of the earth. Psalm
8:5 speaks of "the son of man ..... made a little less
than GOD". This verse uses
the same plural Hebrew name for God as in Genesis 1. (Elohim). A comparison
with Hebrews 2:7 shows clearly
that the plural "God", and the "us", spoken of here and
in Genesis, includes the angels. It is not inclusive of Jesus at all. He is
the subject of the discussion between God and the angels. DOESN'T THE
BIBLE SAY ELSEWHERE THAT JESUS EXISTED BEFORE HE WAS BORN? In the Old
Testament there is not one reference that speaks of Jesus as a person then
presently existing. What we do have
is many prophecies which speak of the future existence of the MAN who was to
be born as Son of God. This happened when Jesus was born of His virgin
mother. That was when His existence began. References like
Isaiah 42:1 show how God
sometimes speaks of future events in the present tense to express the
certainty of their fulfillment (See also Romans
4:17 A.V. which shows how God speaks of things which do not
exist, as though they already did exist.) In the New
Testament there are several references, which when approached with the
pre-conception that Jesus did pre-exist, have been misconstrued to support
this. However, if
they are approached from the correct premise that Jesus is a man, and that
men simply do not pre-exist, (for then they are not men!), a vastly different
picture emerges. A few of these references are listed below. 1. John 1:15, - "After me
comes a man who ranks before me, for he was before me". This does not
mean that Jesus existed before John. He was, in fact, conceived six months
after John. It does mean
that Jesus ranks above John, not in time but by right of birth. The Greek
verb translated "was" literally means "came into
existence". The Greek word translated "before", can mean
either "before in time" or "superior in rank". Clearly, it is
the second of these meanings which is intended here. The verse is saying that
Jesus holds His superior rank, not by right of prior existence, but because
He was born to it as Son of God. 2. John 8:58 - "Before
Abraham was, I am." Jesus is
usually said to be claiming the divine name "I am" for Himself.
This is supposed to show that He is God and therefore pre-existed. However, a careful
study of other uses of the words "I am" in John's Gospel, shows
that they are used repeatedly by Jesus, without any suggestion at all that
the divine name is meant. In fact, the
Greek grammar requires that in this verse, another word should be understood
as implied after "am". In other places, where Jesus uses the words,
the translators have recognised this by inserting the word "he".
e.g., John 8:24,28, "I am
He". If this is also
done in verse 58, as it ought to be, then we are left with the simple
statement by Jesus that He is the one spoken of in the prophetic writings,
long before Abraham's time. 3.
John 8:56 - "Abraham
rejoiced to see my day." This statement
by Jesus refers to the story (in Genesis 17:15-17)
where God promised 99-year-old Abraham that his 89-year-old wife would
conceive and bear a son. Abraham fell on his face before God, rejoicing in
faith. God's
long-standing promise that the saviour of the world would be his descendant (Genesis 12:3) was about to begin its
fulfillment, with the birth of Isaac. 4. John 17:5 - "Glorify me
with the glory which I had with thee before the world was made". God spoke in a
similar way about Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:4-5) The words
spoken of Jesus do not imply pre-existence for Him any more than they do for
Jeremiah. It is simply a statement that even before the foundation of the
world, it was God's plan to glorify Jesus. It does not
mean that Jesus was present when the plan was made. 5. John 8:42 - "I
proceeded and came forth from God". This is simply
a statement in Jewish idiom, of the biological origin of Jesus. Every Jew
"came forth" from his father's body. (see Genesis 15:4 and 2 Samuel 7:12). In using this
language, Jesus is expressing his claim for His divine origin and begettal. The one
essential difference in his case, of course, was that Jesus came forth from
his Father's mouth as a spoken word which accomplished God's purpose through
the miracle of the Virgin Birth. 6. John 8:42 - "I came not
of my own accord, but he sent me". Jesus is not
the only one who was sent by God. Almost
identical words are used about John the Baptist. "There was
a man sent from God".
(John 1:6). The same words
are used of disciples to say that they are sent in exactly the same way that
Jesus was. "As the Father has sent me, even so I send you".
(John 20:21). These words
when used about Jesus do not imply that He pre-existed in Heaven any more
than they do for John the Baptist, or for us. 7. John 6:38 - "I have
come down from Heaven". Again, the
words are simply a statement of divine origin - not of personal pre-existence
in heaven. All Jesus is saying
is that He is like the manna which God miraculously provided for Israel. (See
verses 31, 32, 51,
and 58 of
the same chapter). 8. John 8:38 - "I speak of
what I have seen with my Father". Any man who
knows what it is to spend time with God in the secret place, ought to know
what this means. In the place of prayer, deep within our hearts and minds,
heaven comes down to earth and a man communes with God until he is able to
speak, not on his own authority, but as he is taught by God. (John 8:28). 9.
Colossians 1:15
- "The firstborn of all creation." In the Hebrew
language, the word "firstborn" means more than simply "born
first in time". It also means to be born as the first son of a father,
the first of a family, who is by right of that birth, the legal heir to his
father's estate. The word when
used about Jesus, describes Him as God's first and only begotten Son, the
first born of God's family, taking rank and precedence over all others, as
the heir of all creation. He is first born
in rank because of His divine begettal. He is also in a
special sense, first born in time, not because He pre-existed His human
birth, but because He is the first to be raised from the dead. (Acts 13:33 "This day have I begotten
thee.) He was raised
(or begotten) from the dead, both as the firstborn in time, and the firstborn
in rank, of all God's "new creation". (Colossians 1:17-18). CONCLUSION Starting with
an impossible theory about a "God-man" who existed eternally before
he was born, the theologians went on to compound their mistake, using the
techniques and language of Greek philosophy to produce the doctrine of the
Trinity. Along the way
there have been many others (usually classed as "heretics") who,
whilst rejecting the Trinitarian theology, have nevertheless started from the
same impossible assumption that Jesus pre-existed his human birth. This has
led to great confusion in the minds of those who, as a result of this
illogical foundation, find it virtually impossible to regard Jesus as really
a man. If, instead, we
begin with the scriptural premise that Jesus really is a a
man, just like all other men, (with the sole exception of His virgin birth),
there is no longer any "mystery" requiring us to abandon all logic. In spite of His
supernatural origin, and the miracle of His virgin birth, Jesus is not
himself a supernatural being. He is just like us in every way. He is a man
who makes God real to other men. He reveals what it will be like for us when
God lives in us as He does in Jesus. That IS Good
News. If it is possible for one man to please God, then other men are left
without excuse for their failure. Other men also, can become what God wants
them to be. Under the Lordship of Jesus, the grace of God not only forgives
the past, but also guarantees that our sinful carnal nature can be
transformed, until we have become just like the man Jesus. |