Trinitarian confusion at Romans 9:5

Off topic
Word tricks. That's funny. However I don't think it's an appositive, at least not in the way you seem to mean it. τῆς δόξης is dependent on the preceding ἐπιφάνειαν, which in turn sets up the dependent genitives following. I believe that "Great God and Savior" refers to Jesus Christ here. I wonder if James 2:1 is relevant?

Ἀδελφοί μου, μὴ ἐν προσωπολημψίαις ἔχετε τὴν πίστιν τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῆς δόξης.

I'm up for Jesus being the glory of God, but to me that indicates he is God himself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Edit insults
Well, what does Scripture say and imply?

Luke 1:

31 καὶ ἰδοὺ συλλήμψῃ ἐν γαστρὶ καὶ τέξῃ υἱὸν καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν.

The use of the term suggests to me that it starts right at the very beginning, and then there is a gestation period and birth well documented in Scripture.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Non-sequitur. If the word was spoken by Jesus, then the spoken word could not have become Jesus ("spoken word being made a cell").

(i.e. the Logos in John 1:1 doesn't mean the "spoken" word but something else.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Non-sequitur. If the word was spoken by Jesus, then the spoken word could not have become Jesus ("spoken word being made a cell").

(i.e. the Logos in John 1:1 doesn't mean the "spoken" word but something else.)
God’s spoken Word became whatever He wanted it to be, — light, the stars, the earth, Adam, the animals, etc..Start with Genesis 1:3

καὶ εἶπεν ὁ θεός γενηθήτω φῶς καὶἐγένετο φῶς

Interesting that light is the first thing that God created, and Jesus is metaphorically called “the light” in the prologue.
 
What I said was in response to a statement about Jesus' spoken words, not God's metaphorically spoken words. What I will countenance is that the Logos was the one doing all the speaking in Gen 1 etc, as the Logos is God in action per Jn 1:1c.
What was created was physical light as in day / night, not spiritual light, I believe from the LXX where φῶς is used for light meaning
luminousness (in the widest application, natural or artificial, abstract or concrete, literal or figurative) Derivation: from an obsolete φάω (to shine or make manifest, especially by rays. Conceivably the Hebrew word has a wider import in Gen, but that I don't know.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What I said was in response to a statement about Jesus' spoken words, not God's metaphorically spoken words. What I will countenance is that the Logos was the one doing all the speaking in Gen 1 etc, as the Logos is God in action per Jn 1:1c.

What was created was physical light as in day / night, not spiritual light, I believe from the LXX where φῶς is used for light meaning
luminousness (in the widest application, natural or artificial, abstract or concrete, literal or figurative) Derivation: from an obsolete φάω (to shine or make manifest, especially by rays. Conceivably the Hebrew word has a wider import in Gen, but that I don't know.
אוֹר (ca. 120 ×): אור; MHb., Ug. ar (UMGl. 76; Driver Myths 13510 ?), Ph. in n.m. ארמלך, Uru-milki (Tallqvist Names 244a), Akk. urru day: אוֹרוֹ/רָם; אוֹרִים Ps 136:7 †; masc. (Jr 13:16 → Rudolph; Jb 36:32 rd. עליו as MSS): —1. brightness, daylight Gn 1:3f Is 5:30 Jb 3:9 24:13 (prp. אֵל), cj. Is 26:9 (כָּאוֹר Gaster VT 8:438), becomes dark Jr 4:23 (→ Gressmann Eschatologie 69f; Fensham ZAW 75:170f); יֹצִא א׳ brings to light Jb 28:11; —2. light (emanating from a body): א׳ הַלְּבָנָה and א׳ הַחַמָּה Is 30:26, א׳ אֵשׁ firelight Ps 78:14, א׳ נֵר lamplight Jr 25:10, א׳ עֵינַיִם light of the eyes Ps 38:11, כּוֹכְבֵי א׳ bright stars Ps 148:3; א׳ (rising) sun Jb 31:26 (|| יָרֵחַ) 37:21 Hab 3:4, אוֹרִים גְּדוֹלִים sun and moon Ps 136:7 (cf Gn 1:16); א׳ flash of lightning Jb 36:32 37:11, 15; בְּיוֹם א׳ in broad daylight Am 8:9; —3. dawn (to state the time): לָאוֹר at dawn Zeph 3:5 Jb 24:14 (prp. לֹא אוֹר before dawn) מִן־הָא׳ Neh 8:3 עַד־הָא׳ Ju 19:26, עַד־א׳ הַבֹּקֶר Ju 16:2 (4 ×) and כְּא׳ הַבּ׳ 2S 23:4 and בְּא׳ הַבּ׳ Mi 2:1 (here rather inf., Nestle ZAW 23:337f); —4. metaph. א׳ הַחַיִּים light of life (or of the living) Ps 56:14 Jb 33:30 (prp. בְּאֶרֶץ הַח׳); רָאָה א׳ = to be alive Ps 49:20 Jb 3:16, = to have full knowledge Ps 36:10, cj. Is 53:11 (rd. יִרְאֶה אוֹר, 1QIsa.b Sept. :: Seeligmann BiOr. 6:7b: cj. יִרְוֶה, cf. Ps 91:16); נָתַן א׳ לְ to call to life Jb 3:20, רָאָה בָא׳ to stay alive Jb 33:28; א׳ || שִׂמְחָה Ps 97:11; א׳ פָּנִים benevolence (alt. inf. or pf.) Jb 29:24, of the king Pr 16:15, of God Ps 4:7 44:4 89:16; א׳ the epitome of happiness Ps 97:11 112:4 Jb 12:25 and of salvation Am 5:18; א׳ = God (prp. אֵל) Jb 24:13; Y. is or has א׳ Ps 36:10, (v.s.), is the א׳ of the devout Mi 7:8 Ps 27:1 הָלַךְ בְּא׳ י׳ Is 10:17; א׳ יִשְׂרָאֵל Is 2:5; אוֹרֵךְ salvation for you Is 60:1, א׳ גּוֹיִם Is 42:6 49:6 and א׳ עַמִּים 51:4 = salvation for the nations; —Am 8:8 rd. כַּיְאֹר; Zech 14:6 rd. קוֹר; Ps 139:11 prp. יִסְגֹּר; Jb 25:3 rd. אֹרְבוֹ; 36:30 rd. אֵדוֹ; 38:24 cj. רוּחַ, but better אוֹר = Amurru west wind, AHw. 46a (Torczyner Job 529; Aalen Licht).


Koehler, L., Baumgartner, W., Richardson, M. E. J., & Stamm, J. J. (1994–2000). In The Hebrew and Aramaic lexicon of the Old Testament (electronic ed., pp. 24–25). E.J. Brill.
 
I agree the Logos was not Jesus in any material sense, because the Logos is confined to heaven and Jesus was confined to the earth, but as it happens, a core scriptural doctrine is that it is possible for there to be a transpostion, a supernatural metamorphosis, between the one and the other Dan 7:13,14.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The word did not BECOME Jesus, the word was made Jesus. The word(spoken) or God is what also made everything else in Gen 1.
Jn 1:14 The Logos became flesh (ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο)

You need to think about whether the Logos is God's spoken word, or spake God's spoken word, directly or indirectly or metaphorically. I discern you are more than a trifle confused here.
 
Edit insults.
I tried to convey to you that Jesus wasn't the Logos in any material sense. A human being is defined as "flesh" (flesh gives birth to flesh) whereas the Logos is "spirit" (spirit gives birth to spirit). The two exist in different jurisdictions and dimensions. Your objection I already took into account by what I said. Your argument involves a reductio ad absurdam point, but my point is that the Logos is not an unborn human being / person in any material sense.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I tried to convey to you that Jesus wasn't the Logos in any material sense. A human being is defined as "flesh" (flesh gives birth to flesh) whereas the Logos is "spirit" (spirit gives birth to spirit). The two exist in different jurisdictions and dimensions. Your objection I already took into account by what I said. Your argument involves a reductio ad absurdam point, but my point is that the Logos is not an unborn human being / person in any material sense.
Using this, your definition, even a donkey is a man.

The bible, on the other hand, defines a human being (a man) as a creature, created (either conceived in the womb of a woman or else directly created by God) in the image of God at a point in time, the very first being Adam (created on the sixth day of creation). Your Jesus contradicts more than one of these biblical criteria. Pay special attention to bold.
 
"Was made" is not the best translation of ἐγένετο in John 1:14.
I agree, "became" is better. It's the exact same usage as in John 2:9 when the water "became" wine by a miraculous act:

ὡς δὲ ἐγεύσατο ὁ ἀρχιτρίκλινος τὸ ὕδωρ οἶνον γεγενημένον, καὶ οὐκ ᾔδει πόθεν ἐστίν, οἱ δὲ διάκονοι ᾔδεισαν οἱ ἠντληκότες τὸ ὕδωρ, φωνεῖ τὸν νυμφίον ὁ ἀρχιτρίκλινος

The best translation of the clause in question at John 1:14 is as follows;

"And the Word became (ἐγένετο) a human being (σὰρξ),....." [Καὶ ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο ...]
 
Using this, your definition, even a donkey is a man.

The bible, on the other hand, defines a human being (a man) as a creature, created (either conceived in the womb of a woman or else directly created by God) in the image of God at a point in time, the very first being Adam (created on the sixth day of creation). Your Jesus contradicts more than one of these biblical criteria. Pay special attention to bold.
I didn't recall Jesus using your pedantic definition in John 3:6, albeit I agree I omitted to say that man can also be born of πνεῦμα as well as σάρξ. Such shows there is no barrier to the Λόγος becoming σάρξ where the σάρξ can be a temple of the πνεῦμα (but obviously a "kenoticized" πνεῦμα where the Λόγος became fully human Heb 2:17).
 
Back
Top