Did Jesus teach he was GOD himself?

Sorry but John 1:1-3 that was written by John who was taught by Jesus, doesn't remove what Jesus himself clearly said in John 17:3 and neither does the fact that you are confused about John 1:1-3 make what you are saying about it correct either, for no matter how you might argue about it, your doctrine on John 1:1-3 contradicts Jesus' words in John 17:3 complete.

Therefore your doctrine about John 1:1-3 is false.
Sorry, But Jesus claimed to be God the " I AM " of Exodus 3:14 in John 8:58 and God the Father FULLY BACKED that up in Heb.1:8 by calling Him " O God " and the FACT that John 1:1 POINT BLANK says " the WORD was God " before becoming " FLESH " ( God the Word in the Flesh as Jesus Christ ) in John 1:14! Clase closed!
 
That's a strawman, any way you slice it.
Exactly, just like we are made in His Triune Image without actually being 3 Humans as 1 Thess.5:23 says we Humans have a human ( Body, Soul, & Spirit )! Thus each part of us can be called human ( human Body, human Soul, & Human Spirit ) without actually being 3 humans! Thus God the Father, God the Son, & God the Holy Spirit without actually being 3 GOD's! They are 3 Divine Persons in the ONE GOD ( TRINITY ) that can be called " God " individually just like our body, soul, & spirit can be called human individually, that makes up just ONE Human!
 
Sorry, But Jesus claimed to be God the " I AM " of Exodus 3:14 in John 8:58 and God the Father FULLY BACKED that up in Heb.1:8 by calling Him " O God " and the FACT that John 1:1 POINT BLANK says " the WORD was God " before becoming " FLESH " ( God the Word in the Flesh as Jesus Christ ) in John 1:14! Clase closed!
Nope and actually the very best you could do with John 8:58, would be that it was Jesus' answer to who came first, Jesus or Abraham and not that he was claiming to be God.

For the Jews twisted his words "your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day (the time of his coming to Israel) and saw it and was glad" and replied asking Jesus, "you are not yet fifty years old and yet you have seen Abraham" and therefore his answer was a matter of who came first and not about Jesus being God.

Furthermore, even Tertullian understood what the words "And God was the Logos" coupled with "and the Logos was "pros" The God" truly meant and he expresses it in his own words below.

Therefore he is guilty of twisting the knowledge that was given him, in making the Logos out as another person of God and just like he attempted to argue that our logos is within us who are made in his image also and which is totally ridiculous.

Here is his very words on this below and if you click on the link (Against Praxeas 5) it will open up the whole of what he wrote about this also.


<p>In Greek, "Word" is Logos, and it carries a much wider meaning than "word" does. It's the word from which we get "logic." The early churches were almost as prone to translating it "reason" as they were to translating it "word."

Here's Tertullian's very interesting explanation of what logos is:

Observe, then, that when you are silently conversing with yourself, this very process is carried on within you by your reason, which meets you with a word at every movement of your thought … Whatever you think, there is a word … You must speak it in your mind …
Thus, in a certain sense, the word is a second person within you, through which in thinking you utter speech … The word is itself a different thing from yourself. Now how much more fully is all this transacted in God, whose image and likeness you are? (Against Praxeas 5)
Logos is that voice you hear inside yourself when you are thinking. At least, that's a rough estimation of what logos means. Tertullian goes out of his way to describe it as "a second person within you" because he's bringing up the Logos of God as a second Person of the Trinity.

God, according to the early churches, has always had logos inside of him.



Notice, Tertullian rightly sees the word Logos as God, to be referring to God as personified in his thinking and reasoning and logic and the words, "and the Logos was pros The God" to be meaning that God was reciprocating with his own thinking, reasoning and logic the same as we do who are made in his image.

Therefore he was without excuse that after seeing this he still twisted the meaning of John's words and made the Logos to be another person of God's nature and then to mean that we also have another person in our nature who are made in his image also and as if we are two persons in one being which is total foolishness.


Below are Paul's very words and which reveal what Tertullian did with his knowledge on this issue.


Romans 1: 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.

20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal (that which cannot die) God for images made like a mortal (that which can die) human being and birds and animals and reptiles.


The above is exactly what Tertullian became guilty of after having seen the truth about the Logos referring to God in his thinking, reasoning and logic and the words, "and the Logos was pros The God) as meaning that God was reciprocating with his own mind and thinking and reasoning and logic, he then still twisted the Logos to be referring to another person instead of the single person and being of God like John was expressing in all of this.


The only thing that John was making a distinction of within the single being and person of God in his prologue, was The God in his full being with The God as personified in his thinking and reasoning and logic and he being a monotheistic Jew, was never wanting you trins to be taking this to mean the he was speaking of two God's or of two literal persons who were the same God.
 
Last edited:
Exactly, just like we are made in His Triune Image without actually being 3 Humans as 1 Thess.5:23 says we Humans have a human ( Body, Soul, & Spirit )! Thus each part of us can be called human ( human Body, human Soul, & Human Spirit ) without actually being 3 humans! Thus God the Father, God the Son, & God the Holy Spirit without actually being 3 GOD's! They are 3 Divine Persons in the ONE GOD ( TRINITY ) that can be called " God " individually just like our body, soul, & spirit can be called human individually, that makes up just ONE Human!

I think that analogy does NOT represent the Trinity any better than an egg (shell, white, and yoke).

And most TRINITARIANS I debate would say an egg is NOT a good analogy of the Trinity because it shows “separate parts”.

Let me ask YOU...

1) Is an egg (with shell, while, and yoke) a good analogy of the Trinity?

2) Is a human (with body, soul, and spirit) a good analogy of the Trinity?
 
I think that analogy does NOT represent the Trinity any better than an egg (shell, white, and yoke).

And most TRINITARIANS I debate would say an egg is NOT a good analogy of the Trinity because it shows “separate parts”.

Let me ask YOU...

1) Is an egg (with shell, while, and yoke) a good analogy of the Trinity?

2) Is a human (with body, soul, and spirit) a good analogy of the Trinity?
The biggest blunder with using our being made in the image of God in body, soul and spirit, as a good analogy of the trinity, is the fact that when God made man he was totally Spirit and didn't have a body at all.
 
Nope and actually the very best you could do with John 8:58, would be that it was Jesus' answer to who came first, Jesus or Abraham and not that he was claiming to be God.

For the Jews twisted his words "your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day (the time of his coming to Israel) and saw it and was glad" and replied asking Jesus, "you are not yet fifty years old and yet you have seen Abraham" and therefore his answer was a matter of who came first and not about Jesus being God.

Furthermore, even Tertullian understood what the words "And God was the Logos" coupled with "and the Logos was "pros" The God" truly meant and he expresses it in his own words below.

Therefore he is guilty of twisting the knowledge that was given him, in making the Logos out as another person of God and just like he attempted to argue that our logos is within us who are made in his image also and which is totally ridiculous.

Here is his very words on this below and if you click on the link (Against Praxeas 5) it will open up the whole of what he wrote about this also.


<p>In Greek, "Word" is Logos, and it carries a much wider meaning than "word" does. It's the word from which we get "logic." The early churches were almost as prone to translating it "reason" as they were to translating it "word."

Here's Tertullian's very interesting explanation of what logos is:

Observe, then, that when you are silently conversing with yourself, this very process is carried on within you by your reason, which meets you with a word at every movement of your thought … Whatever you think, there is a word … You must speak it in your mind …
Thus, in a certain sense, the word is a second person within you, through which in thinking you utter speech … The word is itself a different thing from yourself. Now how much more fully is all this transacted in God, whose image and likeness you are? (Against Praxeas 5)
Logos is that voice you hear inside yourself when you are thinking. At least, that's a rough estimation of what logos means. Tertullian goes out of his way to describe it as "a second person within you" because he's bringing up the Logos of God as a second Person of the Trinity.

God, according to the early churches, has always had logos inside of him.



Notice, Tertullian rightly sees the word Logos as God, to be referring to God as personified in his thinking and reasoning and logic and the words, "and the Logos was pros The God" to be meaning that God was reciprocating with his own thinking, reasoning and logic the same as we do who are made in his image.

Therefore he was without excuse that after seeing this he still twisted the meaning of John's words and made the Logos to be another person of God's nature and then to mean that we also have another person in our nature who are made in his image also and as if we are two persons in one being which is total foolishness.


Below are Paul's very words and which reveal what Tertullian did with his knowledge on this issue.


Romans 1: 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.

20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal (that which cannot die) God for images made like a mortal (that which can die) human being and birds and animals and reptiles.


The above is exactly what Tertullian became guilty of after having seen the truth about the Logos referring to God in his thinking, reasoning and logic and the words, "and the Logos was pros The God) as meaning that God was reciprocating with his own mind and thinking and reasoning and logic, he then still twisted the Logos to be referring to another person instead of the single person and being of God like John was expressing in all of this.


The only thing that John was making a distinction of within the single being and person of God in his prologue, was The God in his full being with The God as personified in his thinking and reasoning and logic and he being a monotheistic Jew, was never wanting you trins to be taking this to mean the he was speaking of two God's or of two literal persons who were the same God.
Tortured, complex trash.
 
O Yes indeed there is mention because John 1:1 POINT BLANK says " the WORD Was God " and was with God!
So who was with God? Was it another God with God? If so that would be teaching multiple Gods.
Thus He who " was God " did in Fact become" Flesh " ( God the WORD in the Flesh or God-Man ) in John 1:14!
If he who was God became flesh then who is the one that was with God and what did he become? Let us put this in perspective... In this scenario, God is the father, and the word is Jesus. Jesus said he was with the father in the beginning. Therefore Jesus must be the word. Are you saying that Jesus is also the Father? Or are you saying that Jesus is another God with God the father?
Case closed!
You cannot close a case without explaining if Jesus was God the Father or if Jesus is another God (God the Word) with the Father.
 
So who was with God? Was it another God with God? If so that would be teaching multiple Gods.

If he who was God became flesh then who is the one that was with God and what did he become? Let us put this in perspective... In this scenario, God is the father, and the word is Jesus. Jesus said he was with the father in the beginning. Therefore Jesus must be the word. Are you saying that Jesus is also the Father? Or are you saying that Jesus is another God with God the father?

You cannot close a case without explaining if Jesus was God the Father or if Jesus is another God (God the Word) with the Father.
Case is closed because GOD is a Trinity of 3 Divine persons called Father, Son. & Holy Spirit! Yes each part ( yes part is not a good word to use for the Trinity, but it is used so you can understand as a human ) of One GOD can be called God without actually being 3 GOD's, just like Triune humans can have each part of them called human without actually being 3 humans - ie - human body, human soul, & human spirit ( see 1 Thess.5:23 for that Fact that one human consist of those 3 parts since all humans were in Fact created in the One GOD's Triune image as per Gen.1:26! The one GOD said this " Let US ( plural - FSHS ) create man in OUR Image ( Plural - FSHS )"! He did not say let me ( singular ) create man in my ( singular ) image! So yes each Divine Person of the TRINITY ( One GOD ) can be called " God " individually ( as per John 1:1, Acts 5:3-4 for the Holy Spirit, and Heb.1:8 for the Son ), without actually being 3 GOD's!
 
Nope and actually the very best you could do with John 8:58, would be that it was Jesus' answer to who came first, Jesus or Abraham and not that he was claiming to be God.

For the Jews twisted his words "your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day (the time of his coming to Israel) and saw it and was glad" and replied asking Jesus, "you are not yet fifty years old and yet you have seen Abraham" and therefore his answer was a matter of who came first and not about Jesus being God.

Furthermore, even Tertullian understood what the words "And God was the Logos" coupled with "and the Logos was "pros" The God" truly meant and he expresses it in his own words below.

Therefore he is guilty of twisting the knowledge that was given him, in making the Logos out as another person of God and just like he attempted to argue that our logos is within us who are made in his image also and which is totally ridiculous.

Here is his very words on this below and if you click on the link (Against Praxeas 5) it will open up the whole of what he wrote about this also.


<p>In Greek, "Word" is Logos, and it carries a much wider meaning than "word" does. It's the word from which we get "logic." The early churches were almost as prone to translating it "reason" as they were to translating it "word."

Here's Tertullian's very interesting explanation of what logos is:

Observe, then, that when you are silently conversing with yourself, this very process is carried on within you by your reason, which meets you with a word at every movement of your thought … Whatever you think, there is a word … You must speak it in your mind …
Thus, in a certain sense, the word is a second person within you, through which in thinking you utter speech … The word is itself a different thing from yourself. Now how much more fully is all this transacted in God, whose image and likeness you are? (Against Praxeas 5)
Logos is that voice you hear inside yourself when you are thinking. At least, that's a rough estimation of what logos means. Tertullian goes out of his way to describe it as "a second person within you" because he's bringing up the Logos of God as a second Person of the Trinity.

God, according to the early churches, has always had logos inside of him.



Notice, Tertullian rightly sees the word Logos as God, to be referring to God as personified in his thinking and reasoning and logic and the words, "and the Logos was pros The God" to be meaning that God was reciprocating with his own thinking, reasoning and logic the same as we do who are made in his image.

Therefore he was without excuse that after seeing this he still twisted the meaning of John's words and made the Logos to be another person of God's nature and then to mean that we also have another person in our nature who are made in his image also and as if we are two persons in one being which is total foolishness.


Below are Paul's very words and which reveal what Tertullian did with his knowledge on this issue.


Romans 1: 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.

20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal (that which cannot die) God for images made like a mortal (that which can die) human being and birds and animals and reptiles.


The above is exactly what Tertullian became guilty of after having seen the truth about the Logos referring to God in his thinking, reasoning and logic and the words, "and the Logos was pros The God) as meaning that God was reciprocating with his own mind and thinking and reasoning and logic, he then still twisted the Logos to be referring to another person instead of the single person and being of God like John was expressing in all of this.


The only thing that John was making a distinction of within the single being and person of God in his prologue, was The God in his full being with The God as personified in his thinking and reasoning and logic and he being a monotheistic Jew, was never wanting you trins to be taking this to mean the he was speaking of two God's or of two literal persons who were the same God.
FYI, only God can know someone before that some one is born! In John 8:58 Jesus CLAIMED to have personally known Abraham ( Not after Abraham was born ) before Abraham was born! You lose again! Case closed as ONLY GOD knows people before they are born! ----------------------
 
So who was with God? Was it another God with God? If so that would be teaching multiple Gods.

If he who was God became flesh then who is the one that was with God and what did he become? Let us put this in perspective... In this scenario, God is the father, and the word is Jesus. Jesus said he was with the father in the beginning. Therefore Jesus must be the word. Are you saying that Jesus is also the Father? Or are you saying that Jesus is another God with God the father?

You cannot close a case without explaining if Jesus was God the Father or if Jesus is another God (God the Word) with the Father.
NOT God The Father; another PERSON God The Word(Son)with The Father.
Your strawman is exposed again.
 
FYI, only God can know someone before that some one is born! In John 8:58 Jesus CLAIMED to have personally known Abraham ( Not after Abraham was born ) before Abraham was born! You lose again! Case closed as ONLY GOD knows people before they are born! ----------------------
Where did Jesus say this? Where did you get that from his words "your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day and saw it and was glad"?

Notice, Jesus only said that Abraham saw his day and not that he saw Abraham or Abraham's day and therefore Jesus was speaking of a vision that God gave him were he saw the time when Jesus would come to Israel from God's foreknowledge of it.

By the way, God also knew Jesus before he was born and as per 1 Peter 1:20, "who truly was foreknown "prognosis" before the foundation of the world but was in these last days made manifest for you".


He was saying that Abraham received a vision of the day that Jesus would come to his people Israel from God's foreknowledge of it and he never said any such thing as what the Jews were accusing him of saying or like what you also have twisted him to be saying in agreement with those reprobates.

For like usual they were looking for something to accuse him to death for, and therefore they only heard what they wanted from their real Father the Devil and Jesus even told them this also in that same chapter.
 
Where did Jesus say this? Where did you get that from his words "your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day and saw it and was glad"?

Notice, Jesus only said that Abraham saw his day and not that he saw Abraham or Abraham's day and therefore Jesus was speaking of a vision that God gave him were he saw the time when Jesus would come to Israel from God's foreknowledge of it.

By the way, God also knew Jesus before he was born and as per 1 Peter 1:20, "who truly was foreknown "prognosis" before the foundation of the world but was in these last days made manifest for you".


He was saying that Abraham received a vision of the day that Jesus would come to his people Israel from God's foreknowledge of it and he never said any such thing as what the Jews were accusing him of saying or like what you also have twisted him to be saying in agreement with those reprobates.

For like usual they were looking for something to accuse him to death for, and therefore they only heard what they wanted from their real Father the Devil and Jesus even told them this also in that same chapter.
Who was truly ORDAINED before the foundation of the world.
Jesus claimed to EXIST before Abraham was born.
 
Case is closed because GOD is a Trinity of 3 Divine persons called Father, Son. & Holy Spirit!
That is your false teaching that cannot be quoted from the scripture.
Yes each part ( yes part is not a good word to use for the Trinity, but it is used so you can understand as a human ) of One GOD can be called God without actually being 3 GOD's,
Part is a good word because your trinity is made up of parts. The true and living God is one not parts.
just like Triune humans can have each part of them called human without actually being 3 humans - ie - human body, human soul, & human spirit ( see 1 Thess.5:23 for that Fact that one human consist of those 3 parts since all humans were in Fact created in the One GOD's Triune image as per Gen.1:26!
That is your misunderstanding of the scripture, nothing more. The body without the spirit is dead...the body and the spirit make a soul...
Genesis 2:7
And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
The one GOD said this " Let US ( plural - FSHS ) create man in OUR Image ( Plural - FSHS )"! He did not say let me ( singular ) create man in my ( singular ) image!
Us means more than one...unless you are saying God is more than one God then God was speaking to someone else...When you are referring to yourself you don't say us, do you?
So yes each Divine Person of the TRINITY ( One GOD ) can be called " God " individually ( as per John 1:1, Acts 5:3-4 for the Holy Spirit, and Heb.1:8 for the Son ), without actually being 3 GOD's!
In your world of folly that may be so but it is not written in the scripture. You are entangling yourself with nonsense...Divine means God you just wrote each divine person...that means each God person. You are admitting that you have three Gods in your own words.Your claim is that three Gods make one God.
 
NOT God The Father; another PERSON God The Word(Son)with The Father.
Your strawman is exposed again.
You are not very bright, are you? If the person is "God the Word(Son)" then the person is a God... We know and agree that the Father is God, therefore God the Father. Your suggestion that there is a "God the Word(Son)" with God the Father shows you believe in multiple Gods
 
That is your false teaching that cannot be quoted from the scripture.

Part is a good word because your trinity is made up of parts. The true and living God is one not parts.

That is your misunderstanding of the scripture, nothing more. The body without the spirit is dead...the body and the spirit make a soul...
Genesis 2:7
And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Us means more than one...unless you are saying God is more than one God then God was speaking to someone else...When you are referring to yourself you don't say us, do you?

In your world of folly that may be so but it is not written in the scripture. You are entangling yourself with nonsense...Divine means God you just wrote each divine person...that means each God person. You are admitting that you have three Gods in your own words.Your claim is that three Gods make one God.
Yes it is in those scriptures that I quoted because Acts 5:3-4 says they lied to the Holy Spirit ( not the Father or Son )! In Heb.1:8 the Father calls His Only Begotten Son " O God "! John 1:1 says the WORD ( Precarnate Jesus Christ ) " Was God " and He " was with God " ( the Father & Holy Spirit! So don't tell me that the Holy Spirit was NOT present in the beginning with the Word and Father in John 1:1! Also sine we humans are created in GOD's ( TRINITY ) triune image we do indeed have 3 human PARTS called a BODY, SOUL, & SPIRIT in 1 Thess.5:23 ------------------------------------

1 Thessalonians 5:23
New International Version

23 May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
 
Where did Jesus say this? Where did you get that from his words "your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day and saw it and was glad"?

Notice, Jesus only said that Abraham saw his day and not that he saw Abraham or Abraham's day and therefore Jesus was speaking of a vision that God gave him were he saw the time when Jesus would come to Israel from God's foreknowledge of it.

By the way, God also knew Jesus before he was born and as per 1 Peter 1:20, "who truly was foreknown "prognosis" before the foundation of the world but was in these last days made manifest for you".


He was saying that Abraham received a vision of the day that Jesus would come to his people Israel from God's foreknowledge of it and he never said any such thing as what the Jews were accusing him of saying or like what you also have twisted him to be saying in agreement with those reprobates.

For like usual they were looking for something to accuse him to death for, and therefore they only heard what they wanted from their real Father the Devil and Jesus even told them this also in that same chapter.
100% Wrong again ( former HWA )! Jesus pre-existed as the WORD who " was God " in the beginning! Then He became incarnate ( God the Word in the Flesh ) in John 1:14! So it was NOT a vision at all! It was CLEARLY Him ( precarnate Jesus ) as God the Word that knew ALL of His Creation ( John 1:3 & Coll.1:16 )! So do NOT ADD ( like in your former name on CARM - HWA or He Will Add ) to GOD's spoken words in His inspired scriptures or this ( Rev.18:1 ) will happen to you! So yes Jesus as God the Word Knew Abraham BEFORE Abraham was Born as He so said in John 8:58! Case closed!
 
Last edited:
You are not very bright, are you? If the person is "God the Word(Son)" then the person is a God... We know and agree that the Father is God, therefore God the Father. Your suggestion that there is a "God the Word(Son)" with God the Father shows you believe in multiple Gods
John 1:1 says what it says. The Word was God.
 
John 1:1 says what it says. The Word was God.

I agree !!!

But to clarify our views...

The Word was "God" mentioned in Genesis 1:3. TRUE or FALSE?

Genesis 1:3... And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

I say TRUE.

Since some Trinitarians say "God" in Genesis 1:3 refers to the one Person "God the Father" and "The Word is NOT God the Father", I am interested to see what YOU say.
 
100% Wrong again ( former HWA )! Jesus pre-existed as the WORD who " was God " in the beginning! Then He became incarnate ( God the Word in the Flesh ) in John 1:14! So it was NOT a vision at all! It was CLEARLY Him ( precarnate Jesus ) as God the Word that knew ALL of His Creation ( John 1:3 & Coll.1:16 )! So do NOT ADD ( like in your former name on CARM - HWA or He Will Add ) to GOD's spoken words in His inspired scriptures or this ( Rev.18:1 ) will happen to you! So yes Jesus as God the Word Knew Abraham BEFORE Abraham was Born as He so said in John 8:58! Case closed!
Sorry but when John spoke of God as the Logos, he wasn't speaking of another person of God's nature but only as God personified in his thinking and reasoning and through which he created all things and even Tertullian understood this about what John was saying, although being in the lfesh and not the Spirit, he still twisted the truth about it.

Here is his very words about it below.



Tertullian Against Praxeas Chapter V.—The Evolution of the Son or Word of God from the Father by a Divine Procession. Illustrated by the Operation of the Human Thought and Consciousness.

But since they will have the Two to be but One, so that the Father shall be deemed to be the same as the Son, it is only right that the whole question respecting the Son should be examined, as to whether He exists, and who He is and the mode of His existence. Thus shall the truth itself7803 secure its own sanction7804 from the Scriptures, and the interpretations which guard7805 them. There are some who allege that even Genesis opens thus in Hebrew: “In the beginning God made for Himself a Son.”7806 As there is no ground for this, I am led to other arguments derived from God’s own dispensation,7807 in which He existed before the creation of the world, up to the generation of the Son. For before all things God was alone—being in Himself and for Himself universe, and space, and all things. Moreover, He was alone, because there was nothing external to Him but Himself. Yet even not then was He alone; for He had with Him that which He possessed in Himself, that is to say, His own Reason. For God is rational, and Reason was first in Him; and so all things were from Himself. This Reason is His own Thought (or Consciousness)7808 which the Greeks call λόγος, by which term we also designate Word or Discourse7809 and therefore it is now usual with our people, owing to the mere simple interpretation of the term, to say that the Word7810 was in the beginning with God; although it would be more suitable to regard Reason as the more ancient; because God had not Word7811 from the beginning, but He had Reason7812 even before the beginning; because also Word itself consists of Reason, which it thus proves to have been the prior existence as being its own substance.7813 Not that this distinction is of any practical moment. For although God had not yet sent out His Word,7814 He still had Him within Himself, both in company with and included within His very Reason, as He silently planned and arranged within Himself everything which He was afterwards about to utter7815 through His Word. Now, whilst He was thus planning and arranging with His own Reason, He was actually causing that to become Word which He was dealing with in the way of Word or Discourse.7816 And that you may the more readily understand this, consider first of all, from your own self, who are made “in the image and likeness of God,”7817 for what purpose it is that you also possess reason in yourself, who are a rational creature, as being not only made by a rational Artificer, but actually animated out of His substance. Observe, then, that when you are silently con601versing with yourself, this very process is carried on within you by your reason, which meets you with a word at every movement of your thought, at every impulse of your conception. Whatever you think, there is a word; whatever you conceive, there is reason. You must needs speak it in your mind; and while you are speaking, you admit speech as an interlocutor with you, involved in which there is this very reason, whereby, while in thought you are holding converse with your word, you are (by reciprocal action) producing thought by means of that converse with your word. Thus, in a certain sense, the word is a second person within you, through which in thinking you utter speech, and through which also, (by reciprocity of process,) in uttering speech you generate thought. The word is itself a different thing from yourself. Now how much more fully is all this transacted in God, whose image and likeness even you are regarded as being, inasmuch as He has reason within Himself even while He is silent, and involved in that Reason His Word! I may therefore without rashness first lay this down (as a fixed principle) that even then before the creation of the universe God was not alone, since He had within Himself both Reason, and, inherent in Reason, His Word, which He made second to Himself by agitating it within Himself.

Too bad he wasn't being led by the discernment of the Holy Spirit but instead by his own carnal human reasoning and this is made clear when he said that we who are made in God's image also have another person within us like God does, how foolish!

This is what will always happen when man's carnal human reasoning gets involved in attempting to understand the truths of God's inspired word in the scriptures and if you can't see all of the human reasoning he is doing in the above, I certainly don't know why you can't, because it is quite obvious.
 
Back
Top