BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE: CHRISTIAN?
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
John 1:1-5 In the beginning was the Word*, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by
him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and
the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the
darkness comprehended it not.
Acts
11:25-26; 26:27-28 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek
Saul: And when he had found him,
he brought him unto Antioch. And it
came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with
the church, and taught much people. And
the disciples were called Christians G5546
first in Antioch. …
King Agrippa, believest thou the
prophets? I know that thou believest. Then Agrippa said unto Paul,
Almost thou persuadest me to be a
Christian G5546.
1Peter
4:16-17 Yet if any man
suffer as a Christian G5546,
let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf. For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of
God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
In general world
perspective and description, “Christian” is a religious subset group that also
worships god (Many religions – one same god). It is typically used in speech
and literature as is Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, et al. But in all 3 mentions in
God’s Word it means nothing of the kind. “Christian” means “follower of Christ”.
Which brings me
to the misnomer generally applied to the USA; “Christian nation.”
Are there USA
citizens, elected leaders and bureau managers and workers, including presidents
past and present that have or now do follow Christ and make decisions and
actions according to Him; The Word. (Jn.1)
There is a minority, but the majority does not follow Christ; this truth
evidenced in USA chosen options and resultant societal function contrary to The
Word.
Consider how
local, county, state, national, international political and business decisions
and actions would be if citizen and especially those with leadership authority consulted
and followed The Word? EBB4
*For those interested in
further understanding, from Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible: John 1:1
In the
beginning - This expression is used also in Gen_1:1.
John evidently has allusion here to that place, and he means to apply to “the
Word” an expression which is there applied “to God.” In both places it clearly
means before creation, before the world was made, when as yet there was
nothing. The meaning is: that the “Word” had an existence before the world was
created. This is not spoken of the man Jesus, but of that which “became” a man,
or was incarnate, Joh_1:14. The
Hebrews, by expressions like this, commonly denoted eternity. Thus. the
eternity of God is described Psa_90:2;
“Before the mountains were brought forth, etc.;” and eternity is commonly
expressed by the phrase, before the foundation of the world.” Whatever is meant
by the term “Word,” it is clear that it had an existence before “creation.” It
is not, then, a “creature” or created being, and must be, therefore, uncreated
and eternal. There is only one Being that is uncreated, and Jesus must be
therefore divine. Compare the Saviour’s own declarations respecting himself in
the following places: Joh_8:58; Joh_17:5; Joh_6:62;
Joh_3:13; Joh_6:46;
Joh_8:14; Joh_16:28.
Was the Word
- Greek, “was the λόγος Logos.” This name is given to him who afterward became
“flesh,” or was incarnate (Joh_1:14 -
that is, to the Messiah. Whatever is meant by it, therefore, is applicable to
the Lord Jesus Christ. There have been many opinions about the reason why this
name was given to the Son of God. It is unnecessary to repeat those opinions.
The opinion which seems most plausible may be expressed as follows:
1.
A “word” is that by which we communicate our will; by which we convey our
thoughts; or by which we issue commands the medium of communication with
others.
2.
The Son of God may be called “the Word,” because he is the medium by which God
promulgates His will and issues His commandments. See Heb_1:1-3.
3.
This term was in use before the time of John.
(a) It was used in the Aramaic translation of
the Old Testament, as, “e. g.,” Isa_45:12;
“I have made the earth, and created man upon it.” In the Aramaic it is, “I, ‘by
my word,’ have made,” etc. Isa_48:13;
“mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth.” In the Aramaic, “‘By my
word’ I have founded the earth.” And so in many other places.
(b) This term was used by the Jews as applicable
to the Messiah. In their writings he was commonly known by the term “Mimra” -
that is, “Word;” and no small part of the interpositions of God in defense of
the Jewish nation were declared to be by “the Word of God.” Thus, in their
Targum on Deu_26:17-18, it is said, “Ye
have appointed the word of God a king over you this day, that he may be your
God.”
(c) The term was used by the Jews who were
scattered among the Gentiles, and especially those who were conversant with the
Greek philosophy.
(d) The term was used by the followers of Plato
among the Greeks, to denote the Second Person of the Trinity. The Greek term νοῦς nous
or “mind,” was commonly given to this second person, but it was said that this nous was “the word” or “reason” of the First Person
of the Trinity. The term was therefore extensively in use among the Jews and
Gentiles before John wrote his Gospel, and it was certain that it would be
applied to the Second Person of the Trinity by Christians. whether converted
from Judaism or Paganism. It was important, therefore, that the meaning of the
term should be settled by an inspired man, and accordingly John, in the
commencement of his Gospel, is at much pains to state clearly what is the true
doctrine respecting the λόγος Logos, or Word. It is possible, also, that the
doctrines of the Gnostics had begun to spread in the time of John. They were an
Oriental sect, and held that the λόγος Logos or “Word” was one of the “Aeones” that had been
created, and that this one had been united to the man Jesus. If that doctrine
had begun then to prevail, it was of the more importance for John to settle the
truth in regard to the rank of the Logos or Word. This he has done in such a
way that there need be no doubt about its meaning.
Was with God - This expression denotes friendship or intimacy. Compare Mar_9:19. John affirms that he was “with God” in
the beginning - that is, before the world was made. It implies, therefore, that
he was partaker of the divine glory; that he was blessed and happy with God. It
proves that he was intimately united with the Father, so as to partake of his
glory and to be appropriately called by the name God. He has himself explained
it. See Joh_17:5; “And now, O Father,
glorify thou we with thine own self, with the glory which I had with thee
before the world was.” See also Joh_1:18;
“No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom
of the Father, he hath declared him.” See also Joh_3:13;
“The Son of man, which is in heaven.” Compare Phi_2:6-7.
Was God - In the previous phrase John had said that the Word was “with God.”
Lest it should be supposed that he was a different and inferior being, here
John states that “he was God.” There is no more unequivocal declaration in the
Bible than this, and there could be no stronger proof that the sacred writer
meant to affirm that the Son of God was equal with the Father; because:
1. There is no doubt that by the λόγος Logos
is meant Jesus Christ.
2. This is not an “attribute” or quality of God,
but is a real subsistence, for it is said that the λόγος Logos
was made flesh σάρξ sarx - that is, became a human being.
3. There is no variation here in the
manuscripts, and critics have observed that the Greek will bear no other
construction than what is expressed in our translation - that the Word “was
God.”
4. There is no evidence that John intended to
use the word “God” in an inferior sense. It is not “the Word was a god,” or
“the Word was ‘like God,’” but the Word “was God.” He had just used the word
“God” as evidently applicable to Yahweh, the true God; and it is absurd to
suppose that he would in the same verse, and without any indication that he was
using the word in an inferior sense, employ it to denote a being altogether
inferior to the true God.
5. The name “God” is elsewhere given to him,
showing that he is the supreme God. See Rom_9:5;
Heb_1:8, Heb_1:10,
Heb_1:12; 1Jo_5:20;
Joh_20:28.
The meaning of this important verse may then be thus summed up:
1. The name λόγος Logos, or Word, is given to Christ in reference to his
becoming the Teacher or Instructor of mankind; the medium of communication
between God and man.
2. The name was in use at the time of John, and
it was his design to state the correct doctrine respecting the λόγος Logos.
3. The “Word,” or λόγος Logos, existed “before creation” - of course was not a
“creature,” and must have been, therefore, from eternity.
4. He was “with God” - that is, he was united to
him in a most intimate and close union before the creation; and, as it could
not be said that God was “with himself,” it follows that the λόγος Logos
was in some sense distinct from God, or that there was a distinction between
the Father and the Son. When we say that one is “with another,” we imply that
there is some sort of distinction between them.
5. Yet, lest it should be supposed that he was a
“different” and “inferior” being - a creature - he affirms that he was God - that
is, was equal with the Father.
This is the foundation of the doctrine of the Trinity:
1. that
the second person is in some sense “distinct” from the first.
2. that
he is intimately united with the first person in essence, so that there are not
two or more Gods.
3. that
the second person may be called by the same name; has the same attributes;
performs the same works; and is entitled to the same honors with the first, and
that therefore he is “the same in substance, and equal in power and glory,”
with God.
