BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE: CHRISTIAN?
Thursday, October 22, 2015
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
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.
1Peter 4:16-17 Yet if any man suffer as a
Christian, 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, “god”, 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” specifically means
“follower of Christ”. Not a follower of Christ = Not Christian.
Which brings me
to the misnomer generally applied to the USA; “Christian nation.” Are we a
nation made up of followers of Christ? Generally speaking, do we as a
population follow Jesus or pursue happiness?
Does USA
citizenry, elected leaders and bureau managers and workers, presidents past and
present follow Christ and make decisions and acts according to Him; The Word?
(Jn.1) There is a minority, but the USA 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.
