Help With The Greek

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

The difference is vocabulary, not theology. Both John and Paul had distinct vocabulary.

John's words in Jn. 1:1 are best understood by 1 Jn. 1:1.

1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

Ok. 1 John 1:1 says the Logos is the word of life.

The Trins say the Word is the Eternal Son.
The Arians say the Word is the begotten Son.
Traditional Oneness says the Word is a plan or thought God had of Christ from the beginning.
Biblical Oneness believes the word of life is a portion of Gods eternal life put into a form or expression, distinct from his omnipresence.

So do we now understand? Which one is the truth?

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

The use of articles and the importance or the lack thereof in theology should be left for those who actually read and write Koine Greek.

I say the same thing about prepositions. They have a range of meanings, but the best way to understand them and how to translate them is to use them when writing and reading Greek.

So God calls mean to be teachers on the basis of how well they understand Greek articles and prepositions?

[Scott Pitta]

Details of Greek grammar should be left to those who actually translate and have college level training of Koine Greek.

This has been my longtime observation.

[Scott Pitta]

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.

[Apostolic1ness]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

Ok. 1 John 1:1 says the Logos is the word of life.

The Trins say the Word is the Eternal Son.
The Arians say the Word is the begotten Son.
Traditional Oneness says the Word is a plan or thought God had of Christ from the beginning.
Biblical Oneness believes the word of life is a portion of Gods eternal life put into a form or expression, distinct from his omnipresence.

So do we now understand? Which one is the truth?

Traditional oneness!

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

Ok. 1 John 1:1 says the Logos is the word of life.

The Trins say the Word is the Eternal Son.
The Arians say the Word is the begotten Son.
Traditional Oneness says the Word is a plan or thought God had of Christ from the beginning.
Biblical Oneness believes the word of life is a portion of Gods eternal life put into a form or expression, distinct from his omnipresence.

So do we now understand? Which one is the truth?

I like how you have labeled your view alone as the exclusively biblical one. :-) Just joking with you. Why not just call yours Non-Traditional Oneness? Or Alternative Oneness?

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Costeon

I like how you have labeled your view alone as the exclusively biblical one. :-) Just joking with you. Why not just call yours Non-Traditional Oneness? Or Alternative Oneness?

Words are powerful. It's my purpose to get Oneness believers thinking in a new way. So I guess "Alternative" Oneness is ok. And yet......"Biblical" Oneness leaves a deeper impression.

[Michael The Disciple]

Here is a discussion that took place this week at Apostolic World Conference. Steve Ritchie on the right teaches the traditional Oneness doctrine "Mind Word" theory.

Mark August on the left teaches the more Biblical idea of the Logos as the pre incarnate image of the invisible God.

They just introduce the difference between the two. Starts at about 6 min in.

https://www.facebook.com/mark.august.982

Scroll down to the 4th screen.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

Ok. 1 John 1:1 says the Logos is the word of life.

The Trins say the Word is the Eternal Son.
The Arians say the Word is the begotten Son.
Traditional Oneness says the Word is a plan or thought God had of Christ from the beginning.
Biblical Oneness believes the word of life is a portion of Gods eternal life put into a form or expression, distinct from his omnipresence.

So do we now understand? Which one is the truth?

Perhaps instead of saying the Logos is the plan God had of Christ we should say the plan or Idea of God is the Logos.

This way we emphasize both the Idea or Plan aspect of the Logos along with the actual Person of God aspect of the Logos, rather than devaluing the Logos into a mere thought or idea in God's mind.

I also would avoid saying the Word of life is "a portion" of God's eternal life, rather it IS God's eternal life being expressed as a Being we call Jehovah, and that expression or manifestation of God became flesh as the Son of God.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Words are powerful. It's my purpose to get Oneness believers thinking in a new way. So I guess "Alternative" Oneness is ok. And yet......"Biblical" Oneness leaves a deeper impression.

If I am not mistaken a correct view of the Logos was a part of early Oneness teaching?