Let me explain, and I hope not blow your mind.
John 1:1 contains more to me than most others seem to get from it. I use the NWT here: In [the] beginning the Word was, and
the Word was with God, and
the Word was a god. (NWT)
ISV:
Hebrews 1 3 He is
the reflection of God's glory and
the exact likeness of his being, and he holds everything together by his powerful word. After he had provided a cleansing from sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Highest Majesty
ASV: Revelation of
John 21:23: And the city hath no need of the
sun, neither of the moon, to shine upon it:
for the glory of God did lighten it, and the lamp thereof is the Lamb.
In the beginning was the word, and the word was
a god? That sounds JWish. I'd say of course the Word (the dictated law of salvation) was with god because it came from god. It's the language.
Barebones:
God said "I will save you all humanity"
Humanity didn't listen to him and still sinned.
God writes "This is my promise/my word that I will send a savior for humanity"
Humanity read what he said and still sinned.
God said "Okay... if listening does not work and you're not able to see me as purely god without dying, I will create a human who will BE
my Words I just expressed above. He is an incarnation of god's word of a savior and the word has to be with god because it wasn't christ, it was god's word. Christ is just the incarnation of that word. "He does his father's will not his own." and so forth.
Hebrews does a better example than I could do because there are a lot of prepositions and image, likeness, mirrors, etc but not really To Be words. Puts a dent in the trinity issue. I'm learning from another conversation there are different takes on how people even define the trinity.
"Lamp therefore is the lamb" sounds like god is shining on his son so that humanity can see. Just guessing.
The above scriptures may be used to illustrate what I believe. Beginning from the bottom, if comparing God and Christ, God would be the sun and Christ the moon, size vice, spiritual vice, importance vice, etc. They are two separate beings, Christ having been begotten, only begotten, yet created.
I can see that. Another look at it is Trinity just means three people working together. It doesn't explain the relationship between the three but once they are one, they are no longer a trinity. Just sayin'
Christ is the Word of God since before man was created, thus it applies to the angels also. This means that the angels must go through Christ to speak to God. In Hebrews we see what I mean, Christ is the exact copy of God. I think it appropriate to say that Christ is in a sense God's avatar to all, angels and mankind.
I never heard of that. The angels must go through christ. The Word is god's dictations of salvation. Jesus never took credit for his father's words. I can't speak much on angels. That's more confusing than figuring what god is, but I could have sworn angels are right where god is. People go through christ and in the name of christ because they need to be saved from their flesh/sins in order to be in union with god.
Can an angel sin?
His function: he functioned (gender doesn't exist of body in heaven, it is a matter of function) as God's wife in that God created all things through Christ:
John 1:3: Through him all things were made, and apart from him nothing was made that has been made. ) This is why God when God created man, he created us in their image, plural, as man and woman. (Gen 1: "26 And God said,
Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:." This is God speaking to Christ, his wife in creational matters.)
All things are created through christ just means all things are created through the word of god and that word is salvation for the people. Just as the Israelites, it's a repeated theme of saving the people.
God's wife???
The Church is the first I can think of. Other than that, who is god's wife?
That went over my head.
Later Christ was sent down to earth as his son, to ransom us. Here on earth, he came as a man since he now shall function as God's king according to the promise made to King David. Thus he is 'son of God', 'son of man' priest according to king Melchizedek's manner, and king according to inheritance of King David.
That's making it way too complicated. Probably because you're bible-oriented. I wish I had the "I'm just a Bill" song to explain what I mean.
Like. I'll use you as an example.
Another word for word is message. I'll use that.
God the creator has a message to humanity.
He spoke this message to many covenants.
The message has always been the same because it came from the creator
On that note, the message has been with him before humanity existed
But no one listened to god's oral messages.
So, he said to Moses, I want you to write
this message. So Moses writes and writes, and writes. He writes the salvation of god's people (not his). No prophet claimed god's message was his message.
Later on down the line, people kept sining. So god devised a plan. He said, hey didn't listen to me when I said the Law. They didn't listen when I told Moses to write the Law. So, I am going to seen the Law-this very important highly documented salvational message as an incarnation. This message cannot be separated from me. An artist is his art just as a creator is to his message. (It's a metaphor)
So, god did more miracles. A child born of a virgin. Three wise men. Etc. This was the Message-the incarnation of god's message of salvation. Everyone learns different ways. God must have realize we are kinesthetic learners.
So, the message became flesh. Remember, the message has always been there. The message and the source are inseparable. So of course the message and the source are inseparable.
Here is the problem: Once the message was made flesh in the image of and incarnation of a human being, it is no longer the source of that message but an incarnation of that source. These are two separate things. Yes, the message and the source are one. But because the message is now flesh, as
soon as it became flesh, it was no longer the source.
It was (cough. cough.) an intermediary to the source. Humanity needed to know the message in order to know the source.
I used message instead of word because Word is a title of the message incarnate. words are typed or written letters that each clumped together has meaning to a sentence. The Word caps is that message isn't just any ol' message, it's a proper noun.
But it is an incarnation. In image. It is not Hinduism where the incarnation is god. In this case, the bible specifically separates the incarnation from the source by prepositions and the incarnation himself separating himself from the source. If christ feels he is not good compared to his father, why would a christian say that "they are one" means the same as they are each other?
That doesn't make sense. That's a contradiction in terms.
I know this is long but I have yet to figure how to explain it to where you all can see it somewhat objectively. It's like if you show someone a blue tree for thousands of pictures and then you give him a red tree and ask him, he may accidently say blue. It's not intentional. It is what it is.